bookmeal

When it is Wrong to Want to Know God’s Will

2011-10-04T22:31:00.003-06:00

I just came across a little something I wrote nearly three years ago. I've revisited this topic many times since in passing conversations, but had somehow forgotten that I had once written about it. As I am short of current posts this fall, and as I am still trying to live out the lessons stated here, I thought it was worth sharing now.

When it is Wrong to Want to Know God’s Will
28 December 2008

There is a perpetual struggle amongst Christians to relinquish control to our Creator, to allow him to guide us daily in the path of his own choosing, according to his own will. Never mind that the path is also one according to his own goodness; we simply would rather have the freedom to choose a lesser path – and routinely do.

But there comes a time in many of our lives when, having ventured out on a path of our own choosing and found a dead end or a stain-darkened alley one too many times, we reach a point of desperation. Now it has come: Now (finally) I am willing to submit to your will, Lord. Bring it on! Just show me what you want me to do. Now that I’ve exhausted my ideas, I’ll give your way a try.

I recently reached such a point in my life. I finally had to admit that my little version of reality was in fact a swiftly fading daydream. The path before me was slipping away beneath my feet, and I was grasping for a handhold. After months of feeling assured that God was clearly leading me to a specific destination, I had begun to feel thwarted at each attempt to move forward on my journey. It seemed as if God had changed his mind, as if he had erased the route completely and hadn’t bothered to draw up a new one.

At that point I wandered for an extended period in a barren land, aimless and without purpose. I grieved the loss of my unrealized dreams, I attempted to create new dreams to replace the old, I occasionally gave myself over to the despair of imagining the status quo stretching out forever without a hope for change. I begged God, I ignored God, I accused him – of teasing, testing, torturing me. I felt that life as I was living it was hardly worth living at all, and I sank deeper into the paralyzing mire of despair and self-pity.

It was at this point that I finally became willing to do God’s will – whatever it was. All I needed to know was what it was. The unknowing, the limbo was killing me. I needed specifics: who, what, where, when, why. I was in a place of total submission (or so it seemed to me at the time), humbly desiring to receive my orders. Just tell me your will, Lord, and I will do it. I’m ready. You’ve stripped me down to the barest humility, and I admit your way is best. Now fill me in!

And then I read two little verses in Isaiah that threw me for a loop: “Woe to those who draw sin along with cords of deceit, and wickedness as with cart ropes, to those who say, "Let God hurry, let him hasten his work so we may see it. Let it approach, let the plan of the Holy One of Israel come, so we may know it." (Isaiah 5:18-19)

Woe to those who desire to know God’s plan? Why would the prophet bemoan those who sought to know God’s will? Isn’t that what the Christian life is all about, to know and do the will of God? How could that be wrong?I was completely perplexed. I didn’t understand the passage, but I knew that God had brought it to my attention for a reason.

What God and friends and time eventually revealed to me was that the problem was not in the knowing itself, but in the motives behind the knowing: Tell me what you want so I don’t have to keep trusting you in the darkness of unknowing. The issue is about control. Trusting in the midst of darkness is incredibly uncomfortable – I can’t take even a single step without guidance lest I lose my way, or knock my head on a low-hanging branch, or fall down a rabbit-hole. I must hold out my hand for guidance every single inch of the way.

But if I could know – could see – the path! Then I could really go somewhere, then I could really make progress. I might even find a handy shortcut, or a more scenic route to the same destination. Then I could withdraw my hand and take control once again.

And that is the woe, that in the seeking to know his will we sometimes are in fact seeking a way to get out of trusting him – to be “free” of him and his constant “interference” in our lives. And it is a woe indeed, for we will have traded his providence for a freedom that is no freedom at all.

In the midst of my struggles, I realised that what God desires is a deeper, more intimate relationship with me. I didn’t need to know the specifics of God’s will after all. I could follow along in the darkness, inch by inch by inch, never seeing where it was I was headed, trusting that God would make my feet secure. In a sense, the unknowing, the limbo was killing me – killing my stubborn independence and self-reliance so that I would be forced to throw myself wholeheartedly into the arms of God – his mercy, wisdom and love. And that is true freedom.

Favour in the Wilderness: A Reflection

2011-08-03T15:22:00.001-06:00

Note: I've been mulling this over and wondering if it's too melodramatic or too interior to post on Bookmeal...there is a lot that I have left unsaid and what I have said is messy and rather open-ended. But, in the interest of honesty, and because this is my first attempt at a post in three months, what the hey! Here goes, for better or worse...

--

My last post was dated May 3rd. Yes, well. This summer I have been uprooted from my "country life in the Canadian prairies" (as per my introductory blurb on the right) to - what shall I call it? Urban sophistication in Alberta's downtown core? Right now it feels more like "self-doubt straddled on the fence between here and there." Time will tell.

I lived in Niton Junction, Alberta, Canada for eight years. That is the longest I have ever lived in one place. The second longest stretch was seven years in San Diego, from birth to age 7. After that, my life has been snipped into tidy three-year packages, give or take. I have been uniquely shaped by each place I have lived, but perhaps on an even deeper level I have been shaped by the act itself of perpetual home-hopping. Over the years I have had difficulty defining home. Where is it? What is it?

I moved to the country with all the passion and dreamy-eyed wonder of a newly-married twenty-eight year old (sort of) artist, a tender shoot just beginning to rise out of the rich soil that had nurtured and nourished me during my five years at Regent College in Vancouver. I had plans. I had technicolour dreams for our little acreage life in the middle of nowhere.

But it didn't happen. During the last four years in particular, I watched so many of those dreams die, one by one by one. I felt like little pieces of me were dying too, and I grieved. Over and over again, I seemed to hear one word from God: No. I was crushed under the weight of it, defined by the pain of it, and at times embittered by the unfairness of it.

Over time and for reasons I don't fully understand, the good earth of my previous growth had become a parched and barren land, and I was a bruised reed. I had ceased to produce seed. I was so hunched over I no longer was able to provide shade for others.

"Therefore I am now going to allure her;

I will lead her into the wilderness

and speak tenderly to her."

Hosea 2:14

God in his mercy met with me in the desert and spoke words of comfort and life. He spoke of his faithfulness and his love. He also showed me that some of his No's were in fact only Not yet's. There was still hope, a future for me in his keeping.

This is what the LORD says:

“The people who survive the sword

will find favor in the wilderness;

I will come to give rest to Israel.”

"They will come and shout for joy on the heights of Zion;
they will rejoice in the bounty of the LORD--
the grain, the new wine and the olive oil, the young of the flocks and herds.
They will be like a well-watered garden,
and they will sorrow no more.
Then young women will dance and be glad, young men and old as well.
I will turn their mourning into gladness; I will give them comfort and joy instead of sorrow.
I will satisfy the priests with abundance, and my people will be filled with my bounty,”
declares the LORD.

(Jeremiah 31: 2, 12-14)

I don't presume to say that the not yet has arrived and become now. Whether I like it or not, it's the nature of pilgrimage and the Christian life to keep moving, to keep pressing on toward. Who knows what trials this new leg of the journey holds? But what I can say for sure is this: In February, just six short months ago, God said Yes. Aside from the geographical details of moving our family of six from Niton to Edmonton, it remains to be seen exactly what else he was saying Yes to at the same time. Opportunity, sacrifice, joy, pain, brokenness, hope? A helping of each, I'd imagine. I'm a little less romantic this time, or at least trying to be. And I think that's okay - it's not cynicism or pessimism, but a willingness to let God define my adventures a bit more broadly than I would if I were in charge...Which I'm not...Which is the point - a lesson I learned in the desert.

~
Becky
Edmonton, AB

Embodying Attentiveness: Lessons from the Trail

2011-05-03T10:42:00.012-06:00

The Way is Made by Walking: A Pilgrimage Along the Camino de Santiago, by Arthur Paul Boers
progress: 111/178

This book is a collection of Mennonite pastor and professor Arthur Paul Boers' reflections on his 500-mile pilgrimage along the Camino de Santiago trail in Spain. Being that I have been on my own pilgrimage of sorts, it caught my eye in the bookstore. In the foreward, Eugene Peterson defines pilgrimage as

The ancient practice of walking, usually with others, to a holy site while paying prayerful attention to everything that takes place within and without, soul and body, all the ways that are inherent along the Way, along with the companions who are also on the Way. (9)

Boers goes on to explain that his pilgrimage differed from other experiences of challenge and hardship in his life because this journey and all of its difficulties was one of his choosing. Although he defines pilgrimage in its truest sense as a physical journey with the goal of spiritual transformation, he explains that pilgrimage has a metaphorical application as well: as an interior journey of spiritual transformation. The latter has been my experience, and indeed, many of his lessons on the Camino de Santiago have resonated with the lessons I've been learning in the wilds of rural Alberta. He writes

We live at a time when our walk with God is seen as more fluid, including steps forward and backward, perhaps even sideways at times, and we are not always sure which is which. (24)

A major theme of pilgrimage is the idea of movement - that God is the God of movement, and that we best keep company with Him by walking, or journeying, with Him. In the Old Testament, he dwelt in a tent and travelled as a pillar of fire or cloud, and Jesus himself was called The Way. Boers writes

Human nature means that we are always yearning wanderers. We are all homeless, ever since our eviction from Eden. And pilgrimage is an inevitable consequence. We need constantly to look for - and stay on the move for - God. This search keeps us unsettled. Deity is not easily tied down. Biblical faith is wary of confining divine presence too closely to one place or building, land or sanctuary, race or nation. Faithful people are repeatedly and providentially called to go elsewhere, be displaced and meet - even be - strangers, all in order to encounter our Creator more fully. (39)

God is always calling his people to movement, as "aliens and strangers" in search of a "country of their own." (Hebrews 11:13-16). The Christian life is one of journeying and the transformation it brings. Throughout the Psalms and Proverbs, we are called to "walk" in His ways (c.f. Proverbs 2:20), which means we are to walk with Jesus. And it is this walking that changes everything. It is about seeking and finding the path, and then traveling upon it. As Peterson points out, it is about paying attention: to God, to where He is leading you, to what He is doing in and through you, and in and through others on the journey with you.

This is where the literal and metaphorical understandings of pilgrimage intersect, for the physical journey is a one-time experience which trains us how to live the rest of our lives more attentively. Following the pilgrim path requires alertness as we watch for signposts, and discernment as we weigh carefully whose directions to follow. The walking itself slows us down for thoughtfulness, reflection, and prayer. We begin to see with clearer vision how God is "at work in all things" - a lesson Boers learned from a fellow traveller.

A particular challenge Boers faced on his journey was to lighten his load. He was constantly being challenged to simplify, if not by other more experienced pilgrims, then by his sore muscles and the blisters on his feet. What could he do without? How were the possessions in his pack weighing him down unnecessarily? Again, the literal weight of his pack challenged him to consider the metaphorical burden of his possessions. He reflected on the toll that his own accumulation of possessions has taken on him, as well as the toll his own consumerism takes on the world at large. His bold statement, "Every time I use a car, I make a theological decision" has returned to my thoughts to challenge me about my own flippancy with regard to the world's resources.

I was also intrigued by Boers' link between simplicity and hospitality. By lightening his backpack, he was forced to rely on the hospitality of others when he was in need. I wonder how much our possession of Every Useful Thing prevents us from experiencing the grace of hospitality from those around us? I am generally quite willing to loan out my Useful Things, but it is harder to receive from others when I am in need, yet that interplay of giving and receiving is so essential to our humanity. To be only a Giver or a Receiver is to be broken, severed from the shalom that true community embodies.

I am over half-way through this book, and the reading of it has been a journey in its own right. My life does not match up to the ideals of pilgrimage. It is rushed, and wasteful, and preoccupied. I'm like a stick figure wandering through the beauty of the three(+)-dimensional world unawares. How do I flesh out that anaemic little stick person and embody the attentiveness of pilgrimage in the busyness and distraction of my day-to-day life?

A Sobering Responsibility: A Guest Post by Rosie Perera

2011-04-29T19:16:00.005-06:00

The following is a guest post by Rosie Perera, in response to my recent request to share a bit about her journey as a woman in the Church. I met Rosie at Regent College but it wasn't until I'd moved away and joined Facebook that I've really started getting to know her - one of those all-too-rare cases in which Facebook has facilitated the deepening of a friendship beyond cyberspace, to phone chats and the occasional coffee date when we've crossed paths in Vancouver, and even a side-trip to out-of-the-way Niton! I have appreciated her informed perspectives - and her willingness to discuss them with me in a way that models grace, not condescension - on a wide range of topics, including politics, spirituality, technology, and anagrams, to name a few! A prolific writer, speaker, teacher, and photographer, you can hear (and see) more from her on her blogs Space for God and Faith and Technology and Iambic Admonit. She has two stories to share here: one an observation from her childhood, and the other a more personal glimpse into her own journey.

I grew up in a very conservative Congregational church, where women were not involved in anything except playing the piano, minding the nursery, and teaching children’s Sunday School. Even the offering was always collected by men. I’m not sure whether the latter was a conscious decision or just a default because nobody had ever thought of doing it differently. But certainly the fact that there were no women elders or deacons was due to what they believed to be biblical principle. When I was growing up, I never questioned it or even noticed it as odd, since I’d never been exposed to anything different. Many years later, the church had dwindled to the point where there were only two deacons serving a congregation of about 40. One of the deacons died or moved away, and there were no other eligible men in the church available to serve. The leaders reluctantly asked my mother, a pillar of faith and long-time member of the church, whether she would be willing to serve as an interim deaconess, until another eligible man joined the church. She initially said no, because she felt it was forbidden in the Bible. But since there were no other options, they prevailed upon her. She finally agreed, but with strong reservations, and insisted that it only be temporary, until a man came along who could take the position. As soon as the other deacon heard that she’d agreed to serve, he resigned, because he didn’t want to serve on a deacon board with a woman. Thus they had to ask another woman in the church, who agreed to serve. And so, ironically, the church went overnight from not allowing any women deacons to having nothing but women deacons. And lo and behold! It worked out, and they did a good job, and the church’s compunctions about women serving as deacons faded away.

I have been attending a little lay-run Mennonite church in Vancouver for 14 years. About half the preaching is done by laypeople in the church and the rest is by guest preachers. My first few years at this church, I was studying theology at Regent College. Thus it wasn’t surprising that after a couple of years I was approached by one of the leaders in the church asking whether I would be willing to preach for them sometime. The church is very welcoming of Regent students and likes to give them an opportunity to grow by giving them preaching and leadership responsibilities. And they are very forgiving of people who aren’t all that good at preaching (yet). I was not studying to become a pastor. In fact I actively did not want to ever preach. I’d been brought up to think it was wrong for women to preach. Besides that, I was afraid of the responsibility it would entail, and of the possibility of misleading people to their eternal damnation. I had by that time been exposed enough to biblical equality both in my previous church (where I’d seen women preach) and at Regent, where I was at the time just finishing a course on Gender, Sexuality and Community. I’d read Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen's Gender and Grace, Gretchen Gabelein Hull’s Equal to Serve, and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis’s Women Caught in the Conflict, and had found them all reasonable and convincing, while the readings in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood that we were assigned rang hollow. Still, I was afraid to try preaching myself, so I said no, I wasn’t ready yet. A number of months later, the same leader asked me again. The church was preparing for a sermon series on 1 Peter and he wondered if he might be able to slot me in somewhere. This time, I reasoned that perhaps God was nudging me to do it, since it was certainly not coming from my own desire. I told the leader that I might be able to have my arm twisted if the passage that included 1 Peter 2:24-25 hadn’t been spoken for yet, as I’d just written a paper on those verses for my exegesis class. It turned out that was the only passage that hadn’t yet been assigned to anyone. Again it felt like maybe God was nudging me, so I agreed. However when the time drew closer, I panicked and got cold feet about it, and backed out. Another year went by and I was asked again if I would preach. I said “yes” and went ahead with it this time. But oh, what a torment!

I got to pick the passage I was going to preach on. I was given a huge lead time (a few months). The situation couldn’t have been more ideal for my first time preaching, or so I thought. But both the freedom and the lead time proved to be difficult challenges. I spent all but the last three weeks dithering over what passage I would preach on. I finally settled on Genesis 22, the “Sacrifice of Isaac,” because I’d done some work with it at Regent. I had translated the whole chapter for my Hebrew class, so I knew the text pretty well. I relied on all my great exegetical skills that I’d learned in class, prepared lots of geeky notes about what various words meant in the Hebrew, and the inclusios and other poetic devices used in the story. I was getting nowhere on coming up with a main point to craft into a sermon. I had not taken a homiletics class and felt woefully inadequate to the task. My anxiety grew the closer it got to that Sunday I was to preach. I procrastinated and stressed out. By the Saturday night, I had about one or two paragraphs of un-crafted words towards a sermon, nowhere near enough to fill up the 15-20 minutes that was allotted to me. In a profound state of panic, I called up a Regent friend of mine late at night and asked for prayer and wisdom. I told him how I was dreading this appointment with the pulpit the next morning. He had the brilliant insight that my journey towards that hour kind of paralleled Abraham’s trudging approach to Mount Moriah. His steps must have been heavy during those three days, as he knew what awaited him at the top. Ultimately, it was God who provided the ram for the sacrifice. My friend told me to be myself, be transparent, tell my own story and link it with Abraham’s. So that’s what I ended up doing. I didn’t use much of the material I’d prepared, and mostly spoke off the cuff. It was probably less than 10 minutes in all. But thankfully my church has a time of discussion and response after the sermon in our worship service, and the people took up what I’d said and riffed on that for quite some time, and the whole became better than what I’d humbly offered. Indeed, God did provide the ram.

Since that time I’ve been invited back to preach on a dozen or more occasions, and it has gotten easier with time. But it is still a sobering responsibility, and I hope and pray that it will never be something I feel nonchalant about. That lesson I learned my first time about trusting in God’s provision, and seeking him rather than entirely relying on my own intellect, has never left me. Of course I know that I do have to do my homework; I can’t just “wing it.” And I do still struggle with procrastination most times. But I’m not nearly as panicky about it, and I’ve completely gotten over the fear that I might be doing something terribly sinful by preaching.

Entrenchment, Anger, Offense and Respect in the Gender Debate

2011-03-14T14:41:00.005-06:00

Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

As I've continued to explore the topic of gender equality in the church, I've been amazed at just how much material is out there - in the news, on blogs, in conversations with old friends. I'm overwhelmed with the information and sophisticated arguments that are available to the masses, and I'm also overwhelmed with hope. There is a strong international community of Christians who are working toward the ideals of gender equality that have not lost their faith or their faithfulness in the process. The godliness, intelligence and integrity with which this view has been advocated has won it a valid place within the ranks of evangelicalism. At the end of his chapter on "Contemporary Evangelicals for Gender Equality," Ronald W. Pierce concludes this way:

The 1990s into the beginning of the twenty-first century found biblical equality advocates functioning as a mature force within evangelicalism rather than fighting for a right to survive as in the preceding decades. Their literature reinforced their theological heritage, while at the same time developing it and expanding its influence in both theoretical and practical terms. (74)

The most discouraging part of this chapter was the deepening entrenchment that has occurred amongst the two sides. It seems there is very little room left for helpful dialogue, and that makes me sad. I always feel like truth must win out if only the two sides press on hard enough to see the discussion through to the very end (unfortunately, the church tends to be better at dogma than dialogue). And yet, there are many godly and intelligent women and men of integrity on the other side of the fence, too. So how do we agree to disagree as a people who are called to "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3)?

The best I have been able to come up with regarding my own attitude is to think about it in terms of the already/not yet context: I truly believe the kingdom of God is leading us toward the freedom and shalom of racial, social, and gender equality of Galatians 3:28, and we are called to begin living out that reality now. However, some have a different understanding and are not yet able to acknowledge or live out that truth in the same ways, because of hermeneutical, social, or cultural constraints. Whatever it looks like when the already meets the not yet, we'll all finally be able to agree, thank God!

In the meantime, I will continue forward on the path to gender equality, encouraging people to love God and to follow his calling, regardless of their gender. I will try to resist cynicism, stereotyping and oversensitivity. And I hope that those in the patriarchal camp will live out their convictions with sensitivity, humility and excellence. I trust that somewhere in between there is room for respect, if not agreement, and it is each of our jobs to find that place: not only to respect others but to be worthy of respect ourselves.

~~~

Well, this blog didn't go where I thought it would go! My original point was this: all of the superior material out there on the gender equality debate has made me wonder if I'm reinventing the wheel by trying to write too much about DBE - my strongest conviction as I've read it has been that others should read it in its entirety and think through the views on their own. I have found the arguments complex and convincing, but even if others disagree, I hope they will be moved to a deeper level of respect for those who advocate gender equality.

However, I will be continuing to share snippets of what I'm reading and learning, from DBE and other sources (and experiences). For starters, I wanted to post a few links for what I've been reading online lately:

1. Jennifer Danielle Crumpton wrote an article for the Huffington Post entitled "Femmevangelical: The Modern Girl's Guide to Sharing the Good News", in which she tells her own story of being a young woman on her way to seminary who hears a patriarchal sermon on 1 Timothy 3:1-13. She writes, "That sermon changed the way I went to seminary. You might think it burned enough to seal the deal -- that any sentimentality or lingering value I held for the evangelical religion of my youth had been scorched. But actually, it lit another kind of fire inside. Instead of turning away, I decided to take back my tradition." She offers thoughtful insight on words like evangelical and repentance, and goes on to discuss what she identifies as the "the important role of underdog women in the story of God and humanity."

2. The post entitled "Love and Respect (Part 1)" on Chimaera takes a look at love and respect and challenges as sexist the complementarian view that separates them according to the genders. Is love (primarily) for women and respect for men, or are we missing the point? She asks herself the question of whether she'd prefer - if she could only choose one - love or respect, and her answer is honest and thought-provoking.

3. It might be worth directing you to Chimaera's part 2 article as well, noting that Steve and I had quite a spirited discussion about whether it was helpful or too snarky, and whether there is a place for snarkiness, or even downright anger, in the gender equality debate. Her post begins, "If you aren’t convinced that Love and Respect Ministries is sexist, read on until you are." My first response was to laugh. Steve's was to be turned off by the cynicism. In the end we both agreed that while it may not always be conducive to dialogue, there is much anger with regard to this topic, and it needs to be heard too.

4. A friend challenged me to read a complementarian's blog series on women in the church and pointed me to Thabiti Anyabwile's blog. His purpose in writing is to focus on what women can do within a patriarchal framework instead of what they can't do, an appreciated gesture meant to affirm women. In one post he plugs an upcoming conference (now past) which will seek to equip women to teach other women. I think it is great for more women to be trained in biblical exposition and equipped to know their Bibles better, so that they too can be teachers of Scripture. Indeed, there are some great women involved in this conference. But I can't help wonder why women and men must be segregated in such a way. Is it because women are a bit of a minority in this area and therefore worthy of a special female-themed conference? Or is there some perceived difference in what and how we teach women versus men? Further, Anyabwile quotes an organizer of the conference:

Over the last few years, the Charles Simeon Trust has been challenged to consider training women to teach the Bible to other women. We have asked ourselves several questions: Is this a good idea? Does the Bible commend it? What would it look like? How would it best be accomplished, especially given our complementarian theological convictions? In answering these questions, we are convinced that God would have us play a part in this aspect of pastoral ministry.

I'm not sure offended is the right word for how I felt (thankfully, the organizer does go on to strongly affirm from Scripture that women should indeed be allowed and equipped to teach other women), but the fact that it could even be in doubt startles me. The offense part comes in when I begin to imagine what other things such people might question about women. But maybe that's just my pride speaking, and I should respect their commitment to the authority of Scripture. Read for yourself and let me know your thoughts.

5. Lastly, a friend emailed me a link to "10 Reasons Why Men Shouldn't be Pastors." Just in case you want to throw my own words back at me ("I will try to resist cynicism, stereotyping and oversensitivity"), I will add that there is always room for humour, especially when it makes you think, and this one's a good one.

I'd love to hear your thoughts...
~B

Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives and Women Preachers: Swim On

2011-03-04T12:24:00.002-07:00

Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

progress: 151/507

The first few chapters of the book discuss the historical widening and narrowing of women's ministry roles. Although the tradition of the Christian church has been overwhelmingly patriarchal, history provides consistent examples of exceptional men and women who modelled or worked toward equality in the church - from martyrs, monastics, and reformers, to quite a few mainline demonminations at the turn of the twentieth century. I was quite intrigued to discover the role my own alma mater played - on both sides of the fence. Two different circulations (Alumni News and Moody Monthly) from Moody Bible Institute in the 1920s celebrate the stories of female alums who who ministered in roles that the Moody of my era (1990s) would have met with clear disapproval. The first woman to graduate from the pastor's course in 1929 accomplished a feat that would've been impossible during my time there in the mid-90s, when preaching classes were not open to women. Such stories as these compelled the author of this chapter (Janette Hassey) to conclude, "Consequently, the early MBI stands as an appropriate educational symbol of 'fundamentalist feminism.'" (42)

!

Such egalitarian attempts didn't last long. The latter half of the chapter discusses the reasons for the rise and fall of women's ministry in the last century. The rise of women in the church was due in large part to three factors: 1) Eschatological interpretations of passages such as Joel 2:28 and Psalm 68:11-12 among evangelicals emphasized the role of the Holy Spirit in empowering people - men and women - to meet the needs of reaching the lost in the "last days." 2) "Charismatic church leadership" maintained that Spirit-gifting was the primary qualification for leadership, rather than gender, and allowed women the opportunity to train and work as lay leaders, often alongside their husbands. 3) Social activism allowed women the opportunity to become public church leaders, and as they spoke out on behalf of slaves and other victims, they found a voice to speak out for themselves. (50)

For a while, women enjoyed a great amount of freedom to serve within the church. So what changed it all, and so quickly? Hassey provides four explanations: 1) Fundamentalist subcultures arose as a response to the modernist theology that had infiltrated the mainline denominations between WWI and WWII. Some of these exhibited separatist tendencies that narrowed the role of women. I found it interesting that one of the major movements of the latter variety was the founding of Dallas Theological Seminary, whose "southern conservative social values" limited the role of women in the church and society. (53) A significant contributor to the tightening of women's opportunities at Moody Bible Institute was the influx of DTS graduates onto MBI faculty. (53-54)

A second reason for the decline of women's roles in the church was 2) its institutionalization. An increased emphasis on professionally-trained rather than lay-trained ministers and its focus on specialization edged women out. One unfortunate consequence was that "educational attainment and credentials often replaced spiritual gifts as the essential leadership qualifications." (53-54) Another reason was 3) the fundamentalist reaction to social change. As women's roles in society expanded with the increase of secular feminism, the church reacted in fear by narrowing the sphere of women in the church. The author's mention of a 1940s book entitled Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives and Women Preachers made me laugh despite the ominous undertones of how Christian gender perspectives were changing. Hassey summarizes those changing perspectives this way:

"Convinced that the survival of the traditional family and of the entire social order was at stake, many evangelicals tightened their approach to women in ministry." (55)

Finally, 4) fundamentalist exegesis resulted in a revised understanding of women's role-limiting passages such as 1 Timothy 2. A narrowed understanding of biblical inerrancy led to a literalism which prevented such passages from being understood as occasional or culturally specific, and instead emphasized the instructions presented as the enduring standard for all women for all time.

I found it fascinating to observe the ebb and flow of women's roles over the course of a century, and the varied reasons for the changes that took place. What a bunch of reactionary folks we humans are, changing our minds as often as our world changes. I might be discouraged if not for the fact that I have confidence in the Holy Spirit's ability (passion?) to work through and in spite of our human tendency to complicate most everything with questionable motives and imbalanced perspectives. These are muddy waters to navigate, but closing our eyes and treading water accomplishes nothing, so we swim on.

~B

P. S. Click here for an entertaining history of the bob haircut. The most astonishing line I read: "Men divorced their wives over bobbed hair."

The Gender Debate: Terms and Definitions

2011-02-09T11:21:00.003-07:00

Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

progress: 151/507

I've been having a hard time deciding which words to use when writing about gender (did you know patriarchalism isn't listed in the Oxford Dictionary?), so I thought it might be worth defining a few terms here as one (final!) aside before we jump right into this meaty book.

Two Convictions
As a starting point, the book emphasizes the two convictions which are the foundation of the book: "That the Bible is the fully inspired and authoritative Word of God, and that it teaches gender equality in church, home and society." (11) The first conviction I agree with wholeheartedly, and this is what makes me willing to hear and consider the arguments for the second conviction. The authors go to great pains in the introduction to the book to point out that their convictions are primarily biblical, rather than cultural, personal or societal (17).

Two Definitions

The authors offer two definitions for their viewpoint:

1. "The essential message of biblical equality is simple and straightfoward: Gender, in and of itself, neither privileges nor curtails one's ability to be used to advance the kingdom or to glorify God in any dimension of ministry, mission, society or family." (13)

2. "Egalitarianism recognizes patterns of authority in the family, church and society - it is not anarchistic - but rejects the notion that any office, ministry or opportunity should be denied anyone on the grounds of gender alone." (13) This position is based on the fact that men and women are equally

made in the image of God
fallen to sin
redeemable by Christ
participants in the new-covenant community
heirs of God
able to be filled and empowered by Holy Spirit (13-14; see the book for Scripture passages, which will mentioned in detail later in the book)

Clarfifying Terms
There are also quite a few terms used to express the two views on gender in the Church:

Male leadership is also referred to as patriarchy, hierarchy, headship, authority and tradition. This view "restricts women from full participation in certain ministries and decision-making responsibilities. The emphasis is on male leadership rather than shared leadership in the church and home." (15)

Gender equality is also known as evangelical feminism, egalitarianism and biblical equality.

Further, the authors note that both views have employed the term "complementarity," with the difference being in the implications of complementarity between the sexes. Thus, this word can offer some amount of common ground as a starting point for dialogue.

A Final Word on the Debate
"The debate between those who promote male leadership and those who promote gender equality cannot be rightly settled by name calling, issuing propaganda or evading this divisive issue. It can be approached with integrity only through careful scholarly investigation of what the Bible teaches about the nature, gifts and callings of women and men. To that end this book is offered." (17-18)

A Change of Mind and Heart: An Article by John Stackhouse

2011-02-08T15:22:00.005-07:00

I just came across an article by Regent College professor John Stackhouse, Jr on his blog. It's an excerpt from a new book entitled "How I Changed My Mind About Women In Leadership: Compelling Stories from Prominent Evangelicals," which includes personal stories of people such as Bill and Lynne Hybels, I. Howard Marshall and others regarding their conversions to egalitarianism. I was intrigued by his reasons for the change, as some of them are quite similar to the ones mentioned in my last post. He ends with suggestions on how women and men can work towards change. It's worth a read in its entirety, but if you're unconvinced or short on time, here are a few quotes to chew upon:

"So let’s recognize immediately that any deep change in us, such as the change from patriarchalism to egalitarianism, results only from the transformative power of the Holy Spirit of God."

"But this important breakthrough for me in my thinking about gender resulted also as a general theological principle: our task as theologians—and, indeed, the task of any responsible Christian—is to do the best we can to understand the Word of God in its multifarious complexity, even as that will sometimes result in an interpretation that does not fit every piece of the puzzle together without strain, leaving no pieces on the table, and certainly not pocketing the inconvenient ones, hoping no one will notice! No, all we can do is what we can do, namely, to submit to the Word of God as we understand it while remaining open to improvement of our interpretation later on."

"I needed to feel something of the pain of patriarchy: of being interrupted or ignored in conversation; of being passed over for recognition and promotion; of receiving condescension or suspicion instead of welcome partnership. And I needed to be confronted with their anger, with their refusal to be treated this way anymore."

Incidentally, the comments are also well worth reading, where differening views are eloquently expressed.

~B

Patriarchy - My Personal List of Ifs, Ands or Buts

2011-02-05T11:40:00.007-07:00

Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee
progress: 151/507

I began reading this book last summer, and now I'm at the point where I've got to re-browse my notes before I can really get moving on this topic. Nonetheless, the topic has been at the forefront of my mind all this time, and has become a lens through which I have been re-viewing my world. My last post of 2010 was a bit of an introduction to the topic of biblical gender issues by way of a personal story from my own journey. However, I find I'm still not quite ready to dive into writing about the book itself. As I've been confronted with this topic in recent discussions and experiences over the last few months, I've been thinking about the reasons why I am willing to challenge traditional patriarchal views of leadership in the church. How did I get to this point? Of course, opinions, feelings and experiences cannot be authoritative; however I think it's worth mentioning them, if for no other reason than to let you know where I'm coming from and where my biases lie.

Judging Another's Spiritual Calling
How can I challenge definitively the way God chooses to work in another mature believer's life? This idea can certainly be abused: we have only to look at the news and the history books to see the way that Christians have used "God told me" to justify all sorts of unquestionably wrong behaviour. But what do you do when a woman, whom you personally know to be a godly, mature believer, tells you that she feels "called" to be a pastor? I was confronted by just such a person during my year abroad in Scotland. Even though I was much less comfortable with the idea of a female pastor back then than I am now, I was hesitant to pronounce it wrong. Was she mistaken, deluded, sinful? Or was she simply an honest woman trying to be available to God's call on her life? I couldn't say for sure, so I deferred judgment. Fourteen years later, I am looking for a more definitive answer.

Inconsistencies in the Practice of Patriarchy
As mothers and Sunday School teachers, women are given huge influence over the spiritual training of young (girls and) boys. But at some point in their development into young men, that influence is transferred from women to men. Why is female spiritual influence over a male okay at one point and not at another? Isn't the shaping of a young mind one of the most powerful influences that mind will ever experience? What does this say inherently about women as leaders, or about some men who are content to let women do all the "lesser" work of raising children until the diapers and flannelgraphs are done?

Even as a teenager, I was bewildered by the fact that in churches where women are not to have any spiritual leadership over men, it was still okay for missionary women to have leadership over men (Lottie Moon and Elizabeth Elliot are two historical examples of missionary women who are respected by traditionally patriarchal denominations). Are the unreached equivalent to the little boys, able to be taught by women until they reach a certain point of maturity? Is there a special dispensation for a woman to lead when a man is unavailable or unwilling to do so?

Impracticalities of the Patriarchal Position
In comparison with previous centuries, the twenty-first century affords women extraordinary freedom. We have access to education and jobs (among other things) like never before. All else being equal, I wonder how many universities would hire a man with a BA to teach a subject when a woman with a PhD in the same field is available (although perhaps the wages might not change much - there is still more progress to be made). Wouldn't they want the most qualified person they could find to impart the highest level of knowledge to their students? And yet, when it comes to many churches, a woman is barred from even applying to teach simply because of her gender. In this model, Bible training, teaching experience, even spiritual maturity, can be a moot point simply because of her gender. Is this what God meant when his inspired authors wrote about divisions between men and women - that it is better for any man to teach than one well-trained and godly woman?

Negative Effects of the Patriarchal Position
One of the worst examples of patriarchal ignorance I have ever witnessed was when famous missionary and author Elisabeth Elliot came to speak at a conference at my Bible college. It was a conference, mind you, not a church service, and yet, as she got up to speak, handfuls of young men got up and walked out as witness to their disapproval. I am still offended by their rudeness. Sometimes, men who believe that women should not teach men can fool themselves into thinking that they have nothing at all to learn from any woman. Although I don't believe it is inherent to patriarchaly, its practice can lead men to view women as inferior, forgetting that every time Jesus speaks about spiritual power and leadership, it is in terms of submission and self-sacrifice.

Another area I have wondered about is how a strong division between the genders can negatively affect a community of believers. In my own experience, I have found that the wider the divide between men and women, the weirder I feel around men. I try to be normal, but some won't even make eye contact with me unless perhaps their wives are near. I feel cut off from half of my community, both in the areas of receiving and giving. In contrast, in churches where gender is not such an issue, I have enjoyed the rich friendship and camaraderie of both women and men without that same sense of awkwardness.

Another negative effect that can occur with gender divisions is the effect it can have on the spiritual maturity of the women themselves. A woman once remarked to me on what a relief it was to have her husband as the spiritual head of her home - she could just sit back and let him make the decisions! She meant well, and perhaps spoke hyperbolically, but I was dismayed. I wonder how many women are content to take a more passive role in their own (and others') spiritual development, simply because they feel that someone else (ie, their husbands or pastors or other male leaders) are ultimately responsible for it.

Positive Examples of Female Leadership
Some of my first experiences of women in leadership were negative, and reinforced my discomfort with the thought of a woman behind the pulpit. Some were either extremely liberal in their biblical interpretations, and/or biased in the opposite direction - women with something to prove. Others were just fluffy, not really preaching at all, but sharing their thoughts in a devotional or sentimental way.

It really wasn't until I went to Regent College that I began to witness positive examples of godly women preaching before the whole body of believers. Spirituality professor (and dear friend) Maxine Hancock spoke in Chapel with passion, conviction and academic excellence. She taught alongside her mostly male colleagues not primarily as a woman but as a learned, prepared and gifted speaker. (You can find a few talks here.)

We also had the privilege of hearing from many other Regent profs and their wives as well as male and female Regent students at our church in Vancouver, which was located on the University of British Columbia campus. Deriving its roots from a Brethren background, the church's leadership was shared amongst men and women from within the congregation and beyond, and I felt enriched by sitting under so many different members of God's household.

These are just a few examples from my own experience, but they exposed me to the great gifting that God has bestowed on men as well as women to teach and to preach. It made me question whether my initial discomfort with women preaching was due more to my own background and experience than to a black-and-white scriptural mandate.

Room for Another Interpretation in the Bible
Ultimately, the above questions, experiences and observations must bow to what the Bible says on the subject. I know that this is where I will lose many of you, and for different reasons - some of you won't recognize the authority of Scripture, others won't see room for an alternative, sound interpretation of the Bible's teaching on gender roles. As for me, I felt freed to pursue this topic further after I read an academic, evangelical article on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters which made room for a more egalitarian viewpoint. Tears came to my eyes as I read, and it was then that I realised just how deeply this topic has touched me. How encouraging it was to know that there are others who love God and the Bible who have been able to maintain their integrity while holding such a view.

Understanding of What it Means to Be Human
I have come to believe that it is in the community of men and women that we most fully live out our humanity. We look like God when we live in harmonious community with each other, because He is His own community - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. No man or woman alone can bear God's image to the extent that men and women together can. Adam-Eve-God. Husband-Wife-God. Mother-Father-Child. God of course has no gender but has imparted masculine and feminine characteristics to each of us, which reflect different aspects of His divine character. He is described in Scripture as both a protecting, providing, and disciplining Father, and a nurturing, wise and helpful Mother.

Men and women need each other. Just as a child needs a mother and a father (I am speaking in terms of ideals here, I mean no disrespect to the amazing single parents who do their best with the cards they've been dealt), just as a business or even a country is best run (in my opinion) when there are many voices - men and women need to hear from each other. So how should this play out in the church, which Paul described this way in Galatians 3:28:

There is neither Jew nor Gentile,

neither slave nor free,

nor is there male and female,

for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

If each gender (and indeed each individual) bears God's image in a unique way, how can the church afford to effectively silence half of its members? If men and women in community reflect God's image, what is lost when only men can lead? Just as a child is ideally raised by a mother and a father, isn't the church best served when men and women can share their diverse and complementary strengths in raising up a mature church?

Final Thoughts
I know that I've thrown a lot out here. Please understand, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything at this point - I'm just trying to articulate my thoughts so I can critique them as I proceed more deeply (and academically) into this topic. Just the act of having to write out my ideas has been helpful in challenging the validity of my logic or exposing my tendencies toward cynicism or overgeneralization.

I'm excited to explore further, but also a little nervous. This topic has a powerful tendency to divide, turning our opponents into heretics or oppressors or - even worse - liberals! I am happy to have many friends on each side of the fence, and just about everywhere in between. I pray this will protect me from reducing any person, made in God's image, to a one-dimensional caricature.

Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. - Ephesians 4:2-3

Back to Bookmeal

2011-02-02T10:24:00.001-07:00

Hello again, faithful reader(s)! It's been a long time, but I have a good reason for going AWOL: I have been delivered! Our fourth child arrived just in time for the new year and we have been settling in quite well. We rejoice in this new little life, already so dear to us.

You might also have noticed that I didn't reach my goal of reading twenty books for Bookmeal in 2010. I don't feel like I've failed because I've gotten so much out of what I have been able to read and write (I hope you have too). I'll continue along this year, without being too specific on a timeline.

Even during my absence, I've noticed some new flags on my visitor list - welcome, and thanks for stopping by! Introduce yourselves sometime and get in on the conversation...

Share

Finding My Voice: A Turning Point at Calling Lake

2010-11-18T16:52:00.001-07:00

By way of confession, I thought I would share the following story before I jump right into my next book on gender roles. It was an especially meaningful chapter of my journey to discover my place as a woman in the kingdom of God. I know that it is simply an anecdote, and therefore doesn't prove anything with regard to what the Bible says, but I hope it will convince you of my good intentions: that I am not grasping of leadership, not closed to God's leading in this area of my life. My experience in this story also gave me the permission I needed to continue my quest for understanding in this area.

***

My husband's extended family (about 25 of us) got together over Father's Day weekend earlier this year to spend some time together at my sister-in-law's cabin. In advance, an email had been sent out by the same (very organized) sister-in-law with a proposed schedule for all the basics: dishwashing schedule, meal sharing, etc. There was also a request for a volunteer to lead the Sunday worship time. I wouldn't have responded except that she had specifically clarified that she was looking for a "man or woman" to lead. So, I responded that "if nobody else is interested" in doing it, I'd be willing.

That is how I ended up being in charge of the informal Sunday service at Calling Lake this June.

As it was, I was nervous, as very few if any of my extended family have seen me teach. The confidence with which I normally lead was overshadowed by insecurity at this new audience, in front of whom I would feel especially vulnerable. Not only was I the youngest of the adults, I was a girl. And most of these were Baptists. And one of them - Steve's dad - was a Baptist pastor. By this time, I'd already been reading my Biblical equality book for awhile and had become uncomfortably aware of the differing view of the roles of women in the church. Would I offend anyone by leading, simply because I was female? Or worse, would I speak as a representative of women and screw up?

I revamped a Sunday School talk that I had given at our church a few years' previously on Matthew 16:24-26, on what it means for us in our daily lives to take up our crosses and follow Jesus. I felt good about it the first time I'd taught on it, so it seemed like a safe bet to use again. But then I thought about my Baptist-pastor-father-in-law and I was plagued with doubts: Had I got my facts right? Were my hermeneutics correct? I checked and double-checked my notes and attempted to calm myself.

Then, the night before I was to lead, I lost my voice. Only one out of every three syllables I spoke was audible. I was sniffling nonstop. All I wanted to do was sleep. Well, that and teach, which was why I didn't ask Steve right then to see if anyone else would be able to take my place. Despite my fears, my nervousness, and my second-guessing of myself, I wanted to do this. Teaching is in my blood. So, I went to bed and hoped for the best.

During the course of the night, I woke up many times to cough, blow my nose, or suck on another cough drop. In my half-sleep I prayed, "Please let me get over this by morning." As I tossed and turned, a thought occurred to me: What if God was trying to tell me something by this sudden, poor-timed illness? What if I wasn't supposed to teach tomorrow? Or ever? And so I prayed a second time, "Lord, if you want me to do this, then please, let me get well. But if you don't, then...don't." I drifted back to sleep for awhile, only to wake up again, with the thought of how painful it would be if God responded by choosing not to heal me, how hurtful if his answer was indeed, "Despite your passion, despite your preparation, and despite your desire to share my own words with others, I don't want you to teach - because of your sex." Unable to bear the weight of such a thought, I released it to God and drifted back into a fitful sleep.

I woke up an hour before the service was to begin and my voice was completely gone. Surely now was the time to find a replacement. Still, I resisted. In my stubbornness, I got up, looked over my notes and went to the kitchen to make myself some honey and lemon tea. Within minutes, I began to find my voice.

And so, with a quiet but steady voice, I shared from my heart that Sunday morning in the presence of the entire Bonham family. And I believe God blessed it. Several family members jumped into the discussion. At one point, a brother-in-law responded to my comment about how I felt recently that I was "living in the 'no' of God" and I was given a brief opportunity to share a bit more personally a few details of my struggles over the last few years that I'd never gotten to share with any of them before. The discussion was lively and continued until, getting nervous that I was letting it go on too long, I asked for a volunteer to close in prayer. At this point, another brother-in-law interrupted and asked if he could share a few more thoughts, and the discussion continued for another half hour or so. My father-in-law never spoke, but in the end he prayed and mentioned me by name, thanking God for what I had to share with everyone this morning.

Afterward, several family members approached me to thank me for sharing. My sister-in-law commented on my obvious passion for teaching. My brothers-in-law told me how much they enjoyed the discussion. Even my teenaged nephew said, "That was really good, Auntie Becky." (!!) I didn't even think the teenagers in the group would even be listening to what I had to say! A short while later, my father- and mother-in-law came over and gave me hugs, telling me I'd done a good job. The apprehension I had felt earlier was washed over with relief and a profound sense of joy - because I'd done what I love, I did it well, and I felt affirmed in doing it, both by my family and by God, who healed me just in the nick of time.

With respect for the private details of these real people and my relationships with them, I'll simply say that it was a turning point in some of those relationships. I felt that a few misconceptions fell away that day and my loved ones got a truer glimpse of who I really am. Doors were opened in relationships that had remained closed up to that point. Discussions have since been enlarged, to cover more topics and embrace deeper passions. In the end, I have felt more known by my family than I had ever felt in the past, and to my relief, that was a blessing and not a curse.

Share

Thoughtful Christianity, Part 4: Empty "Threats" and the End of Knowledge

2010-11-12T16:25:00.006-07:00

Your Mind Matters: The Place of the Mind in the Christian Life, by John Stott
progress: completed

Mindless Witness

Someone once shared a story she had read about the immediacy of the need for witness. The main point was a question, "What if you knew your neighbour's house was going to burn down this very night - wouldn't you warn them?" I've heard similar metaphors before, and of course I understand that the main point is that we need to take matters of the soul seriously. But that particular day, my mind took a different turn. I couldn't help but ask myself, "But would they even believe you?" If someone came to me and said something along those lines, my first thought would probably be, "How do you know?" and, depending on who was telling me, I might even wonder if they were trying to threaten or intimidate me. Whether I took the risk of believing such an apparently outrageous suggestion would depend on who was telling me, and how well he or she knew me. If a stranger said it, I would likely consider them a quack, and perhaps even a threat to my safety. If a family member or close friend said it, I would be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and hear them out.

A person will rarely accept even the well-intentioned advice of a complete stranger, at least not without sufficient information to make an informed decision of their own. And that requires both the advisor and the hearer to exchange and evaluate ideas in order to make wise choices - namely, to use their minds.

Instead, what we as Christians can sometimes fall into is what John Stott describes as "an emotional, anti-intellectual appeal for 'decisions' when the hearers have but the haziest notion what they are to decide about or why." (66) It seems to me that the street-corner preacher with the sign "Believe in Jesus and be saved!" has very little hope of attracting any real interest, because he has so little to say about who this Jesus is, or why anyone should believe in him. When Jesus is reduced to nothing more than a pithy slogan or appeal, he is thereby stripped of his identity and rendered meaningless to the hearers. Stephen's speech to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7 is the consummate example of a thoughtful, thorough sermon that spoke right into the hearers' realm of knowledge and experience, giving them all they needed to accept his message (or refute it, as they did in this case; well-reasoned evangelism doesn't guarantee a well-reasoned response).

As much as we can heartily acknowledge the Spirit's ultimate role in preparing, softening, and turning hearts toward God, that doesn't change the fact that our role is to reason with unbelievers. This, as Stott points out, is made clear in the abundant use of words throughout the Acts especially that intertwine evangelism with the affairs of the mind: "persuade," "argue," "explain," and "prove." He writes,

To set the Holy Spirit and a reasoned presentation of the gospel over against each other is a false antithesis. (72)

and then goes on to quote Gresham Machen from his book The Christian Faith in the Modern World:

There must be the mysterious work of the Spirit of God in the new birth...Without that, all our arguments are quite useless. but because argument is insufficient, it does not follow that it is unnecessary. What the Holy Spirit does in the new birth is not to make a man a Christian regardless of the evidence, but on the contrary to clear away the mists from his eyes and enable him to attend to the evidence. (quoted on page 72)

I risk getting a little quote-happy here, but Stott's closing comments for this section are worth repeating in their entirety:

Our objective is to win a total man for a total Christ, and this will require the full consent of his mind and heart and will.

I pray earnestly that God will raise up today a new generation of Christian apologists or Christian communicators, who will combine an absolute loyalty to the biblical gospel and an unwavering confidence in the power of the Spirit with a deep and sensitive understanding of the contemporary alternatives to the gospel; who will relate the one to the other with freshness, pungency, authority and relevance; and who will use their minds to reach other minds for Christ. (73-74)

Amen! May I grow more and more into just such a person.

Conclusion

Stott sums up his little book with a reminder that believers are not to view knowledge as an end in itself, but as a means to an end. "Knowledge," he writes, "carries with it the solemn responsibility to act on the knowledge we have, to translate our knowledge into appropriate behavior." (80) The appropriate behaviour, the end of knowledge, is expressed in four main areas of the Christian life: worship, faith, holiness, and love ("For by itself knowledge can be harsh; it needs the sensitivity which love can give it." (83)). He concludes with a warning:

Knowledge is indispensable to Christian life and service. If we do not use the mind which God has given us, we condemn ourselves to spiritual superficiality and cut ourselves off from many of the riches of God's grace. At the same time, knowledge is given us to be used, to lead us to higher worship, greater faith, deeper holiness, better service. What we need is not less knowledge but more knowledge, so long as we act upon it. (84, emphasis mine)

Learn and grow in knowledge, and in wisdom act upon it.

--
So ends my journey with John Stott - for now at least. I've been coming back to these themes again and again, being challenged and convicted in my own life as I seek to live out my knowledge and my faith with intentionality and integrity, and I trust this is only the beginning of the journey. Further up and further in!

~Becky

Share

Engaging Culture: Faith and Film

2010-11-09T10:05:00.004-07:00

I just finished reading an article written by my friends and fellow bloggers Steve and Julie Golding-Page. They are an Anglican priest-couple currently living in Saskatchewan and former Regent College alumni. They are self-professed film fanatics who see movie-viewing as an effective way to engage culture and their Christian faith. I especially enjoyed their discussion of Acts 17, where Paul demonstrates an active and thoughtful engaging with the pagan culture of first-century Athens. It's worth taking a look at this interesting article, which also gives ideas for how to start your own film group:

http://www.anglicanplanet.net/canadian-news/2010/11/3/film-faith-meeting-god-at-the-movies.html

When I was at Regent College, professor Loren Wilkinson hosted weekly film and discussion evenings. I loved taking a deeper look into films that I knew some Christians might boycott altogether, and finding my own faith enriched in the process, as well as an increased ability to engage the world around me in a more thoughtful way.

What are your thoughts about faith and film? What movies have challenged or changed you?

Share

Thoughtful Christianity, Part 3: Transformed Minds and Common Sense

2010-11-08T17:03:00.012-07:00

Your Mind Matters: The Place of the Mind in the Christian Life, by John Stott
progress: completed

(Note: Sorry for the stupid breaks, etc. Blogger is being very annoying and changing all my formatting, and I am not the HTML-genius type. Grrr.)

The Place of the Mind in the Pursuit of Holiness

How is our mind related to our actions? How does it contribute or distract from our pursuit of the holiness to which we were called? Stott answers that it is a neglected but essential component. For, how can we know the will of God without using our minds to discern it from His word? Further, the battle for discipline begins in our minds:

Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but
be transformed by the renewing of your mind.
Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—
his good, pleasing and perfect will. - Romans 12:2

It is the many Scripture verses such as this one that lead Stott to conclude that "self-control is primarily mind-control." (58) The battle for our character is usually won in the mind, as it is renewed by the grace of God. (57) Conversely, the opposite is also true:

Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile
to retain the knowledge of God,

so God gave them over to a depraved mind,

so that they do what ought not to be done. - Romans 1:28

Those who live according to the flesh

have their minds set on what the flesh desires;

but those who live in accordance with the Spirit

have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. - Romans 8:5

A renewed mind set on what the Spirit desires will live according to the Spirit. A depraved mind set on what the flesh desires will live according to the flesh. As believers who still struggle with the flesh, this is the battle we fight, the tension we live within. And we are doomed unless we allow our minds to be engaged and transformed by the Holy Spirit.

Finally, Stott reminds us that "we are to consider not only what we should be but what by God's grace we already are. We are constantly to recall what God has done for us." (59) We are to preach these things to ourselves "until their truth grips our minds and molds our character." (60)

Therefore, with minds that are alert and fully sober,

set your hope on the grace to be brought to you

when Jesus Christ is revealed at his coming. - 1 Peter 1:13

Guidance: General Will versus Particular Will

I really liked what Stott had to say here. I've struggled sometimes with the way others speak so assuredly that "the Lord told" them that they needed to do such and such. It sounds much more spiritual than my usual, "I thought about it, prayed about it and finally decided to do such and such, and in retrospect, it seemed like God was definitely leading me on that path." Even when I do have an inkling that God is speaking an idea into my mind, I am hesitant to declare it, because I am unsure of what is me and what is Him, and I am aware that I may be subconsciously using spiritual language to defend a human idea.

During a Bible study on 1 Samuel, I came across two different types of situations that David encountered in his adventures with King Saul. At times, God gave him a specific command: go here, do this. Other times, David was seemingly left to his own to make a decision on act it. In both situations, God blessed him. In one situation, God was direct. In the other, God allowed him to make his own decisions about what to do. The following two quotes from Bill T. Arnold, author of the NIV Application Commentary on 1 & 2 Samuel, have given me comfort as I struggle to discern God's will for my life without direct, specific words from God:

“David is doing what seems logical, walking through the doors open to him. God honors what he does.” (363)

“Rarely do the saints of the Old Testament have direct confirmation of their actions, though they hold resolutely to the belief that God is involved. Such examples remind us to submit our entire decision-making process to God and trust him to enlighten our God-given reason and logic and to guide us in our important decisions in life.” (364)

John Stott affirms this idea. He does so by differentiating between God's general will for all of our lives (be holy, be righteous, love one another) and his specific will for our individual lives (Whom should I marry? What career should I choose?). The Bible is our source to know and discern God's general will - "for all people...at all times" (61), but not so for God's particular will, which

is not to be sought in Scripture, for Scripture does not contradict itself, and it is of the essence of God's particular will that it may be different for different members of his family. Certainly we shall find in Scripture some general principles to guide us in our particular choices. And I do not deny that some of God's people down the ages have claimed to received very detailed guidance from Scripture. Yet I must repeat that this is not God's usual way. (62-63)

He uses the example of choosing a life partner. While we can draw out principles from the Bible of what sort of person we ought to marry, we will not find a name or an address of The One! Instead, he argues, we are to use common sense, "trusting that God will guide you through your own mental processes." (64) I can verify that this is the manner in which I firmly believe God led me to pursue theological studies, to study abroad in Glasgow, to attend seminary even thought I had to go into debt to do it, and to marry the man I did (to name just a few).

In the course of my decision-making, I trusted him to close the doors that weren't in his will, as he knew that I sought to do his will. I considered the advice of those wiser and more experienced than I. In this way, I took ownership of the inherent difficulties of any choice, even while I enjoyed the blessings that he poured out on me in the following of them. Perhaps we are being a bit lazy if we just expect him to spell out every step of our lives, without having to engage our God-given brains:

Although God promises to guide us, we must not expect him to do so in the way in which we guide horses and mules. He will not use a bit and bridle with us. For we are not horses or mules; we are human beings. We have understanding, which horses and mules have not. It is, then, through the use of our own understanding, enlightened by Scripture and prayer and the counsel of friends, that God will lead us into a knowledge of his particular will for us. (64-65)

It is just one more way that God lends us what CS Lewis called "the dignity of causality."

--
Did I mention this tiny little book was filled to the brim with profound insight? I guess I'll have to cut this short once again, so I can keep this post (relatively) short and get it posted today! More to come...
~Becky

Share

A Mindful Hymn

2010-11-08T11:27:00.001-07:00

As I was writing about mindful worship this weekend, I was thinking of the hymn "And Can It Be That I Should Gain," by Charles Wesley, as a specific example of such intelligent praise. To my pleasant surprise, we sang it in church on Sunday. It bears repeating here, as it's worthy of more meditation than I can muster during one sing-through:

And Can It Be That I Should Gain
by Charles Wesley, 1738

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain—
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

’Tis mystery all: th’Immortal dies:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore,
Let angel minds inquire no more.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
Let angel minds inquire no more.

He left His Father’s throne above
So free, so infinite His grace—
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race:
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

Still the small inward voice I hear,
That whispers all my sins forgiven;
Still the atoning blood is near,
That quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

Wow! As much as I enjoy some of the contemporary songs out there, the old Christian hymns are a rich heritage I hope we never forsake.

Share

Thoughtful Christianity, Part 2: Intelligent Worship and Rational Faith

2010-11-06T11:17:00.005-06:00

Your Mind Matters: The Place of the Mind in the Christian Life, by John Stott
progress: completed

In the second half of his book, Stott gives examples of how the mind is to be engaged in Christian worship, faith, holiness, guidance, evangelism and ministry. I'll discuss each of these areas in turn.

Mindful Worship versus Mindless Worship

(c) Becky Bonham

What is the place of the mind in worship? A better preliminary question might be, What is the goal of worship? For some, it is to have an "experience," an emotional high of sorts, to transcend the moment in heartfelt praise to God. For others, emotion or experience has little to do with it; it is primarily a confession of God's greatness. For me, it is to focus on God without getting distracted by the words or the music, the sound of my voice or the wiggling of my children, or any number of random thoughts that seem to have chosen this moment to assault my consciousness. I often find myself discouraged by my attempts at meaningful worship.

Perhaps another related question would be, Who or what is the focus of our worship? Ourselves, or God? Orthodox theology? Aesthetically pleasing music? Hearts reawakened to God through praise? Or an awesome band that is able to get everyone worked up into a quasi-spiritual frenzy?

Okay, that last one was a bit sarcastic, but I was reminded of a satirical article I read on some of the shortcomings of contemporary Christian worship. Here's a snippet which is applicable to the conversation at hand:

The twin goals here are a) repetition and b) chanting quality. We don’t focus on what we’re singing, but how we’re singing it. The main thing is to get that kind of tingly, "olive oily" feeling. Don't worry if you don't get this right away. It will come as you learn to disengage your intellect. Just free yourself. Immerse yourself. Relax.

Of course there's a balance. It's not just about God, it's not just about us, but it's about us in relationship to God. Stott goes to great lengths to emphasize the importance of engaging our minds in worship.

The only worship acceptable to God is intelligent worship, worship "in truth," the worship offered by those who know whom they are worshiping and who love him "with all their mind." (44)

His emphasis is on truly knowing this God whom we worship. The Psalms are filled with concrete language and images of who He is: Creator, Redeemer, Rescuer, Friend. He hears the cries of the oppressed, he is patient with the obstinate, he is defined by steadfast love and holiness. I am sometimes struck by how many contemporary worship songs could easily be mistaken for love songs between humans, and when that is the case, I think something essential has been lost. We bring ourselves to worship, with all our needs, shortcomings, and distractions, but worship at its best will re-center us in God, which in turn will put us in our proper place, under his mercy and grace, and providential care. As ecstatic as worship can sometimes feel, those feelings can't last unless they are grounded in the character of God. This is why Stott writes,

All Christian worship, public and private, should be an intelligent response to God's self-revelation in his words and works recorded in Scripture. (47-48)

Blind Faith versus Rational Faith

(c) Becky Bonham

"It is a great mistake to suppose that faith and reason are incompatible." (49) Stott points out that in Scripture, faith is not the opposite of reason, but in fact the opposite of sight: "For we live by faith, not by sight." (2 Cor 5:7)

On the contrary, true faith is essentially reasonable because it trusts in the character and the promises of God. A believing Christian is one whose mind reflects and rests on these certitudes. (49)

Unlike Oprah and her friends, who espouse a view of faith in faith (I have faith that _______, therefore it is true), Christian faith is grounded in rational, logical truth, as presented in Scripture, and confirmed in our lives by the Holy Spirit. Stott calls it "a reasoning trust...which reckons thoughtfully and confidently upon the trustworthiness of God." (52) And of course rational, logical truth requires the engaging of our minds. I liked the sentiments of Dr. Lloyd-Jones, whom Stott quotes at length:

Faith, if you like, can be defined like this: It is a man insisting upon thinking when everything seems determined to bludgeon and knock him down in an intellectual sense. (quoted on page 54)

I like that. When I am tempted to doubt, the only thing which draws me back from the edge is a reengaging of my brain, in which I remind myself of God, who he is and what he's done.

Well, I think I'll have to keep breaking this post down into parts. I've got a quiet house to myself for a limited time and should probably do something...mundane. Let's see if I can find a way to engage my mind in housework!

~Becky

What Has Happened to Our Conviction? or, I'm Just Like Inviting You to Join Me on the Bandwagon of My Own Uncertainty

2010-11-03T19:09:00.002-06:00

This is a word animation video which a friend posted on Facebook quite some time ago. It's a fun little piece which highlights yet another misuse of the intellect, or rather the lack of it, in popular culture. Along with having a cool message by poet Taylor Mali, it's also just fun to watch (animation by Ronnie Bruce):

Typography from Ronnie Bruce on Vimeo.

Share

On Being Thoughtful Christians: Using, Losing and Abusing Our Minds - Part 1

2010-10-27T12:14:00.003-06:00

Your Mind Matters: The Place of the Intellect in the Christian Life, by John Stott
progress: completed

One of the highest and noblest functions
of man's mind is to listen to God's Word,

and so to read his mind and think his thoughts after him,
both in nature and in Scripture. (31)

When I started my first year of Bible College, someone spoke in Chapel about not losing the "heart and hands" aspect of our faith while we strengthened the "head" aspect through theological study. It seemed obvious enough to me at the time, but I had no idea how tricky this would prove to be in real life, nor how many different ways that we as Christians can get off balance in this area.

On the one hand, there is a brand of theological prowess, which in the midst of substandard (or nearly nonexistent) theology, is easily mutated into cynicism. Poor teaching or a lack of teaching can contribute to this condition in the hearts of those who are hungrier than their fellows for a more thorough treatment of ideas and beliefs. Intellectual condescension causes the informed to forget that they, too, were once uninformed. Intellectual pride can convince those who are knowledgeable to think they have all of the knowledge and cannot learn from someone with less knowledge than themselves. (The application of fancy labels are handy tools, used to dismiss those who are "simple," "ignorant" or "sentimental." - I could use more specific terms, but I'm trying very hard to speak in generalities.) And all of these things - intellectual cynicism, condescension, and pride - can lead to an imbalanced perspective that views theology and doctrine as the Most Important Thing.

Others have had run-ins with such types of people and become utterly turned off to the ego and the attitude and the dogma - and along with it the thinking, the theology, and the doctrine. They can be reactionary to the point of placing personal experience above theology, sometimes going so far as to pit doctrine and Christian living against each other, as if it must be one or the other. Others adopt a black-and-white approach to biblical ideas, because it is so much easier than thinking through individual situations to discern the subtle shades of gray which may in fact be the most spiritually wise.

There are congregations where a lack of education is suspect, and there are congregations where too much education is suspect. There are churches that are too focused on theology, and there are churches that ignore it completely (interestingly, either situation is a good breeding ground for a cult to be birthed). There are "educated" believers who are profoundly ignorant, and "uneducated" believers who are profoundly wise.

I might add that I can see distorted reflections of myself in each and every one of these caricatures.

So, which is it, then? The mind or the heart? Intellect or experience? Doctrine or practice? Knowledge or zeal?

Of course the answer is yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. In the opening chapter of his tiny book, John Stott writes,

Many have zeal without knowledge, enthusiasm without enlightenment. In more modern jargon, they are keen but clueless.

Now I thank God for zeal. Heaven forbid that knowledge without zeal should replace zeal without knowledge! God's purpose is both, zeal directed by knowledge, knowledge fired with zeal. (13)

He goes on to quote a former seminary president:

Commitment without reflection is fanaticism in action. But reflection without commitment is the paralysis of all action. (Dr. John Mackay, quoted on page 14)

Always being careful to reassure his readers that his goal is not an "arid hyper-intellectualism" or a "dry, humourless, academic Christianity, but...a warm devotion set on fire by truth," (18) Stott laments the spirit of anti-intellectualism that has taken hold of both secular and Christian culture today. He points out three emphases within the church which have a tendency in this direction: the disproportionate focus on ritual, social action or experience can become "escape routes by which to avoid our God-given responsibilities to use our minds Christianly." (17) Again, he is not arguing against these things, but for them to be kept in their proper place - that is, in subjection to a thoughtful understanding of Scripture.

He takes some time to argue in defense of our minds - first of all, that we were created to think. We alone of all God's creatures were given the ability for rational thought. And for those who would argue that our minds are now fallen and therefore untrustworthy, he argues that they are no more fallen than our emotions, to which many retreat. Moreover, our minds have been redeemed, along with the rest of ourselves, and are daily being renewed. Lastly, we will be judged by our knowledge, and what we do with it.

How long will you simple ones love your simple ways?

How long will mockers delight in mockery and

fools hate knowledge?

--Proverbs 1:22

Our minds, and our thoughts, matter.

--
I've left this post unfinished for nearly a week now, so perhaps I'll make this part one and finish up in a separate post when I have time. Next time I'll look at his examples of how the mind is to be engaged in worship, faith, holiness, guidance, evangelism and ministry. Stay tuned! ~ Becky

Share

A Fortuitous Find at the Book Fair

2010-10-20T12:07:00.006-06:00

Well, there I was at the Scholastic Book Fair at my son's elementary school today, browsing through the piles of teenage vampire lit, Pokemon manuals and frilly pink puppy diaries, when a book of a different sort caught my eye:

Get Real: What Kind of World Are You Buying?
by Mara Rockliff

The book is geared toward ages 9-12 and discusses the wider implications of what we're investing in when we spend our money on items such as shoes, cell phones, fast food and bottled water, to name a few. I've been browsing it for the last hour or so and it looks pretty good - and not just for the 9-12 bracket, either.

Although Rockliff is descriptive and snarky in her descriptions of how things are made, she's not over the top and her chapters are filled with practical suggestions on how to make better, more informed choices. The final chapters offer many suggestions for change, as well as inspiring stories of other teens and adults who've made a difference in their world. She also includes a graphic of a "wallet buddy," put out by The Center for a New American Dream. It's a tiny paper pouch into which you can slide your credit card, with the following message on one side:

"Every dollar I spend is a statement about the kind of world I want and the quality of life I value."

...and a list of questions to consider before using that credit card on the other side:

Is this something I need?
Do I already own something that could serve the same purpose?
Can I borrow one, find one used, or make one instead of buying new?
Was it made locally?
Was it made with environmentally preferable materials?
Was it made with fair labor practices?
Will it serve more than one purpose?
Will it be easy and cost-effective to maintain?
Will using it require excessive energy?
Does it come in excessive packaging?
Can I recycle or compost it when I'm done with it?
If I'm not still sure, can I wait a month before deciding to buy it?

I thought it was pretty cool. You can download your own copy (slightly altered*) to print out here.

(*The list of questions on the current link is shorter than the above list, which I liked better.)

Share

Next Course: Books 6, 7 and 8

2010-10-15T11:10:00.004-06:00

I've pretty much finished up with my current bookmeal books, and am now focusing on three new ones:

Book 6 - Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, and Gordon Fee
   I'm well into this book already, but have yet to write much about my thoughts. I'll be working to change that in the next few weeks.

Book 7 - Your Mind Matters: The Place of the Mind in the Christian Life, by John Stott
   This book addresses an issue which I have been forced to grapple with in recent years as I've encountered widely divergent views and approaches to the place of the intellect within the church and worship. I read the first chapter back in the spring (or was it last fall?) and loved it, so I've been anxious to get back to it and dig in. John Stott is yet another example of my favourite type of spiritual hero: scholarly, godly and able to speak profound truths in language that is accessible to the average joe. It's a short read (85 pp), so I'll probably tackle this first.

Book 8 - The Way is Made by Walking: A Pilgrimage Along the Camino de Santiago, by Arthur Paul Boers
   Again, I started this last year, and really enjoyed what I read so far. When I decided to do bookmeal, I knew it should be one of my books, so I set aside until then...that is, now.

(Click here for my earlier descriptions of Books 6 and 8)

It looks quite unlikely that I will finish my goal of twenty books this year, but that's okay. Life has sort of gotten in the way at times. Parenting, pregnancy, fatigue, laziness, and intermittent bouts of depression have all played a role, but the one constant has been this: when I can sit down and blog, I feel better. So, I'll press on and keep doing what I can, and enjoy the process without the stress of a hard deadline. Thanks for persevering with me!

Share

Humble Dialogue and the Willingness to Be Wrong

2010-10-14T10:44:00.010-06:00

Amazing Grace: A Vocabulary of Faith, by Kathleen Norris
progress: complete

A friend of mine once described a comment made by his Bible college philosophy professor, one of the few educators at that school which he held in high esteem: In describing his encounters with skeptics or people of different beliefs, he would tell them that, even as a Christian, he would follow the truth wherever it took him, no matter what. No belief was too precious if the truth led him elsewhere.

At the time, I remember struggling with that statement. What exactly would he be willing to discard? Did it mean he would be willing to renounce his faith in Jesus? My friend saw it as a profound example of his integrity and commitment to the truth. I tended to see it more as a threat to the faith. What did he mean he would follow the truth wherever it took him - did he actually think the Christian faith could be wrong? Maybe his own faith was suspect.

Somewhere along the way, I had picked up the idea that a Christian must be completely confident in every aspect of her faith if she is to convince others to believe. There is no room for doubt, because that might scare people away! (Either that or other Christians might become suspicious of you.) What I hadn't thought of was whether or not it was my job to convince other people, or whether exaggerated overconfidence would be more of a turnoff than honest doubt.

Kathleen Norris challenges this modern-day temptation within the church (and Christian institutions) to know everything (or to act like we do) with examples from the early monastic tradition, in which "I know not" was considered a wise response to individual portions of Scripture. Having an all-inclusive approach to Scripture, they were willing to acknowledge that there was a larger context to that passage (i.e., the whole of Scripture), of which they might be as yet uninformed. Humility and a reticence to produce half-baked opinions allowed them time to take in the big picture, to resist the temptation to "use scripture for his or her own ends," (337) until they were sure that their convictions fit into the whole of Scripture. Norris quotes a Benedictine sister and biblical scholar on the benefits of this approach:

'We're forced into contention with the Bible in uncomfortable, often memorable ways,' she says, 'which save us from citing just the scriptures that agree with our own preconceived ideas.' (Shawn Carruth, quoted on page 337)

Even though I've broadened my views considerably since those Bible college days, it's still hard for me to talk about the freedom to say "I know not" without offering up a few disclaimers. I'm not trying to challenge the authority of Scripture. I believe that Christians can have confidence in the Bible. It is 100% authoritative in my life. What I am challenging is whether my interpretations and hermeneutical applications of the many individual passages of Scripture are 100% authorative. I cannot be 100% confident in my own interpretation, because I am a fallible human tainted by sin. This should make room for a refreshing willingness to admit that I might be wrong, and therefore to hear with humility the differing perspectives of others. It allows me to resist prideful judgment of others with differing viewpoints. Norris writes,

To church congregations and denominations that are weary of strife, of continually arguing things out in a tense, judgmental atmosphere, it may come as welcome news to learn that they, too, are allowed to say 'I know not' with regard to the Bible, free to not use it to justify taking sides in every issue that coms along. (338)

She goes on to describe the yearning voiced to her by an acquaintance who

hoped that religious communities could provide a vision of a church, and a community, 'in which not everything has to be decided, where you don't have to take a stand on every issue before you can live together peaceably and creatively.' (338)

Sounds refreshing, doesn't it? Imagine if, instead of persecuting Galileo for his heliocentric views, the Catholic church was willing to say, we can't be 100% sure if that jives with Scripture, but the bigger picture of your life tells us that you're a man who loves God and his word, so let's agree to disagree and move forward in community until the truth is made more plainly clear. Hm. There are far too many examples of this pigheadedness-in-the-name-of-conviction in our churches today. I have modelled it far too much in my own life.

Truth will win out in the end. It can withstand scrunity without our feeble attempts to "protect" it. And if we will make room for genuine inquiry, we might learn something and even grow in our own faith. But, as Norris points out,

Genuine inquiry takes time. It also requires patience, trust, and the ability to listen well, qualities that are unfortunately in short supply in theological schools as well as church congregations, and to be truthful, in the human heart. I do not wish to be mistaken for an anti-intellectual when I criticize the criticizers, that is, when I suggest that the modern methods of biblical interpretation have given us more than we could have hoped for but also less than we need to sustain our faith, and the Christian church. As good and necessary as these methods have proven to be, they have furthered harsh and seemingly intractable division among Christians. (339)

It amazes me how vehemently we as Christians can argue issues that really have comparatively little to do with living the Christian life, alienating so many others in the process, and distracting ourselves from focusing on those little things, like "bearing with one another in love," "making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace," and "do not think more highly of yourselves than you ought." Oh yeah, and "Be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" - an especially challenging one for me, since I am prone to chatter.

I don't pretend to know just how it's done, but I suspect a good place to start is with silence and a sincere and thorough searching of the Scriptures, not so much for an answer to vindicate a particular view as for direction to guide us ever deeper into the heart of God. For this is the purpose of God's word: not to win arguments but to transform its readers into Christlikeness. If we forget that, we are lost.

In the end, I think it's fair to say that the professor's attitude wasn't so much a threat to "the faith" as it was a threat to mine, which was immature and untested. I am inclined to think it was the strength of a deep-seated, mature faith that enabled him to speak with such confidence about Truth - for sincere faith that makes room for honest doubt is in the end, likely to be the strongest.

I'll close with an extended quote from Shane Hipps, author of the great book Flickering Pixels: How Technology Shapes Our Faith (I just read it last year, but might have to read it again for bookmeal):

Many [Christians] are coming to believe that robust faith lives somewhere between absolute trust and deep doubt. The colours of faith change through seasons of grief and hope, passion and despair. No one has it all figured out all the time - both Christians and non-Christians are in need of ongoing conversion. Humanity as a whole is called to participate in an unfolding process of redemption and reconciliation.

and further,

The person who is a true follwer of Jesus, a student and learner, but perhaps not yet - and maybe not ever - an orthodox believer. This category of doubting disciple didn't seem to bother Jesus; after all, his parting words to us in the book of Matthew were, 'Therefore go and make disciples...' Jesus didn't tell us to make believers. He called us to make disciples, and disciples are followers and students of the way of God. Followers learn to change their beliefs as they walk.

Let's not be afraid of doubt, disagreement, or dialogue on these things. The truth can defend itself best when we listen in love, not judgment; when we seek to save souls, not arguments; and when we humbly remind ourselves that our own understanding of things can only ever be partial - at least on this side of heaven.

He who answers before listening—that is his folly and his shame. - Proverbs 18:13

Share

Earthkeeping: Final Thoughts, on Starting Points

2010-10-04T13:30:00.005-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger
progress: completed

"No one made a greater mistake than the person who did nothing because he or she could not do everything."

Edmund Burke (paraphrased in BP 169)

Just in case you got overwhelmed by the hugeness of the principles listed in my last post - as I did, and I was afraid my high school students would - I tried to sum them up in the following five simple rules. Hopefully these will offer practical ways to start doing a little now while we work our way toward doing "everything."

A Few Practical Steps to Earthkeeping

Reduce – Learn to tell the difference between needs and wants, and make responsible choices.
Reuse – Donate to and shop at thrift stores, reuse packaging, repurpose what you can.
Recycle – Picture your trash in God’s good earth and do your best to keep it from going there!
Try to see the big picture – Consider how your choices/actions/inactions and lifestyle/consumption/waste affect others: people, creatures, land, ecosystems.
Learn to love creation – Spend time in it, see yourself as part of it, experience God through the enjoyment of it, and show him by your actions how thankful you are for the gift of it.

For further thought...

Read Psalm 104 and meditate on the majesty of the Creator, and the goodness and the interrelatedness of his creation.
Read Psalm 148 and observe the whole of creation in worship of its Creator.
Check out A Rocha to discover some of the ways that Christians around the world are trying to live out their calling as earthkeepers.
Read (Regent Professor :-) Maxine Hancock's Living on Less and Liking it More for some practical ways to simplify your life and free up your resources.
Visit websites like Freecycle.net and TwoShirts.org and consider these creative ways to give away the stuff you don't need and get the stuff you do - for free!

I would love to hear a few more practical ideas from my readers (my stats tell me there are at least a few of you!), so send them along and I'll add them to the list.

Share

Earthkeeping: The Path Ahead

2010-09-29T12:10:00.015-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision of Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger

progress: 164/187

With the help of Bouma-Prediger and his insightful book, we have hopefully established the following truths:

We are called to be good keepers of the whole of creation.
Creation groans, because of us.
Jesus is the ultimate reconciler of creation.
We have a role to play in the redemption of creation.

So...what is our role?

Bouma-Prediger offers his answer in terms of the larger question of "What Kind of People Ought We to Be?" Values and virtues point the way to what sort of actions we should take (or not take). His discussion was so thorough that I found it difficult to process without putting it into my own little outline (yes, I'm that sort of person :-). The words in parentheses are the unhealthy extremes of the aforementioned virtues.

Integrity: Creation is diverse, good, and harmonious.

Value: Creation has intrinsic value because God made it, not just because of its usefulness.

Goal 1: Act so as to preserve diverse kinds of life.

Respect all creatures (conceit – reverence)
Recognize our interdependence with other creatures (self-sufficiency – addiction)

--
Finitude: Creation is finite.

Sufficiency: We have access to everything we need (as opposed to want).

Goal 2: Act so as to live within your means.

Practice self-restraint in order to reserve and conserve (profligacy – austerity)
Practice frugality so that others may live and flourish (greed – stinginess)

--
Finitude: Humans are finite, limited in power and knowledge, space and time

Fallenness: Humans are fallen, alienated from God, humans, ourselves and the earth

Goal 3: Act cautiously. - Survey as many consequences as possible

Be humble – recognize that we can’t know everything, because we are finite and fallen (pride – false modesty)
Be honest – (deception – false honesty)

--
Fruitfulness: Creatures provide sustenance for themselves and others, and reproduce themselves

Sustainability: Creation, if cared for properly, can sustain itself

Goal 4: Act in such a way that the ability of living creatures to maintain themselves and to reproduce is preserved. - plants, animals, and humans

Be wise in the fear of God – make sound judgments on behalf of creation (foolishness)
Live in the hope of God’s good future for all of creation (despair – presumption)

--
Sabbath: God works and rests, and so should we and the creatures under our care

Rejuvination: Allow ourselves and our world to rejuvenate by resisting the world’s drive for constant production

Goal 5: Act in such a way that the creatures under your care are given their needful rest.

Patiently commit ourselves of God’s way of doing things and his timing (impetuousness – timidity)
Find peace amidst the chaos in the knowledge that God is at work, reconciling our world (restlessness – passivity)

--
Earthkeeping: God owns the earth, and we are called to be its keepers

Benevolence: God does good for the sake of others, and this is how we are called to be earthkeepers

Goal 6: Act so as to care for the earth’s creatures, especially those creatures in need.

Commit yourself to do good on behalf of others, whether humans, animals, or ecosystems (malice)
Learn to love the earth and its creatures, of whom we are keepers (apathy)

--
Righteousness: God is righteous and just, and calls us to be righteous and just, with special attention given to those most likely to be treated unjustly, whether humans or other creatures, trees or ecosystems

Equity: God exercises fairness in according to need (different from equality)

Goal 7: Act so as to treat others, human and nonhuman, fairly.

Exercise justice in acting impartially and fairly (injustice)
Be courageous in the face of difficulty (cowardice – rashness)

While I affirm the importance of each goal, numbers 2, 3 and 7 are the most convicting to me at this point in my life, perhaps because they feel like the ones which are more immediately applicable in my daily life. Living within our means (goal 2) does not mean that as long as we can afford it (which I usually can't anyway), it's okay to consume to our heart's content (which it never is anyway). It is hemmed in by the virtues of self-restraint and frugality - what is wanted must be challenged by what is needed, for ourselves and for others. How does my consumption affect others' abilities to have their needs met? (And I'm not just talking about people here; animals, bugs and trees have needs too.)

This decision-making process regarding needs and wants is closely related to the goal of justice (goal 7), as it necessarily involves an impartial and fair assessment of the needs and wants of others. If that Thing I Want is produced by child labour, or contributes to unjust social structures, if it pollutes rivers with byproducts or involves animals living or dying in non-humane ways, or if it generally keeps me blinded to the needs of others, and feeling like an entitled individual instead of a compassionate member of God's whole creation-community, is it really worth having?

Of course we can't always know these things, and that's where goal 3 comes in: Act Cautiously. This is a tricky one, because we can choose to avoid knowing certain details, which in turn allows us to consume with a clear(ish) conscience. For example, I have avoided watching the food industry exposé Food, Inc. because I'm not sure I can commit to the conviction just yet - but it's on my to-do list! (Just trying to keep it real here, folks.) Nonetheless, as a Christian I believe it is my responsibility to pursue truth, wherever it takes me. Acknowledging that we can't know everything about the world and the consequences of our actions, we must act humbly, cautiously, gently, aware that our actions have consequences beyond our awareness. Insofar as we are able, we must ask ourselves, "What are the potential consequences of this choice?" and endeavour to make wise judgments.

The scary part for me is that it often takes me to a place of conviction that requires me to change: perhaps to spend more money buying the organic or fair trade option, or simply to go without. I'm confronted with my own greed, my tendency to place convenience above conscience, and my general sense of apathy toward many aspects of God's world.

Well, those are a few of my raw thoughts on my own role in being a good steward of this good creation which God has entrusted to me and you. What about you? How do you live out your care and concern for God's creation in your attempt to be a faithful earthkeeper? Of if you're like me so much of the time, how do you fail? What is the path ahead?

The Ultimate Earthkeeper

2010-09-27T13:49:00.007-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger
progress: 160/187

In my series of lectures on Earthkeeping, I covered many of the same texts that Bouma-Prediger discussed in detail in the fourth chapter of his book, entitled, "Is there a connection between scripture and ecology?" as well as a few extras. In Genesis, we looked at several themes, some of which I had previously overlooked, or which I hadn't thought through fully enough to discover all of the implications for creation care.

1. Relationality. In the creation story, we read that God created the heavens and the earth. Throughout the creation, God declares his creation to be "good." Only once, however, does he consider his creation to be "very good." Which part of creation was blessed with this superlative? In my ignorance, I would have assumed it was the creation of humans - we are pretty special, after all, being singled out in all of creation to be the bearers of God's own image. And so it was with surprise that I discovered that it wasn't any one part of creation, but in fact the whole of creation: "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good." (1:31) As glorious the celestial array, as majestic the oceans and mountains, as diverse the multitudes of plants and creatures, God wasn't fully pleased with these things until they were all created, together. Just as God himself is a community of three Persons, just as he declared it "not good" for Adam to be alone (2:18), God is not ultimately satisfied until his creation reflects the community of his own nature. We were made to live in relationship with the sun, which grows our crops; with the plants, which feed us and provide shade for us; and with the animals and other humans, who provide companionship and friendship. The harmony of God's creation (BP refers to it as "shalom") was characterised by an interconnectedness with God, and through him, with everything else he created.

2. Theocentrism. On a similar theme to the first point, I was intrigued to find that, although God blessed many of his individual creations, there was only one day that he blessed in its entirety. "And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done." (2:3) Again, it was not the sixth day, in which he created humans in his image, but the seventh day, in which he rested from his work. As BP points out, the climax of creation is the Sabbath. I've still got a lot of thinking to do to discover all of the implications of that fact. The point I want to draw out at this moment is that God is at the centre of creation, not humans. It's ultimately about him. Many mistakes have been made, I believe, because we view ourselves as the end of creation, rather than him and his glory.

3. Responsibility. In the fall story, we see the splintering of that harmony in which God created the world.

Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return. (3:17b-19)

As soon as Eve and Adam chose their own way over God's way, they discovered the awful consequences of that choice. Not only was their relationship with God broken, but their relationship with each other. And beyond that, the shalom of all of creation was broken: harmony and cooperation would be replaced by toil and adversity. And why? "Because of you."

4. Covenant. In the flood story, we see the further consequences of that disharmony. Humans are evil, and so God uses his own creation (ie, rain) to destroy all but a few representatives of the rest of creation. Mountains, trees, and creatures of every kind are washed away by his grief. When Noah and Company finally set foot on solid ground again, God makes a promise:

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: "I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth."

And God said, "This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth."

So God said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth."

Again, humans are not at the centre of this story, God is. Creation is saved because of his mercy, goodness and faithfulness. He declares this faithfulness by way of a covenant. Never again will he destroy creation in this way. And with whom does he make this covenant? Just to be clear, he says it six times: "This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth." God's dealings with our world encompass the whole of creation. To be sure, his dealings with humans are unique and most amazing, but the reach of his care and concern are cosmic.

These four points raise the following questions to consider with regard to the topic of earthkeeping:

Given the interrelatedness of humans with the rest of creation (as well as God and other humans), how should this inform our role as God's appointed keepers of creation?
How does our tendency to put ourselves at the middle of the story muddle our thinking about the point and priorities of creation?
If humans are responsible for bringing disharmony into creation, what then is our role for righting that wrong?
If God deals with all of creation, what is his plan for the cosmos in its entirety?

The answers are not quick or easy, but a good starting place can be found in Romans 8:18-22:

18 I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19 The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.

Verse 18 tells us that, although we suffer, there is a future glorification which will render our current sufferings puny in comparison. Verse 19 tells us that creation plays a role in our glorification: it waits, eagerly. Verses 20-22 give us the reason for this anxious expectation: it is currently oppressed, frustrated, decaying. It groans. But these three verses also speak of something beyond the present reality: there is hope, liberation, and a promise of a new birth. This raises the question of the means of this liberation - how does it come about? Colossians 1:15-20 reveals that the better question is, by Whom?

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

By Whom does the liberation of creation come about? By Jesus! He is the firstborn over all creation. All things were made by him, for him, through him. He is the centre of the cosmos, and by him all things hold together. He is before all things, after all things, above all things, and by him all things will be reconciled. Jesus is the Ultimate Earthkeeper. As Randy Alcorn points out in his book entitled Heaven, whenever Jesus speaks of his work, he uses words like "reconcile, redeem, restore, recover, return, renew, regenerate, resurrect" (88) - all of which suggest a return to what was before, a return to that perfect shalom in which the world was created (if you are of the persuasion that the world will be destroyed by fire according to 2 Peter 3:10 see BP explanation of why this is most likely a misinterpretation of the Greek text, pages 77-78).

The creation in its entirety anxiously awaits redemption. This redemption is a reversal of the curse, put into effect by Jesus' death on the cross. If you previously thought Jesus only died on the cross to save souls, you need to enlarge your imagination and expand your understanding to see just how HUGE, how utterly complete God's salvation is. I especially like the way Steven Lawson puts it,

Whatever sin has touched and polluted, God will redeem and cleanse. If redemption does not go as far as the curse of sin, then God has failed. Whatever the extent of the consequences of sin, so must the extent of redemption be.” (quoted in Heaven, by Randy Alcorn, page 91)

Revelation 21-22 as well as Isaiah 60 help us to see the extent of what God had planned from the beginning to redeem, restore and reconcile. Jesus died to repair all that is wrong with the world, souls, bodies, lands, creatures, ecosystems, cultures, and nations.

And the clincher is this: as God's appointed keepers of the earth who are called to be imitators of God (Eph 5:1), we have a role to play in that redeeming.

Share

Earthkeeping: Why Christians Don't Care

2010-09-20T16:50:00.011-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger
progress: 160/187

Back again - can I blame pregnancy on my long absence? Or perhaps my three kids? Certainly not laziness, I assure you! Whatever the cause(s), it's good to be back to the structure of autumn again. I have three hours to myself every playschool day, so I'm hoping to dedicate at least some of that time to blogging.

This summer, a friend who is a teacher at the local Christian school asked me if I would be interested in teaching a few Bible classes to the 9-12th graders. The current book is Genesis and she gave me free reign to pick my topic, so I suggested the topic of stewardship: What does/should the keeping of God's creation look like? Being the good sport that she is, she agreed. I was quite pleased that my passionate teaching on Revelation last year hadn't turned her off.

I taught three classes on the subject and I think they went well. After the first class, I left wondering if the kids thought I was a little bit out there (I liked the challenge that presented). I wondered if they expected me to be a radical recycling Nazi, or a doomsday environmentalist blaming humans for all the world's problems. Of course, these fears were most likely borne of my own paranoia of being misunderstood and therefore ignored.

But it's true that many Christians - or strains of Christians - have seemed to view the entire topic of the environment with suspicion, as if that is the domain of "liberals" and extremists. I did have a sense that before I could jump into how to care about creation I had to make a case for why we as Christians should care about creation. At the end of the first class, my friend the teacher asked me outright, why is this the case?

That got me thinking. Where is the disconnect between God's command to rule, reign, work and take care of creation in Genesis 1-2 and the adversarial relationship with creation in which many Christians now find themselves? I wrote down a few ideas.

Why do Christians often neglect or ignore the topic of earthkeeping?

1. It is a reactionary response: nonChristians’ views are sometimes so extreme, we can make the mistake of responding with an equally extreme view in the opposite direction.

Case in point: many of the folks who support saving animals are the same folks who support abortion. Therefore, if you're opposed to abortion, you must obviously stand against saving the whales, right? (I hope this thought doesn't need further development.)

2. We tend to focus more on spiritual matters than material matters – souls before bodies, humans before animals, etc.

Here is just one more way that we allow dualistic beliefs to infiltrate our actions (or inactions): spiritual = good, material = evil. This has been a recurring problem over the centuries with missionary efforts, as the salvation of souls is emphasized to the neglect of the immediate, physical needs of the bodies in which those souls are clothed. Just because an item is a higher priority than another, we are not given permission to neglect or ignore the lesser priority matters. We are called to be multitaskers, addressing many issues at once, from the Great Commission to feeding the orphans and the widows to rooting out "all bitterness, rage and anger" in our hearts. Humans are made in the image of God, but we are called to be keepers of all creatures great and small (not to mention the rivers, mountains and trees!).

3. We misrepresent what it means to “subdue” the earth – we turn dominion into domination.

Christians are not immune from the human tendency to define authority in terms of power and domination. It completely distracts us from the real issue, the question of "What does God's authority look like?" Of course God is powerful and every knee will eventually bow in submission to Him, but our most powerful experience of His rule is in the "glorious, incomparable, unsearchable riches" of His grace, His lovingkindness, His loving care for our every need (both spiritual and physical). All these things are "lavished" on us through Jesus' death on a cross, the ultimate expression of power expressed in self-sacrificial service. Wow.

In his book on creation care (my primary resource for these talks and Bookmeal Book #5), Steve Bouma-Prediger writes,

The proper exercise of dominion yields shalom - the flourishing of all creation. This is a far cry from dominion as domination. And Jesus, in the Gospel accounts, defines domination in terms clearly contrary to the way it is usually understood. For Jesus, to rule is to serve. To exercise dominion is to suffer, if necessary, for the good of the other. there is no question of domination, exploitation, misuse. Humans, therefore, are called to rule, but only if ruling is understood rightly. (74)

4. We’ve never been introduced to the topic from a Christian perspective

I, for one, was not introduced to the theme of "earthkeeping" until I began my Master's Degree at Regent College (and moved to Canada from the US, I might add). Up until that point, it hadn't entered my Christian consciousness. Other themes related to creation took precedence (see #7 below).

5. Worrying about the environment (or nuclear destruction, etc) suggests a lack of faith that God will take care of us.

Holders of this view tend to forget that God uses people to accomplish His will. If we are called as God's-image-bearers to be good keepers of the earth, what happens if we fail in our calling?

I'll spare you the details of why this is most likely a poor translation of the Greek word for "to find," but the main point is, even if it's going to be eventually destroyed, what right does that give us to neglect and abuse it now? I like Bouma-Prediger's analogy, "Is it permissible for me to plunder your house just because some time in the future it will be torn down?" (78) We all know we will die someday, yet we eat, sleep, exercise, love, and enjoy life.

7. We get caught up defending God as the Creator and forget to live that truth out in our daily lives – as godly caretakers of the earth.

This is a personal pet peeve of mine, and so I write with fear and trembling of offending some who might read this. Christians jump right into the fray of the creation/evolution debate, even dividing amongst themselves as to the specifics of that creation - literal days? gap theory? intelligent design? The passion with which they lobby governments, picket schools, and turn this topic into a political hot button, is admirable, but incomplete (some might say misplaced). The main point is that God made the world, right? He is the Creator, therefore creation is good and valuable. Passion for this truth should work itself out in a deepened worship of the Creator and a more reverent approach to creation as God's masterpiece and to our role as earthkeepers of that creation. Steve Bouma-Prediger asks, “How can we honour the Master without caring for his masterpieces?” (135) Passion for creationism that does not result in care and love for creation (as an extension of our love for our Creator) is a stillborn one, not having achieved it's proper end of life and joy and worship - of shalom.

Those are a few of the potential reasons that came to my mind. Bouma-Prediger offers a few additional ones for the Western church (pp. 80-83), including the Western church in particular's addiction to consumption and wealth, tendency toward anthropocentrism rather than theocentrism, and deification of technology as the saviour of our problems. Do you agree? Disagree? Did I miss anything?

I'd better stop there. I want to write a bit more about the Redeemer and redemption of creation, but I'll have to save it for another post.

Share

Girls and Boys and God

2010-07-12T16:05:00.002-06:00

I've been very remiss in blogging for quite some time now. Nonetheless, I've been reading steadily. More posts will be coming soon, but in the meantime, I'm going to cheat. The following is a lengthy comment I wrote today for a blog I've recently discovered. It's not entirely cheating, because the book I mention at the beginning will be book #6 for bookmeal.

But first, a disclaimer: my comments about my experiences with pastors are from my past. I am blessed to currently be in a church with a pastor who very comfortably relates to me and has given me freedom to develop my leadership skills - amongst the women and men of our congregation.

(To read the article to which I responded, click here. And now, my thoughts:)

--

I'm in the process of reading the book, Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Gordon Fee, among others. I have finally gotten around to actively searching the Scriptures on this topic, despite my fears of where it could take me, because I know that "how I feel" is no real reason at all.

I am a pastor's daughter married to the son of a pastor, and I have lately been smiling to myself to realise that of the eight children between these two pastors, it's a woman (ie, me) who would be the most likely to follow in their steps.

I attended a very conservative Bible college in the States and was officially turned off to the male-authority view during my senior seminar when a fellow (male) student presented his paper in support of this view. When several other students brought up the hypothetical situation of a woman who was more qualified or more trained in a theological area and whether she ought to be allowed some measure of leadership/input, he was unwilling to make allowances. Being a Bible/Theo major with an emphasis in Greek and planning to pursue Biblical languages in grad school that fall, I mentioned the fact that the professor who taught the highest-level Greek course at that school was a woman, he responded with simply: "I would choose another school." Ouch! He also glossed over the fact that the two winners of that year's Greek scholar awards were both women, amidst a classful of men. I guess one of the men who didn't do quite so well would be better-suited to teach Greek, simply by fact of their gender.

I've never minded being a part of the male-leadership model in general; in many ways it is still more comfortable to me (at least in the sense that it is more familiar). It wasn't until grad school that I personally experienced a really positive, strong model of female “leadership:” speakers who were scholarly, not just sentimental, who spoke as disciples, not specifically as women.

It was difficult to be a passionate-about-theology kind of woman in churches where the pastor feels uncomfortable being around “a single young lady.” It’s not much easier being married with 3½ kids. If anything, my theological education seems to suggest that I’m a threat, out to usurp authority and proselytize all to my liberal ways, when in fact I simply want to talk with others who care about the topics and ideas that I enjoy so much, and as it happens, the similarly-passionate are usually men.

More than anything, I have struggled with the double standard with which the male-authority model is applied: Why is it okay for female missionaries to minister in a leadership capacity to other cultures? Why is it less “dangerous” or “sinful” for mothers and Sunday School to train boys? Anyone with any recognition of the role of a godly mother in the lives of her children will recognize the power she is given in “ministering” to men – for that, of course, is what young boys eventually turn into (I know - duh!). Susanna Wesley is one famous example for which there have been so many anonymous ones over the centuries. I endeavour to be one myself. :-)

And most of all, it just seems so incongruent with the spirit of Scripture (if not always the letter, at least at first glance). Within the reasonable limits of the culture, from OT Law to the actions and words of Jesus himself and even Paul's often-brusque manner, God’s way is always pushing the envelope of cultural mores, moving toward a higher view of women. In one sense, the Bible is a snapshot of history that ended two thousand years ago, and I think there is plenty of evidence within it to encourage believers to keep moving forward, until women are truly co-inheritors (Rom 8:17) and co-priests (1 Pet 2:5, 9) with men in the riches and grace of God. Each expression of the church is in the midst of that process, some further along than others, and that’s okay too.

Lastly, I must say that no careful reader of Scripture should be able to support any application of authority that turns the word “submit” into a bad word. If Christ himself modelled it, it is a beautiful thing, characterised by sacrificial love, not power, and as Dyfed mentioned, is utterly mutual amongst believers. The best submission is that which is not spoken of at all, but lived out in mutual love. It’s what makes my marriage work, at any rate!

--

What about you, readers? Do you agree? Disagree? Share your thoughts...

Share

For Further Thought: Around the World 18 Times

2010-05-27T13:05:00.002-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger

progress: 98/187

In my last post I wrote about why the world is groaning, without addressing the doubts of some who might disagree as to whether it is in fact groaning at all (except perhaps in some spiritualized sense), believing instead that all or most environmental concern is misguided, misinformed or even maliciously false. I chose not to try and convince any such people, because as I mentioned before, I am not a scientist. I have read the statistics and viewed the charts of many scientists in this book, and I have chosen to believe them as true and not sensationalist, because they make logical sense to me and they jive with my experience of the physical world. I cannot argue with any who disagree with such information, but I hope their disagreement will be based on research and not reactions...it's a temptation against which we all must be on guard.

Having said that, I thought it might be of interest to list some of the statistics that I found most startling in Bouma-Prediger's chapter, entitled "What's Wrong With the World?" I appreciated his use of word-pictures which helped me to visualize the magnitude of the numbers.

Population/Consumption

"A newborn in the US requires twice as much grain and 10 times as much oil as a child born in Brazil or Indonesia - and produces far more pollution. In fact a simple calculation shows that the annual increase in the US population of 2.6 million people puts more pressure on the world's resources than do the 17 million people added in India each year." (Christopher Flavin, quoted on page 43)
For a fascinating - and convicting - photographic representation of what families all around the world eat in a month, click here.

Hunger

If you lined up all the hungry people in the world, shoulder to shoulder, they would stretch around the world (at the equator) 18.2 times. (43)

Biodiversity

While estimates vary, a conservative estimate states that three species per day become extinct. (45)

Deforestation

Half of the forests (our carbon-collecting air-cleaners) that once covered the earth are now gone. (47)

Water

Approximately 25% of the total human population do not have an adequate supply of drinking water. (49)
In California, groundwater overdraft averages 1.6 billion cubic meters per year. (Sandra Postel, quoted on pp. 50-51)
In Arizona, water tables have dropped more than 120 meters. (ibid)
In North Africa, current water depletion is estimated at 10 billion cubic meters per year. (ibid)
In Mexico as well as Gaza and Israel, pumping exceeds natural recharge by more than 50%. (ibid)
In India, water tables are falling 20 centimeters annually. (ibid)
In Beijing, the water table has fallen 37 meters over the last four decades. (ibid)
In Bangkok, overpumping has caused land to subside 5 to 10 centimeters a year for the past two decades. (ibid)

Land

The US has annual ratio of 18:1 soil lost to soil formed. Nineteen million acres of rural land was "developed" between 1970 and 1990 and currently every year, 400,000 acres are lost. (52, 54)

Waste

Each year the US generates enough solid waste to fill a bumper-to-bumper convoy of garbage trucks that would stretch around the equator almost 8 times. This amounts to 1500 pounds of waste per person per year, or 52 tons in a 70-year lifetime. And this is only 1.5 percent of the total waste generated each year in the US alone! (54)
Each year the US throws away (municipal waste only) enough aluminum to rebuild the country's entire commercial airline fleet every three months, and enough disposable diapers, if linked end-to-end, to reach the moon and back seven times.

Energy

The US uses approximately 1/4 of the world's available energy.

Air

In Sweden all bodies of fresh water are now acidic, with "roughly fifteen thousand of them too sour to support life." (Bill McKibben, quoted on page 57)
In the Adirondacks of upstate New York approximately 1/4 of the 2,759 lakes and ponds are now fishless because of acid deposition or have been damaged to the point at which fish populations have been substantially reduced. (58)

Climate

The hottest fourteen years on record have occurred in the last two decades.
The global mean surface temperature has been steadily rising for at least a century.
"Already we are seeing evidence consistent with the predictions of climate change models. More intense heat waves and longer cold spells. Severe droughts and intensive flooding. More destructive storms and less controllable wild fires." (64-65)

Well, that's probably enough downers for now. For me the challenge is to step back from looking at these statistics as shocking quotes to spice up the next conversation, but to feel the weight of them in my own life, to let the conviction settle into my heart, so that I can take action for change. Consumption is the biggest word that comes to mind - how much I as a North American consume, and to what extent that consumption robs others of even the most basic necessities. As much as I might like to, this is not an issue I can ignore.

Share

Creation Groans: What Have We Done?

2010-05-25T14:51:00.006-06:00

For the Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger
progress: 98/187

"We know that the whole creation has been groaning

as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time."

Romans 8:22

I am really enjoying this book. After so much sensationalism, oversimplification and willful ignorance in the media and popular thought, Bouma-Prediger offers a refreshingly sane review of our current environmental situation, as well as thoughtful explanations of how many Christians have misinterpreted Scripture with regard to ecology, and a humble but passionate plea for a closer, more informed look at what the Bible has to say on the subject.

As I write, an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil have been leaking into the Gulf of Mexico every day for the past five or six weeks, since an oil rig exploded in mid-April. As of May 18th, 46,000 square miles of the Gulf had been closed to fishing because of the spread of this dirty, sticky, toxic mess. Amazingly, some folks in the news have chosen to attack random third parties, defending the corporations and deflecting public sentiment from what should be the obvious response: sorrow at the soiling of our good earth.

Some of the heaviest oil on land to date is seen along the Louisiana coastline on May 20.

An oil-covered crab crawls past an oil blob that washed ashore on May 22 in Grand Isle, Louisiana.

(photo and caption credits to CNN)

I think it is this deflecting that disturbs me most. On a CBC news interview last week, callers called in to respond to the Sierra Club's suggestion that the Alberta oilsands are environmentally harmful and therefore new investments should be made in greener technologies. The Sierra representative wasn't even saying that the oilsands should stop, just that new growth should be suspended. Obviously, this struck a chord with the Albertans, so many of whom rely on the oil and gas industry - messy as it is - to put food on their tables. It is completely valid to raise this as a concern in the discussion, but I was surprised how many people simply wanted to shut down the discussion "because the oilsands make good money," as if that in itself were a good enough reason to do anything. I couldn't help thinking about the formula, "We should do ______ because it makes good money." What else would we be willing to plug into such a simplistic statment? Prostitution? Drug-dealing? Abortion? Child labour? Our perspectives on ecology are skewed by many things, not the least of which is money. While a healthy economy is indeed important, we can't separate that from the multitude of interconnected topics that relate to a healthy world at large.

I have puzzled over the highly-politicized nature of the environmental debate, as politicians and the average joes who support them, rather than scientists, make concrete statements about what is or isn't happening with global warming, among other things. When did it become Christian to say that global warming is a hoax? When did it become Liberal to care about environmental issues? Not being a scientist myself, I can only rely on the science of others to sway me one way or the other, but I think any reasonable person should be able to admit that we humans affect our environment- to some degree at least - with our cars and our industries, our chemicals and our sprawl. One fellow who called in to the aforementioned radio show boldly proclaimed that "Ants have made more impact on this planet that humans have!" Meaning no disrepect to ants, I somehow doubt that.

It's a good thing I haven't written in over a month, because that's at least a month's worth of opinions right there. Hopefully I haven't lost any of you yet!

The most intriguing chapter that I've read thus far is the one entitled, "Is Christianity to Blame?" in which Bouma-Prediger explores the multifaceted critique of Christianity as the primary cause of our world's environmental crisis. Though he ably argues against this charge, he emphasizes that Christians do bear part of the burden of responsibility. In his defense, he differentiates between various (misinformed) expressions of Christianity and what the Bible actually has to say on the subject. The expressions of Christianity were familiar to me, and the criticisms of such expressions need to be heard by the church.

The biggest criticism was that God's command in the Garden of Eden for his human creatures to "have dominion" (Gen 1:28) over the earth was tantamount to commanding the exploitation of the natural world for the sole benefit of humans. In the critics' definition, dominion equals domination. Bouma-Prediger challenges this interpretation of dominion, arguing from Psalm 72 as well as Jesus' life that godly dominion is in fact defined by service. Regarding the domination/exploitation view, Wendell Berry writes,

"Such a reading of Genesis 1:28 is contradicted by virtually all the rest of the Bible, as many people by now have pointed out. The ecological teaching of the Bible is simply inescapable: God made the world because He wanted it made. He thinks the world is good, and He loves it. It is His world; He has never relinquished title to it. And He has never revoked the conditions, bearing on His gift to us of the use of it, that oblige us to take excellent care of it. If God loves the world, then how might any person of faith be excused for not loving it or justified in destroying it?" (quoted in SBJ, 75)

Another criticism is that Christian eschatology has contributed to the earth's malaise. Many Christians believe that, since the earth is going to be "burned up," there's no need to be overly concerned about the earth of this world, which is passing away. I have encountered this mentality amongst Christians with dismay. Bouma-Prediger discusses 2 Peter 3:10, the primary verse that has been used to support such a view:

"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up." (NASB)

He explains that this is a mistranslation of the Greek word, which means "to be found." The idea, more clearly translated in the ESV as "the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed," carries the idea of purifying judgment rather than utter destruction. Eugene Peterson brings this idea out even more clearly in his paraphrase: "earth and all its works exposed to the scrutiny of Judgment." As I look more closely at the entire chapter of 2 Peter 3, I still have questions about the nature and extent of the fire. However, as the author points out, even if such an interpretation is correct (i.e. the earth will be utterly destroyed), it should not follow that we are not called to be good stewards of it until that time.

The unfortunate truth is that some Christians have used this passage to justify the degradation of God's good creation. How might things change if more Christians understood having dominion over the earth within a Christlike context of service? What of our own luxuries might we sacrifice in deference to our charge to rule the earth in a godly way?

A number of years ago, it occurred to me that if Jesus' post-resurrection body bore the scars of his death, then what if our restored earth also bore the scars of its previous life? The thought has stayed with me, sobering me to the reality that the choices we make in this life will have consequences in the next life.

Though Bouma-Prediger opposes the accusation that Christianity is wholly to blame for the earth's ecological woes, he goes on to explain how Christians are indeed complicit in at least five ways:

The church is captive to modern Western culture, and its patron gods of consumption and wealth
The church has accepted the anthropocentrism of modernity, placing humanity at the center of purpose and meaning in the universe
The church, along with Western culture, has made technology into a god, forgetting that it is good and bad
The church has forgotten creation in light of redemption, even though creation provides the foundation for understanding that redemption
The Western church is prideful, unwilling to learn from other traditions and perspectives

There is much to think about, much to confess. I'm looking forward to reading more of his thoughts on the path forward, on his "vision for creation care," and how I can be a better steward of my beautiful world.

Share

Memories of Earth

2010-04-15T18:03:00.001-06:00

For The Beauty of the Earth: A Christian Vision for Creation Care, by Steven Bouma-Prediger. (Baker Academic Press)
progress: 31/187

Welcome to the new Book #5 (see my last post). As gardening season approaches, this book seems a good fit. I am routinely amazed and often disturbed by the variety of views amongst Christians with regard to all things environmental/ecological, and the anger, suspision and general passion of one kind or another that arises when the topic is broached. Conspiracy theories abound. Spirituality is called into question. Because I know godly men and women at multiple ends of the spectrum(s), I have realised my need for more information before taking a personal stance. Hopefully this book will be a start in the right direction.

At the beginning of his first chapter, Bouma-Prediger asks the question: "What do you remember from your childhood about the earth?" It seems as good a place as any to start back into writing after my month-long hiatus.

I remember water and sun. The saltiness of the ocean and the chalky residiue of salt on my skin after a swim. Sand, infinite and beautiful, I found to be made up of many colours and shapes upon closer inspection. I remember the buoyancy of my body in the ocean, the light dappling through and sparkling on the white sand below me, the hot sun baking my back as my I snorkeled in and along the reefs. The fish were extreme in every way: colour, shape and size. There were starfish, sea cucumbers, spiny urchins, hermit crabs and the dreaded jellyfish.

The world was magical in its offer of endless possibilities. I was an explorer, trekking through the tangled boonies of Okinawa, the hillside rainforest of Hawaii, the vine-clogged woods of Maryland. I was a hunter, eyes to the ground as I searched for seashells, sand dollars and glass balls along the shores of the Pacific ocean. Once, we saw an old washing machine and a piano, dumped on an otherwise pristine stretch of beach in Japan, and I was at the same time confused as to who would do such a thing, and curious to take a closer look.

The world was powerful. The waves had the power to crush me. There was a current off the coast of Oahu, I was told, that could carry you all the way to another island - dead, of course. In my old neighbourhood in Annapolis, Maryland, there had been a restaurant that had slid off the edge of the eroding cliffs and crashed onto the shore of the Chesapeake Bay below. It was a favourite exploring spot with my friends. That, and the abandoned pool down the road from my house, complete with baby-pool-turned-swamp, which was in the process of being completely reclaimed by nature.

The world was just plain weird at times, which was my childlike way of saying it was wonderful. The black, lumpy, bumpy, spiky swaths of dried lava at Kilauea Volcano Park in Hawaii transported me to another planet. A late-night boat ride at the just the right time of the year left a glowing path of baby jellyfish in our wake on the Chesapeake Bay. There was a funny little plant in Okinawa that closed up its tiny leaves when I touched it. Venus flytraps ate bugs! And fireflies, the most magical of all, transformed the giant oaks and elms of my nighttime walks around the neighbourhood into something ethereal and dreamy.

I loved animals of all kinds and had my share of pets over the years: hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, a cat, a dog, rabbits, fish, and birds. I used to capture green, red and yellow box turtles as temporary pets, until they made their way out of their enclosures and back into the woods. I chased down crawdads and tadpoles in the creek by my house. Bugs I viewed with less openness (except for every child's favourites, the butterfly and dragonfly): I remember the horror of seing a harmless but intimidating banana spider the size of an adult's outstretched hand, making its way toward me on the road as I walked to the bus stop for my first day of school. I was so convinced he was going to get me that I ran back home. Hawaii exposed me to the likes of five-inch-long centipedes, flying cockroaches and numerous large spiders. I remember hearing about a girl in my neighbourhood in California who pulled the wings off of ladybugs and that fact alone made her a horrible person in my mind.

As I think about it, the realm of nature was a major character in my childhood. Being a kid who moved around a lot and struggled at times to fit in socially, the natural world was a place I felt comfortable and at home. The familiar crack of a coconut dropping to the ground outside my window every couple of nights kept me company in Hawaii. The howling wind was a tangible presence as I walked. The sparkling ocean was my playmate, inviting me in. Animals of all kinds were my close companions and the gracious receivers of my awkward gestures of love. Even the more dangerous aspects of nature (thunderstorms, sharks, remoteness, etc) generally struck awe in me rather than fear. In ways I am still struggling to understand, nature has played a significant role in shaping who I've become.

Share

April Housekeeping

2010-04-15T11:36:00.001-06:00

I've been away for awhile, struggling to feel motivated to write. I'm not sure just what my reasons are, but part of it is that I'm feeling overwhelmed. I'm reading multiple books and blogs and overdosing a bit on ideas I need to think through. Occasionally I stall out, feeling incapable of grasping the big picture and being able to comment with sense on anything. The more I read the thoughts of very informed folks, the more disqualified I feel to share my own thoughts. Humility or pride? Likely a healthy dose of each. Humility lets me know that I don't know much, pride makes me want to hide that fact from others. Hiding one's ignorance is appropriate at times ("Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue." - Proverbs 17:28), but it's harmful if that silence keeps me ignorant when exposing myself by asking a "stupid" question could help me become less ignorant. Perhaps I'm just afraid to expose my ignorance on the likes of Facebook! I am well aware of the vast diversity of Friends who read my random comments - believers, doubters, smirkers, professors, activists, pastors, and cynics, to name just a few categories. This blog was meant to be a place to work through my thoughts and open topics up for discussion, but I face the same fears. Stupid, I know. But I press on.

Now for a bit of housekeeping: I am still reading Kathleen Norris' Amazing Grace - and really enjoying it. I have read nearly all of Wendell Berry's A World Lost and I'm just not into it, or at the very least, have no idea what to write about it. So, I am dropping it from my reading list. There are plenty of other books of his that I'm more interested to read, so I'll add him in later. I've got a few books on my mind for my next batch:

For the Beauty of the Earth, by Steven Bouma-Prediger. This book presents "a Christian vision for creation care." The creation/evolution debate, as well of the spinoff issues of creation care and stewardship have been on my mind a lot lately.
Pensees, by Blaise Pascal. It seems as though just about every thoughtful writer that I respect has quoted Pascal at some point. I'm long overdue in reading this one.
The Way is Made by Walking, by Arthur Paul Boers. Boers is a Mennonite pastor and professor who went on a pilgrimage to Spain, and writes about his experience of pilgrimage, both literal and spiritual. Anyone who's read more than one of my posts likely knows that this is a major theme in my life right now.
Discovering Biblical Equality, edited by Gordon Fee, among others. I've been wanting to read this one for a while, as I become increasingly involved in spiritual leadership in my church and community. I have ideas and I have feelings, but I'd like some facts, grappled with by this thoughtful writer and esteemed former professor. Only problem: I don't have a copy as of yet...Anyone have one to donate or sell at a reduced rate?

That's just a few...but more than enough to overwhelm me. Better just pick one and get started!

Share

Soul Whispers: The Unspoken Questions of Our Lives

2010-03-13T10:55:00.002-07:00

In his first epistle, Peter says that we must always "be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." Further, we are to do so with "gentleness and respect," a phrase I repeated in the form of a prayer many times one year when I was a part of a Hare Krishna discussion group. I had been invited to join by a friendly orange-clad follower of Krishna as I walked down Byres Road in Glasgow years ago. I told the fellow I was a Christian, but he didn't seem to mind, so I went ahead and joined the group. I wanted to be a witness for the truth, but I also had to respect the fact that this was their discussion group, not mine. My witness usually took the form of questions about their faith, rather than statements about my own. This approach eventually allowed me the privilege of sharing some of my own beliefs with them, and through this gentle dialogue, we became friends.

It was obvious to me in that particular situation that tactfulness would be required. I could not hijack their topics or begin proselytizing the group members. The first goal was to take time to really get to know them and understand their beliefs. If I showed such respect, perhaps I might (and in fact did) win the right to speak gently and be heard with an open mind.

There are times when I have not shared my faith so gently or respectfully. My evangelical heritage sometimes tempts me to throw doctrine at nonbelievers, like little "thou shalt not" daggers of condemnation. True as it may be, "You're wrong" is not always the best approach, and may sometimes be the worst. Peter writes about giving an answer for the hope that is in us, and it is doubtful whether any healthy Christian would respond by talking primarily about their own sinfulness or that of others. The presence of sin is what makes hope necessary and what by contrast makes it so wonderful, but what embodies that hope? Forgiveness of the unforgiveable? Love for the unloveable? Healing for broken bodies and hearts? The promise of a future where the world will be made right again? To be sure, there is very bad news in the Bible - we are indeed sinful and separated from God. But that's only the lead-up to the Good News - the comedy that God loves us anyway and the fairy tale that there really is a "happily ever after" for those who will receive it in grace (I am borrowing here from Buechner's Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy and Fairy Tale).

Don't get me wrong, recognition of one's sin and genuine confession are essential for every person who would be saved; I'm just arguing that it's usually not the first thing a person needs to hear when being introduced to God: "Bob, this is Jesus. He says you're a scoundrel. Oh, and he loves you even though you don't deserve it." It's difficult for most of us to receive criticism well from our most trusted friends, how much more so from this Jesus, who to Bob is a total Stranger?

I've always thought of Peter's words in terms of responding to the direct question of a skeptic: "Becky, I was just wondering...what is the reason for the hope that is in you?" but the truth is I don't get asked that question all so much. In the rare moments when I probably should've spoken more directly to a person, I have tried to justify my cowardly silence with the quote (questionably attibuted to St Francis) "Preach the gospel at all times; use words when necessary." Actions, like words, are essential. But what words?

It's occurred to me recently that the most important questions people ask are rarely spoken with words, but whispered (although sometimes shouted) with their lives. If our words are to take root in the hearts of others, they must address those whispered questions they are asking with their lives rather than the questions we think they should be asking. This is powerful stuff. Time and again in the Gospels we see Jesus demonstrating this intimate understanding of people's hearts, fulfilling Simeon's prophesy that by him "the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed." A Samaritan woman asks him for water but he answers her deeper question by telling her about living water. The Pharisees are routinely confounded when he identifies the true, ugly motives behind their questions, sometimes by asking a question of his own. Even with good old Thomas, whose doubt keeps it real for the rest of us, Jesus knows what he really needs and invites him to touch Him and believe.

So with this idea of giving an answer to the often unspoken but deepest questions of others' lives, how can we "be prepared" to do so? We must rely on the work of the Holy Spirit, searching out and revealing the truth all around us, about ourselves and others. We must embody the love of God, who went to extreme lengths to show that love to the needy and deluded. And we must be like Jesus, taking the time to talk to people, meeting with and loving them right where they're at. We must be abiding in intimate relationship with these Three, so that our efforts are fueled by their wisdom and words, not our own.

Aside from answering the unspoken questions, we may be called to help people discover exactly what question or questions their own uniquely-loved-by-God souls are struggling to ask. It seems likely that most of us couldn't put our deepest questions into words even if we tried. Ideas, emotions, opinions, and experiences hover like the mists of Avalon between the worlds of our conscious and our subconscious. I have spent the past two years trying to articulate a few of my own questions, and I've only recently begun to discover some of the key words, thanks to several Spirit-led friends who have taken the time to get to know me and my struggles.

So instead of telling our friends that they should do this or don't do that, maybe we can point them beyond the command to the Spirit from whom it came. Darrell Johnson gave me a new perspective on the Ten Commandments. Yes, they are rules. But they are there because of God's love for us. He writes,

The Law is given not to tie us up but to release us into the fullness of freedom. How do the commandments do this? By telling us who we are, by revealing who we were created to be..."You shall have no other gods before me." Why? Because God is an egoist and cannot handle rivals? No. "You shall have no other gods" because we were created in such a way that only the one, true, Living God can satisfy us. We finite creatures were made in such a away that only the Infinite God can fill and fulfill us. God speaks the commandment to protect us, to keep us from ruining our lives by seeking satisfaction in what ultimately does not satisfy. (from Fifty-Seven Words, pp 59-60)

People need to know that God has a standard for living. But the way we present that information can do much to help or hinder a person's receptivity to spiritual matters. Pharisaic zeal for rules is a spirit-crushing, hypocrite-inducing, us-versus-them approach. It is motivated by anger or resentment that someone else might "get away" with doing something they've denied themselves. Godly zeal is for souls to be reconciled to Christ. Jesus addressed people's sin, but only after first pouring out kindness and healing and friendship on the broken and outcast: "Go and sin no more."

God and His word can speak to people about rules and standards; who is more able to soften a heart for repentance than God Himself? I believe our job is primarily to show unbelievers the deep, deep love of Jesus in word and deed, so that when the time comes for the Holy Spirit to convict and guide them into wholeness and holiness, we will have helped Jesus win the "right" to be heard. If our words are motivated by repulsion at a person's sinfulness, they might be better left unsaid - I am especially referring to the case of an unbeliever. But if our words are motivated by a sincere and nonjudmental desire to see a person freed from the weight of sin and released into the full joy of life as God intended it for him or her, then it might be appropriate to speak...but only after listening to the Holy Spirit and being assured that it's His words we speak, and not our own.

Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing. ~ Proverbs 12:18

Incarnational Conversion

2010-03-02T13:40:00.196-07:00

Amazing Grace: A Vocabulary of Faith, by Kathleen Norris
progress: 168/384

The last time communion was served at our church, our three-and-a-half-year-old R reached his hand out to take the sacraments. As Steve gently told him that he couldn't have the bread or juice, he leaned over and whispered to me, "It's hard to say no when he's asked Jesus into his heart about a thousand times." I felt the awkwardness, too.

It started last summer, when our five-year-old T prayed the simple and unsolicited prayer, “God, please you be in my heart, and help me do good things." Although I thought this prayer was sweet and certainly a heartfelt response to a recent punishment, I didn't know whether T really knew what he was saying, so I explained the five-year-old basics of what it means to ask Jesus into your heart. Then I asked him if he’d like to ask Jesus to come and live in his heart, and he replied, “But I already did, Mama!” The next morning he woke up with the words, "I a new boy!" and ever since it has been clear to Steve and me that the seed of faith had indeed taken root in his life.

As T exercised his newfound pleasure in praying at meals and bedtime, R picked up on the excitement. He began to pray, "JesusGod, please you be in my heart" at every opportunity. He occasionally talks about Jesus' death on the cross and is impressed enough with God's greatness that he'll sometimes announce, "I'm God!" while wrestling with Steve, because God is obviously the greatest Superhero of them all, right? (Does that fall under the category of "being imitators of God" or sacrilege? I like to think it might elicit a grin from God. Surely Amazing Superhero from an awestruck three-year-old beats a Decrepit Old Grandpa or Lightning Rod Thrower from sarcastic adults. It's better than Bibleman, at any rate.)

Hero worship and Bible trivia aside, we've sort of assumed that Rowan has not yet "officially" received Jesus into his heart. The words are the there, the information is there, but repentance has yet to replace the indignation or smirks that are his typical response to his own naughtiness. Hence the communion rejection. And hence the question, who are we to determine the state of his heart?

I think we have good reasons for making our kids wait to take communion until we're assured that they will take it with seriousness and at least some understanding of what's involved. Even with T, we walk him through it every time, talking about the bread and the juice and the thankfulness we have for what God has done. But I have sometimes wondered, how will we know when the time comes that R is ready?

Kathleen Norris views "conversion as a daily and lifelong process." (44) Believers have long debated whether conversion is a process or a point, with the real question being about where we draw the line between conversion and sanctification. Sometimes I feel like chalking it all up to semantics. Like T, I asked Jesus into my heart at a very young age and never questioned my faith in all my thirty-five years. I tend to view my own conversion more in terms of having a specific starting point, but this is limited to my own perspective - my decision was a result of a process already in place, and initiated by God. The "point" of my conversion has also stretched out into my present, and I trust, will continue into my future as long as I live. Bit by bit, little pieces of me are being converted, drawn into the light and redeemed. Thank God that He allows time to work out His salvation within us, deeper and deeper into our souls! I couldn't handle so much transformation in an instant.

The problem is that we sometimes would prefer to know exactly where a person (more often than not, someone other than ourselves) stands in spiritual terms. We'd like to think it's a helpful way to know and understand a person better, but it more often is a means by which to label and categorize who's in and who's out. It is a tool which helps us decide how to behave around a person. It's so much easier to deal with sheep and goats when you know who's who, right? Kathleen rejects the idea of conversion as a "a product we consume" (42) and challenges those who would try to define the mechanics of conversion too narrowly. But we humans so like to have things nailed down, defined, compartmentalized, checked off the lists of our own making. To refrain from what she refers to as the "idol called 'This is the way we've always done it'" leaves us in a much more tenuous position, one which forces us to acknowledge the unknowable and move foward anyway. It might even force us to shift our attentions from others' conversions to our own. She writes

Maybe the real scariness of conversion lies in admitting that God can work in us however, whenever, and through whatever means God chooses. If the incarnation of Jesus Christ teaches us anything it is that conversion is not one-size-fits-all. Christian conversion is, in fact, incarnational; it is worked out by each individual within the conmmunity of faith. (42)

People often mean well. I once had a man challenge Steve and me to "throw away the birth control and let God be in charge of how many children you have" because this is what God had told him in a powerful way. I truly believe he was transformed by his obedience (resulting in a total of nine children). What he failed to acknowledge is that the ways in which God works are as unique as each person He has created. I believe what the man really wanted us to experience was the joy of following God's calling in our lives. His mistake was in trying to define our calling in terms of his own. I do this sometimes when I think every twentysomething Christian should go to Regent College for at least a year - it was so incredibly transformational for me, surely it would be for everyone! But God has such unique paths for each of us to follow.

Along with the incarnational individuality that Kathleen writes about comes divine unpredicability, which can mean a loss of human control over both people and situations. It's hard to relinquish our attempts to control in this way, but it must be done. In humility and reverance, we must continually place our trust in the Spirit. This means believing that He is working in people, and that His ways are better than our ways, and uniquely suited to each soul, which He knows so well and we do not. Regardless of which shade of converted a person is or isn't, my responsibility is the same: to welcome that person into the love of Christ. Leaving the mechanics of conversion to God, we are freed to experience gracious and authentic relationship with others who are different from us. We can help rather than hinder what God is doing in others - and in the process become more aware of and receptive to what He is doing in ourselves.

I'm not too sure just what this means with regard to R. For now, the communion is still off-limits, but we'll trust God to show him and us when he's ready. In the meantime, maybe we can be on the lookout for what we can learn from this little one, who views God as a Superhero and likes to tell Him jokes when he prays. What mystery, how God works in the heart of a three-year-old! What glorious wonder that He would make His home there!

What Stew Can Do, or How to Make a Baby

2010-02-23T13:24:00.004-07:00

I've been rolling a metaphor around in my head recently, and finding it useful in my attempts to articulate several different things. I think it began - at least in its current form - with another metaphor, in a discussion I had several months ago with my friend Nancy, about being and doing. We talked about stew: the steaming, savoury stuff of winter afternoons. "What does stew do to make itself taste better?" asked Nancy. It cannot toss in a few more carrots or (in my kitchen) more garlic. It cannot reduce the amount of salt that's been added. It can't even change the temperature from a simmer to a boil. A stew is in fact rather limited in what it can do. The real power, the real artistry, is in the skill of the cook. He or she knows just what the stew needs - and when (because soggy vegetables are an abomination) - to make it delicious.

So what can a stew do? Well, it can...stew. It simply must be, and trust that eventually it really will turn into a delicious stew, a worthy meal to nourish the hungry. And stew, to fully accomplish its purpose, must be served to others. There is always the element of doing. But half-stewed stew - lukewarm and crunchy, flavours as yet unmingled into perfect harmony - is a work in progress and not ready to be served.

This forced me to take a closer look at the ideas of being and doing. I had been talking to Nancy about how I "ought" to be reading my Bible more regularly. Her retort caught me off guard: "Well, I guess that's just one more thing you're failing at." Her issue, of course, was not with the idea of reading the Bible more, but with that little word "ought." I had taken the life-giving, soul-nourishing, spirit-refreshing act of Bible-reading and turned it into one more bothersome little "chore" that needed to be done. To be sure, there is a place for duty in the Christian life, but it is a starting place, a way for the beginner to set foot on the Way or for the doubter to walk forward into renewed or deepened faith. Duty, like the Law, is a form that tells us what we must do. But what God most desires of us is that we do what we do because we want to do it, because we can't help but do it, because our love of Him is so great.

"I desire to your will, O my God; your law is within my heart." My struggle is to keep moving from duty to desire, to let God's law work its way into my heart. Or maybe it's the other way around: my heart works its way into the law, transforming my motives and perspective. The question is, how does one move from duty to desire, without making that goal into yet another duty?

Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but my ears you have pierced;
burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require.
Then I said, "Here I am, I have come—
it is written about me in the scroll.
I desire to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart." --Psalm 40:6-8

For me it has meant trying to release myself from the guilt trips of what I "ought" to be doing. I am learning to say No a little more often, at least until I can say Yes with sincere desire. I am giving myself space and time to discover what it means to abide in Jesus. Eugene Peterson describes it as, making "yourselves at home with [Jesus]" (John 15, the Message). Clement of Alexandria used the phrase "keeping company with God." The point is to focus on my relationship with God (what it means to be a child of God), not my "results" (the stuff I do that authenticates that relationship). Relationship will ultimately point me to God, as the giver of His love and His blessings, which includes the gift of my status as His child. Results, in their best form, should naturally flow out of that relationship and draw us closer to God and point others toward Him. In their worst (and more common) form, results will begin and end with us - striving in our own strength to do what we feel we have to do to find favour with God.

It is this connection between relationship and results that got me looking for a metaphor. As soon as someone talks about being, another feels compelled to speak up for the necessity of acting out ("doing") our beliefs. Emphasize faith and another will defend works. Each perspective is valid, and the two truths are perfected when held in tension. But how can we hold that tension?

I have always been a doer, largely because I like lists, I like to check things off. I like the feeling of control that comes with doing. Also, being freaks me out a little bit. It's so abstract, and I am a concrete kind of thinker. What does it mean to be in Christ apart from what I do? What kind of intimate human relationship would be even remotely satisfying for either individual if results were the main theme of its existence? How much more so with God? Surely He must occasionally wish we would ditch the deeds long enough to hang out with Him and get to know Him better, to find out what's on His heart, and let Him show us what's in ours. Faith and works must indeed go together but not in such a conscientious way as I'd always thought. I shouldn't be making works happen, they should just be happening on their own without so much forced effort on my part.

Here's where my new metaphor comes in. Picture two lovers, a husband and wife bound together by love and commitment. Because they are in love, their time together is characterized by joy and contentment and comfort. Because of the time they spend together and their promise to each other, their relationship is secure against all threats. There is no place they would rather be than in each other's presence. Eventually, during their most intimate expression of love for each other, a child is conceived. Over the course of nine months, their love will blossom and deepen in recognition that this child is the wonderful - and inevitable - "result" of their love for each other. Further, if we were to ask the couple about what they did to "make" the baby, they would probably not start speaking about zygotes or the dividing of cells. They would speak of the act of love that is at the centre of their relationship. Ultimately, this child "happened" because they love each other, not because they consciously thought about matching up sperm and egg.

I think this is similar to how we are meant to be in relationship with God. As our love for God grows and matures, our deeds will be the inevitable result of that love. If we obsess about "making" deeds happen, we have missed the point entirely. If we instead will pour our energies into loving God and growing in our relationship with Him, those deeds will begin to happen without so much thought or effort on our part. Our deeds will be the fruits of desire instead of duty.

In his essay entitled Lilies That Fester (from The World's Last Night and Other Essays), C.S. Lewis talks about words such as refinement and religion, and how people who speak in such terms are in fact the ones least likely to be defined by them. That is, the one who speaks most about piety is the least likely to be truly pious, the one who speaks most passionately about culture is the least likely to in fact be cultured. He writes, "The talk is inimical to the thing talked of, likely to spoil it where it exists and to prevent its birth where it is unborn." (33)

And so it is with deeds. The more time you spend talking about doing them - what you should be doing, what you don't need to do, what you don't want to do, what others are doing or not doing - the less time you're spending in your relationship with God, which is the only source of truly good deeds. I have found this to be true in many areas of the Christian life, just one example being the obsession of some believers about submission (a flawed result of imposed duty rather than a generous outpouring of love). Darrell Johnson's book Fifty-Seven Words brought up another one. In the fifth petition of the Lord's Prayer, believers are told to pray and ask God to forgive their debts, "as we also have forgiven our debtors." Many have struggled with the apparent suggestion that we might not be forgiven by God if we haven't first forgiven others who have sinned against us. Consequently, we can get lost down the familiar rabbit trail of insecurity or indignance about faith versus works.

As Darrell points out, the issue is not about a formula we must complete in order to earn favour and forgiveness with God, rather it is about whether or not we truly understand forgiveness. He quotes John Stott (who so often makes profound statements with few words): "God forgives only the penitent, and one of the chief evidences of true penitence is a forgiving spirit." Like the unmerciful servant of Matthew 18, if we dare to ask God to forgive our mountain and yet refuse to forgive another's molehill (so to speak), we have missed the point entirely. If we don't understand forgiveness enough to give it, how can we pray to receive it? The two are in fact one and the same.

I think that's almost the end of my ramblings, for today anyway. I guess my point is that our human tendency is so often to try and reduce the complexities of relationship with a simple formula for results. Rules are so much easier and more efficient than the demands of relationships. They may limit the chance of messing up (with regard to the letter of the Law, anyway), but they also limit the potential for true Love to do its - His - own work in us. Why play with a ragdoll of our own making when we're able to give birth to real babies with God? Or, to borrow from Jesus' analogy, why fiddle about with plastic fruit when He can produce real fruit in us - as we learn what it means to abide in Him.

"Live in me. Make your home in me just as I do in you. In the same way that a branch can't bear grapes by itself but only by being joined to the vine, you can't bear fruit unless you are joined with me. I am the Vine, you are the branches. When you're joined with me and I with you, the relation intimate and organic, the harvest is sure to be abundant."
- John 15:4-5, The Message

Back On Track, Book #5

2010-02-23T11:26:00.001-07:00

Amazing Grace, by Kathleen Norris
--progress: 138/384
A World Lost, by Wendell Berry
--progress: 99/151

Yikes! It's been almost three weeks since I've written. I've been thinking a lot, however, and I've tried writing but found my thoughts to be too full of blather to share. I suspect that our recent social engagements are perhaps less responsible than our recent spate of television watching. We don't have a TV, mind you, but itunes has been so kind to provide the latest episodes of LOST and a Christmas gift card to Best Buy has (over)fed our movie habit.

I've also been a bit overwhelmed by how many others' good thoughts are already out here in cyberspace. What can I contribute? I've been feasting at others' tables recently, and enjoying it. See my links (bottom right of the blog) for a few recent favourites - among them http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/.

Lastly, I've been a bit overwhelmed by my own thoughts - there is so much swirling around in there, it's hard to stay focused. This presents a good opportunity for me to learn to articulate and prioritize the many strands of consciousness floating about in my head. I've taken to commenting on a few blog articles here and there, just for practice. It's risky, though, to be disagreed with, or even attacked by total strangers. I tend to get a bit riled. I'm less concerned with strangers disagreeing with me than thinking I'm stupid and just blowing me off. I tend to like a good argument when it can be done in a friendly sort of way.

Anyway. Enough. I will begin writing again. Today, if possible. As hard as it is to even feel like writing sometimes (let alone to find time for it), it is so good once I start.

Lastly, you may have noticed that I have listed Book #5 - A World Lost, by Wendell Berry. I was in the mood for a novel, and I happened to have this one on my shelf, unread. So far, so good. Stay tuned.

Thanks for those of you who stop by to read my ramblings and share a few of yours. I appreciate it!

Becky

Share

The Answer To All Our Prayers

2010-02-04T13:36:00.009-07:00

Fifty-Seven Words That Change The World: A Journey Through The Lord's Prayer, by Darrell W. Johnson
progress: completed

I first met Darrell Johnson at Regent College. Because the courses he taught were primarily in the area of pastoral studies, I unfortunately never had the opportunity to take one of his classes (I was working on a Master of Christian Studies with an emphasis on Christianity and the Arts; strangely, if I were to go back at this point in my life, I might consider switching to the Master of Divinity). He once gave a guest lecture in my class on the Book of Revelation, and I remember thinking what an amazing teacher he was; he taught in a way that jived with the way my brain works. I also got to hear a number of his talks in Chapel, and realised what a great preacher he was. Then, towards the end of my time at Regent, Steve and I were in a Community Group for young married couples with him and his wife Sharon. The two of them spent an hour a week encouraging us in our marriages and welcoming us into their lives, as well as their home (I still have Sharon's delicious recipe for Bacon and Spinach Salad). He became an example to me of what true pastoring looks like: he was smart, humble, approachable, vulnerable, and available, among other things. Not to mention the fact that when Bono came to Vancouver and happened to stop by Regent, it was Darrell he stopped by to see. It turns out he'd attended Darrell's previous church in southern California a few times, and liked what he'd heard. How cool is that?

So when I read a book by Darrell, I expect to be educated, informed and challenged. I read his Discipleship on the Edge: An Expository Journey Through The Book of Revelation (buy it here with my heartiest recommendation) two years ago and he did the impossible: he made the Book of Revelation make sense, in a practical and life-transforming way. I had been interested to read his book on the Lord's Prayer and was pleasantly surprised to find a used copy at a Value Village store in Edmonton. Coincidence? I'm inclined to call it Providence.

I've never felt very "good" at prayer, if such a thing can be measured, and so it was with great relief that I read Darrell's reminder that this is the one specific request for instructions made by the disciples and recorded in the Gospels: "Lord, teach us to pray." They didn't get it, either! Certainly, they prayed, but they saw something uniquely different in Jesus' prayers. Darrell writes, "Others in Jesus' day were praying 'Holy One,' or 'Almighty,' or 'Rock,' or 'Lord of Hosts.' Jesus was praying 'Father.'" (105) The disciples saw that all that Jesus was and all that He did sprang out of His relationship with His Father, and the key to that relationship was prayer. He writes

"I understand the disciples' request to mean more than, 'Jesus, teach us some new spiritual techniques that will help us stay awake when we pray and make us feel that your prayers matter.' I take their request to mean, 'Jesus, will you teach us how to relate to the one you call 'Father' the way you do?'

"So Jesus teaches his disciples - and us - to pray fifty-seven words that are brilliant in their simplicity. These fifty-seven words change the way we understand God, ourselves, and the world. Indeed, they are fifty-seven words that, when prayed with even a modicum of faith, end up changing the world. (12)

As we pray the Prayer, we begin to discover what's on God's heart, and what He is doing in our world. And more than that, we are somehow granted the privilege of becoming partners with Him: "We are joining the living God in bringing about the realization of his heart's desire for the world." (14) As with the Book of Revelation, the veil is being pulled back to reveal the mighty happenings that are going on behind the scenes. "Our Father in heaven" is a reminder that God - our Father! - is indeed on the throne of the universe, working out His good purposes throughout the course of history. "On earth as it is in heaven" tells us that heaven is invading earth, and we are invited to participate in the Great Reversal of all that is wrong in our world.

Darrell expounds on each of the six petitions, and sums it all up with the amazing revelation that Jesus himself is the ultimate answer to each of the requests. He is the ultimate hallowing (revealing) of the Father's name (which is His character). He is the King, ushering in the kingdom of God, a new world order. He is the Son who lived His entire earthly life in complete submission to the Father's will. Jesus himself is our "daily bread," the true nourishment of our souls. He is the Redeemer, who cancelled our debts and paid them off with His own blood, and the Reconciler who empowers us to forgive others. Lastly, He is the one who once and for all defeats the Evil One, who would lead us astray. "The answer to the Lord's prayer is as sure as the Lord himself." (112-113)

There is so much wisdom here, so much time needed to soak it all in. What Jesus is saying in this prayer is essentially, "You want to get to know the Father? Get to know me. Walk with me. Work with me. Abide with me. Begin to look like me." Therefore, while I am convinced that God welcomes my honesty in prayer, my requests of what I think I need, His deepest desire is to show me that what I most need is Him. It's a lesson that's been breaking into my heart for quite some time now - I'm finally starting to get it. As with any intimate relationship, God wants to be loved for who He is, not just for the benefits of His friendship. He gives generously, and nowhere does He gives so generously as when He gives Himself. As Brother Lawrence would say, there is no greater blessing than finding ourselves in His presence, and losing ourselves in His love.

Share

Mystery and the Idolatry of Ourselves

2010-02-02T09:30:00.005-07:00

Amazing Grace, by Kathleen Norris
progress: 88/384

After finishing my very difficult article on wrath yesterday afternoon, I returned to reading Book 3 - Amazing Grace by Kathleen Norris - and was pleased to read her comments on mystery so quickly after writing my own thoughts on the subject. In her article on "Annunciation," she writes about the discomfort modern Christians have with the concept of mystery, and their (our) tendency to resort to comforting and therapeutic language when worshipping. She uses words like "trite" and "impoverished." The consequence of this unwillingness to to be content with mystery and replace it with shallow interpretations in turn shifts the focus from God, whom we worship, to the worshippers themselves. She writes,

"Such language reflects an idolatry of ourselves, that is, the notion that the measure of what we can understand, what is readily comprehensible and acceptable to us, is also the measure of God." (72)

The question is, what kind of God would we have if we could fully understand Him with our own limited and broken thinking? He'd look a lot like us, in all the worst ways. We would be attempting to create God Himself into an idol of our own making. Yikes.

***

"'When you realize there is something you don't understand, then you're generally on the right path to understanding all kinds of things.'" — Jostein Gaarder (The Solitaire Mystery)

Share

Wrath: The Fluid That Love Bleeds

2010-02-01T17:12:00.007-07:00

Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, by CS Lewis
progress: completed

In Chapter XVIII, Lewis challenges Malcolm's view of God's wrath, which denies that God experiences wrath as anything akin to an emotion (he uses the phrase "fit of temper"), rather it is an inevitable, impersonal response of holiness to unholiness. Malcolm compares it to what happens when one touches a live wire: "The live wire doesn't feel angry with us, but if we blunder against it we get a shock." (96)

"My dear Malcolm," writes Lewis in his typical winsome way, "what do you suppose you have gained by substituting the image of a live wire for that of angered majesty? You have shut us all up in despair; for the angry can forgive, and electricity can't." (96)

It's no secret that most believers are not entirely comfortable with the idea of God's wrath, especially as it relates to God's love. Those who are zealously at home with God's wrath tend to scare the rest of us off - the hellfire and brimstone may frighten us into repentance, but it does little to encourage us into relationship with God. Some would much rather ignore the fact of God's wrath completely, insinuating perhaps that God's love cancels it out. Still others, such as Malcolm, attempt to reimage wrath into something more tolerable and less terrifying.

Malcolm and Lewis both agree that God's wrath can only be understood in terms of analogy; as with all divine attributes, the human versions are too polluted and self-aggrandizing to do more than offer guesses as to what the perfected version of wrath (or love or jealousy or holiness) is truly like. Lewis reminds us of the danger of becoming overconfident in our attempts at defining God: "Every idea of Him we form, He must in mercy shatter." (82) Nor should we ever think that our finite minds can ever fully comprehend the character and ways of God, who is infinite - in the end we must accept as incomplete our attempts to define and systematize God's personality, and bow down before His divine Mystery, believing that what He has revealed of Himself is enough.

Malcolm mistakenly attempts to reduce God's wrath to a sort of predictable, scientific reaction of a divine Force instead of the personal, relational response of the Persons of the Trinity. What Lewis points out is that if we strip away the nuances of relationship, will, and emotion from our idea of wrath, we must also strip it away from our idea of love and all the rest of God's attributes. He cannot be a Force in one area and a Person in another. Wrath may be gone, as he says, but forgiveness, too.

Surely the attributes of love and wrath inform each other? No man could be said to truly love his wife if wrath was not a possiblity. Can you imagine a lover responding with indifference to the other's confession of unfaithfulness? Surely such "love" would be proven a fraud? Lewis writes,

"Anger - no peevish fit of temper, but just, generous, scalding indignation - passes (not necessarily at once) into embracing, exulting, re-welcoming love. That is how friends and lovers are truly reconciled. Hot wrath, hot love. Such anger is the fluid that love bleeds when you cut it...Wrath and pardon are both, as applied to God, analogies; but they belong to the same circle of analogy - the circle of life, and love, and deeply personal relationships. All the liberalising and 'civilising' analogies only lead us astray. Turn God's wrath into mere enlightened disapproval, and you also turn His love into mere humanitarianism. The 'consuming fire' and the 'perfect beauty' both vanish. We have, instead, a judicious headmistress or a conscientious magistrate." (97)

I believe that God's love and wrath are intimately connected to each other; we need them both if we are to have any hope of understanding God and His ways. The problem arises when we draw too heavily from human examples of either: human love can be shallow, selfish, and temporary; human wrath can be unfair, unwarranted, and cruel. In humans, wrath and love can rarely if ever coexist. With God, they must, for He never contradicts Himself. He IS love (always and forever), and yet He is also revealed in Scripture as a God of wrath and vengeance. He loves us and yet - and so - He pours out the wrath we deserve on His beloved Son, on Himself. What can we make of this? It is mystery.

We dare not play favourites with His attributes lest we pollute them all. Without wrath, God's love would become sentimental and uninvolved. Without love, His wrath would be cruel and inescapable. God loves, God avenges, God judges, God forgives. He is love, He is just, He is holy. It's a tightrope act that we are called to walk, constantly holding these truths in balance. Only then can we have any hope of becoming wise.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom..." - Proverbs 9:10a

"The one who fears God will avoid all extremes." - Ecclesiastes 7:18b

Share

The Next Course(s): Books 3 and 4

2010-01-28T08:59:00.004-07:00

I think I'm going to write one more post about Letters to Malcolm, but I'm not sure when I'll have the chance. In the meantime, I thought I'd announce my next two books, in case anyone is following along.

Book 3 will be Amazing Grace: A Vocabulary of Faith, by Kathleen Norris. I'm 60 pages into this one and enjoying it quite a bit. Since the book is a collection of 60+ short word-stories, I thought it would work well to read and comment alongside other reading.

Book 4 will be Fifty-Seven Words That Change the World: A Journey Through The Lord's Prayer, by Darrell Johnson. I've been reading this for the Bible study I am teaching, and thought it would be good to process a bit more here on Bookmeal.

I'm looking forward to growing fat with more spiritual soulfood!

Becky

Share

Roses and Daffodils: In Honour of Personality

2010-01-23T22:25:00.007-07:00

Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, by CS Lewis
Progress: completed

Some of my difficulty in presenting Lewis' Letters to Malcolm more coherently is due to the fact that 1) he tends to ramble (which is appropriate, since these are letters, after all) and 2) he is so dang smart. Sometimes he just loses me for a paragraph or two, and not just because I'm reading in bed. Case in point:

"The abstraction's value is almost entirely negative. It warns us against drawing absurd consequences from the analogical expression by prosaic extrapolations." (51) - My brain is slow to digest comments such as these.

I also had to look up the word "concupiscence" today. It means "lust," but I suppose it looks better in print. I've now bookmarked the Oxford Dictionary website on my computer to keep up with such colourful words and expand my vocabulary.

The statements which I do understand are so profound that each one deserves more time than I have to give the entire book:

"There is danger in the very concept of religion. It carries the suggestion that this is one more department of life, an extra department added to the economic, the social, the intellectual, the recreational, and all the rest. But that whose claims are infinite can have no standing as a department. Either it is an illusion or else our whole life falls under it.We have no non-religious activities; only religious and irreligious." (30) - My world gets bigger every day as I work out with more clarity what this really means. I am still discovering walls that have sprung up in my life, barriers that seek to segregate and compartmentalize what was never meant to stand alone or apart from my faith. I break them down, brick by brick.

"Some people feel guilty about their anxieties and regard them as a defect of faith. I don't agree at all. They are afflictions, not sins. Like all afflictions, they are, if we can so take them, our share in the Passion of Christ." (41) - This is a new idea to me, and I think I like it. Anxieties are not the ideal, but neither are they sins. They can become pathways which lead us to Christ - if, as Lewis writes, we allow them to do so.

"One of the purposes for which God instituted prayer may have been to bear witness that the course of events is not governed like a state but created like a work of art to which every being makes its contribution, and in which every being is both an end and a means." (56) - I love any statement that imagines God as an Artist. This image, for me, represents love, passion, foresight, attention to detail, beauty and goodness. How much more - beyond the limits of our human imaginations - must divine creativity (Lewis would say the only creativity in an ultimate sense) demonstrate these things!

"Creation seems to be delegation through and through. He will do nothing simply of Himself which can be done by creatures. I suppose this is because He is a giver. And he has nothing to give but Himself. And to give Himself is to do His deeds - in a sense, and on varying levels to be Himself - through the things He has made. In Pantheism God is all. But the whole point of creation surely is that he was not content to be all. He intends to be 'all in all.'" (70) - This passage emphasizes at once the complete superfluity of creation (in and of itself) and the deep pleasure God derives from creating, and interacting with his creation in love. He needs nothing, so He gives, and that brings Him pleasure.

His humour keeps me smiling. Not-so-random tidbits of information from his vast storehouse of knowledge tickle my funny bone:

"You remember that the ancient Persians debated everything twice: once when they were drunk and once when they were sober." (45)

Here is one of my all-time favourite quotes from Lewis:

"If grace perfects nature it must expand all our natures into the full richness of the diversity which God intended when He made them, and Heaven will display far more variety than Hell. 'One fold' doesn't mean 'one pool.' Cultivated roses and daffodils are no more alike than wild roses and daffodils." (10)

This is a message that has shone like a beacon into the stormy waters of my spiritual journey: Personality matters to God. It was created by Him and is honoured by Him. The closer I move toward Christ, reflecting Him inside and out, the more unique I will be. In my black-sheep days of rebellion I felt that the more Christian one became, the more that person would begin to look like every other Christian: Christian robots. Predictable. Homogeneous. Standardized. Uniform. Eventually all individual thought would disappear in order to make room for more quotes from Scripture. CD and book collections would shrink until all that were left were hymns and devotionals. I wasn't sure movies would even make the cut.

In more recent years, as I have endeavoured to move out of rebellion and into obedience, I have embraced these words as a life raft. These passions, these dreams, this sense of humour, and even these limitations - are part of who God made me. They may need refining, prioritizing, postponing or redeeming, but they are part of me, and God loves all of me. These things will be perfected, not deleted, as I move closer toward Christ in obedience.

I have always taken secret pleasure in the picture of C. S. Lewis that adorns that backs of my Harvest Book/Harcourt Brace & Co editions of Lewis' books: he doesn't look robotic, does he? In fact, he looks rather impish. C. S. Lewis has always served as a sort of poster boy to remind me that people much smarter than I have struggled with the demands of Christianity and found it worthy of their lives - personalities and brains included.

Lewis has plenty more to say and I have plenty more to digest, but now it is time for bed. Goodnight, and thanks for journeying with me!

Becky

Share

To Clarify

2010-01-23T11:15:00.005-07:00

Apparently I am still not talking enough about Letters to Malcolm. Steve would like to learn more about the book itself, and so I'm trying to figure out my specific purpose for this blog. I would like to introduce people to good books, I would like to encourage discussion, I would like to be challenged by the authors I read and the people who read my posts. These are all important to me, but I suppose my primary purposes are selfish ones: I want to write, I want to engage with the authors I'm reading, and most of all I want to process my own thoughts as I read. So, sometimes there may be an abundance of quotes and interaction with specific thoughts of my author friends, but other times (as of late) I may go chasing rabbit trails of my own making. I hope there will be a balance of both.

With approximately two weeks to devote to reading, processing and writing about each book, I have to pick and choose which worthy thoughts I will engage and which tasty morsels I will have to ignore (at least, in print) for now. I have been tempted to post the occasional list of good quotes, but so far have resisted. Perhaps it would be helpful. At any rate, it would help me to remember all the good stuff I've found. With some books I will discuss an overall theme, with others I may end up exploring one specific quote or passage. I may also bring in other authors I'm reading concurrently and enter them into the conversation, with or without much introduction.

What I endeavour most to accomplish is my own integrity in writing. I'm trying to be honest with myself and whomever else is reading. I'm trying to let go of worrying about what I write because of what someone else might think - of whether they will disagree or think I'm unintelligent, ignorant or uninformed. I'm trying to flesh out ideas about which I'm not always 100% convinced. I will try to be honest in admitting when I don't agree with or understand what appears to be an orthodox idea. Other times my honesty will take the form of preaching to myself something I know to be true but haven't yet fully absorbed into my spiritual walk. At any rate, please don't think I'm preaching to you!

Last of all, this honesty is forcing me to be vulnerable. As much as I would like to have something profound to offer, I am painfully aware that there are many who are infinitely more capable. This willingness to be vulnerable also brings freedom. I release my fears, insecurities and failures and entrust myself to the One who called me onto this journey in the first place. My hope is that through this blog and my fumbled attempts at engaging far superior thinkers, I might just have something profound to say by the end of the journey. Wisdom is what I seek.

Share

Undragoning: Praying As We Are, Not As We Ought

2010-01-21T19:50:00.008-07:00

Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, by CS Lewis
Progress: 56/124

"Oh dear, how ever many skins have I got to take off?" - Eustace Clarence Scrubb

Okay, so as my husband pointed out regarding my last post, I didn't actually mention Letters to Malcolm. True. It was meant as a sort of preamble to some more specific thoughts on his writing, which I have not yet put down on paper. The Letters are there, though, informing my thoughts and attitudes about prayer. This is a second or third reread for me, and the words in this book have come like old friends to visit me many times through the years.

The most specific words I've been thinking about recently are in his statement that "We must lay before Him what is in us, not what ought to be in us." (22) Instead of simply being known by God, prayer is an opportunity for us to reveal ourselves to God, to unveil what is in us. Of course He already knows us better than ourselves; the point is that we become participants in the knowing, the revealing, and consequently, the confessing of our sins to God. There's no point in going to the doctor if we won't admit what's wrong. The doctor may know we're sick, our friends may see our disease, our very flesh may be wasting away, but healing will not happen until the patient himself is ready to admit it and receive the help and support that has always been available to him.

So, we must reveal, unveil ourselves to God. We must come to Him as we are, lovehandles and all. We might as well get it all out - all the frustration, longing, failing, needing, wanting, denying, resisting - for He already knows it's there, and yet He still desires to meet with us. There is no sin too scandalous, no request too trivial, to reveal to God. Lewis' comments revolve around the latter (innocent desires), but I believe the former (sinful desires or actions) also applies. The concern I think we both would have is that of irreverance before God. Is it proper to complain to God? No, of course not. But at the same time it is honest to admit that we have complaints, and where better to have those complaints put into proper perspective than at the feet of God? If I wait until I have no complaints before talking to God, I might be out of touch for a while. I can stew about them on my own, cut off from God by my own unconfessed sin. But if I admit my frustrations to God, they will find their answer in Him - just as Job finally got his answer from God:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel without knowldege?
Brace yourself like a man;

I will question you, and you shall answer me." (Job 38:2-3)

"Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him?

Let him who accuses God answer him!" (Job 40:2)

God put Job in his proper place, and that made a proper man out of Job: he agreed with God and acknowledged his own unworthiness. I find hope in the fact that although Job struggled with God and the assertions of his unhelpful friends for thirty-seven chapters, in the end, God defended him against his friends as "one who has spoken of me what is right" (Job 42:7,8). All those words of despair, complaint, depression, and challenge, and what God heard in the end was that Job agreed with Him. And then He blessed Job.

So, if we will give our brokenness to God, He will set the bone aright. We have the choice to leave the broken bone to heal on its own, sewing its cells back together with the crooked stitches of a child, forever a handicap in our lives. We also have the choice to allow Him (and yes, I believe He generally prefers to have our permission) to restore our broken bones and make them new again, so they can continue to serve our bodies as they were meant to do.

Having emphasized the importance of our willingness to be truly honest about who we are, the question remains as to what extent we are capable of doing so. As with Eustace and his "undragoning" in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, God rewards our attempts at revelation with His own truer, deeper revelation of who we are (as well as who we ought to be). Would it be fair to suggest that Eustace's first attempts at undressing himself was in part what led him to a willingness to be undressed by the Lion?

"Then the lion said - but I don't know if it spoke - 'You will have to let me undress you.' I was afraid of his claws, I can tell you,but I was pretty nearly desperate now. So I just lay flat down on my back to let him do it.

"The very first tear he made was so deep that I thought it had gone right into my heart. And when he began pulling the skin off, it hurt worse than anything I've ever felt. The only thing that made me able to bear it was just the pleasure of feeling the stuff peel off." (from The Voyage of the Dawn Treader by CS Lewis, page 108-109)

If are to know God, we must strip and be stripped of all that hides the truth in our lives. As The 77s song says, we are to "Pray naked." What beautiful costumes have we rigged up to adorn ourselves in an attempt to feel better about ourselves and to make others think better of us? If must all come off, if we are to be right with God, who "reveals the deep things of darkness and brings deep shadows into the light" (Job 12:22), and He in His mercy will not leave us exposed, but will dress us in New Clothes of His own making.

"You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see. Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent." - Revelation 3:17-19

Share

Prayer in the Field

2010-01-18T11:59:00.004-07:00

Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, by CS Lewis
Progress: 56/124

It shouldn't be surprising that when one sets out to learn about prayer, opportunities for practicing prayer will reveal themselves with increasing intensity. On Sunday, it was my three-and-a-half-year-old son, R, with a gash on his forehead, just about to the bone. Without naming names, I prayed that God would let there be a "good" doctor on call - that is, not one of the mean or incompetent ones I've encountered there in the past. God answered favourably, and provided a very kind doctor, whom R dubbed the "Daddy Doctor," and who was so gentle in his manner that R fell asleep on the table even as he was being stitched up (four stitches, for those interested in such things).

Tuesday brought turmoil of a more personal nature, and in my despair I went for a walk. There, under cover of darkness and in the blessed privacy of stars and snowy fields, I yelled. I accused. I was even, momentarily, sarcastic. It was not a pious prayer, but it was honest, and I hope that, at least, honoured God in some way - that I didn't lie to His face (so to speak) and try to sound submissive when in fact I was feeling about as rebellious as a goody-two-shoes like me can get. Amazingly, after the drama, I walked home with a renewed sense of peace and trust.

Tuesday also brought the devastating earthquake in Haiti. I sat transfixed before the computer, assaulted by images of pain and suffering, and unable to turn my eyes or attention away for a very long time. It occurred to me later that tragedy of this magnitude should have rendered my own problems irrelevant, at least for a while, but it didn't. I just made room in my heart for more sadness. Eventually, I remembered to pray about Haiti, too, instead of just feeling sad but helpless.

Tuesday is also my Bible study preparation day, and so I read the first few chapters of Regent College professor and Vancouver pastor Darrell Johnson's book, Fifty-Seven Words That Change The World: A Journey Through The Lord's Prayer. I read about prayer a lot more than I prayed that day, for all my woes.

On Wednesday morning I drove to Bible study, and in the silence of my car, prayed the Lord's Prayer, for the first time really praying it, letting the words draw out of me the sadness, despair, and longing that needed to be given over to those fifty-seven words and the One who hears them.

In Bible study, I taught about prayer, as a blind person leading others who could surely lead the way more capably. At the end, I burst into tears, and heard the heartfelt and teary prayers of other women on my behalf. I experienced the solidarity and community of the body of Christ at that moment, after I had been more honest and vulnerable than I've ever been with them before.

On Wednesday night I had a phone appointment, which I had arranged before my week had begun to fall apart. I was tempted to cancel, as my specific reason for calling seemed moot in light of the recent events and I felt drained. But by God's grace I did call, and was ministered to by a friend and fellow-pilgrim who had previously walked a journey similar to the one upon which I am now travelling, stumbling and grumbling along the way. She prayed through a passage in Jeremiah with me, and I saw glimpses of myself and my situation in those words of Scripture. I felt solidarity with the exiles in Babylon. I ended the phone conversation with a renewed sense of my identity and of God's purpose and plan for me in light of (no longer in contrast to) that identity. I could breathe a little deeper. For a little while I experienced joy.

Thursday brought more turmoil, although a remnant of the peace and trust from my walk on Tuesday hovered nearby, protecting me from despair.

Friday allowed me some respite from my woes and I focused again on the more pressing needs and desperate suffering of Haiti. After a growing sense that more than my prayers were required in response to the catastrophe, I donated money to aid in the relief efforts, and set my mind to thinking what else might be done on behalf of the Haitians.

On Saturday, peace came to my home. Giving and receiving, hearing and understanding, dreaming and planning were the agents of that peace.

And all these, things, I believe, were fruits of the many prayers made by me and for me this week, a personal response from Our Father, who art in heaven.

Share

The Second Course is Served: Book #2

2010-01-09T09:04:00.005-07:00

I've considered several books as the next course for bookmeal. Houston's Transforming Friendship carries on the idea of "keeping company with God," Tozer 's Pursuit of God does the same, but in the end I choose C. S. Lewis' Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, because I feel drawn to something with a bit of humour after Brother Lawrence's serious take on spirituality.

In a Facebook conversation with my friend Rosie, we got into a brief discussion about Brother Lawrence and whether he was super-spiritual or only seemed so because he lived in a monastery and we do not...Perhaps our lives seem more mundane, as Rosie pointed out. Or perhaps it was easier because he lived in a monastery. Was Brother Lawrence as honest about the trials of spirituality as he was the joys and rewards of it?

Here is my response on Facebook:

"I still have my moments of doubt...I was browsing Lewis' Letters to Malcolm this evening and felt impressed by the earthy honesty of his statment: 'Well, let's now at any rate come clean. Prayer is irksome. An excuse to omit it is never unwelcome. When it is over, this casts a feeling of relief and holiday over the rest of the day. We are reluctant to begin. We are delighted to finish. While we are at prayer, but not while we are reading a novel or solving a cross-word puzzle, any trifle is enough to distract us' (113). Now THAT I can relate to!"

So, because he is a funny, earthy guy who also calls me to deeper, truer levels of spirituality, intellectualism and imagination (often all at the same time), Lewis wins the coveted slot of Book 2! It's a reread (this will be my third time, I think) but as Lewis himself said, rereading books is a sign of a true book lover. I wonder if he ever imagined how many would read and reread his own books?

Stay tuned!

Share

Presence and Perspective

2010-01-08T12:55:00.013-07:00

The Practice of the Presence of God, by Brother Lawrence, Part 3
progress: completed

"Do not forget Him! Think of Him often; adore Him ceaselessly; live and die with Him. That is the real business of a Christian; in a word, it is our profession. If we do not know it, we must learn it." (48)

Before I move on to the next book on my reading list, I owe comment on the topic of the presence of God, which tis he primary subject upon which Brother Lawrence so passionately expounds. In his own words, it is:

"the concentration of the soul's attention on God, remembering that He is always present...[It] is the life and nourishment of the soul, which can be acquired with the grace of God" (67, 68).

He resolved to do whatever he could for God - big or small - and to banish from his life anything that would offend or displease God. When he wandered in his thoughts, he would simply recall them back to God, gently and without condemnation from himself or God. When he was troubled by something, he simply released his concerns to God and lost himself in His love. When he was successful in his attempts at practicing the presence of God, he thanked God for the grace to do so. His life was a fleshed-out attempt at abiding, or dwelling, in Christ (John 15).

It all sounds good. It makes sense. Focus in on God and everything will fall into its proper place, and life will work. I even get that life will work because at that point you'll have transformed definitions for what it means for life to "work" (as with the delight yourself in the Lord and he will give you the desires of your heart passage in Psalm 37). What I don't get is how to do this with children. I've had this blog entry in process for several days now, because I've been interrupted by:

R trying to attach a Mega-blocks sword to a non-Mega-blocks Spiderman figure (they don't fit, so I have to keep reattaching the sword for him)
T telling me about a monster in his dream with "powerful snot"
L getting into my paper trays and swatting at me when I tell her no, then collapsing on the floor in an impressive tantrum display. This is already her fourth one of the day...or more.
T needing me to open the tin where he is storing his fallen pine needles from the Christmas tree "for crafts"
T telling me his grand plan for an amazing outer space picture, which will be a present for Steve tonight
T needing me to draw, then cut, then redraw stars for his outer space picture
R and T fighting over their new Christmas present

And that's just the last ten minutes. Add to that the endless cacophony of three little people wanting to talk, needing to be heard and acknowledged, and waiting for a response from me, and focusing my mind on spiritual things get hard. True, Brother Lawrence experienced much grace in being able to "turn his little omelette in the pan for the love of God" but did he have three chattering monks in need of constant assistance in the kitchen with him at the same time?

I don't know the answer to this, but I suspect Brother Lawrence would tell me that practicing the presence simply means inviting God to join me with my three little chatterboxes, and going off to play with a thankful and grateful heart that he's entrusted them to me. He would say that motherhood is God's portion for me at this point in my life and that I can show him my love by doing it (motherhood, that is) to the best of my ability. I liked this prayer:

"My God, since You are with me, and since, by Your will, I must occupy myself with external things, please grant me the grace to remain with you, in Your presence. Work with me, so that my work might be the very best. Receive as an offering of love both my work and all my affections." (82)

Somehow it still feels like it's going to make me feel guilty rather than blessed. The truth is that it's hard to get your headspace right when your headspace is not your own - it's being bombarded by chattering, stuttering, crying, whining, grumpy and often very sweet (hence the guilt) little voices, fighting for airtime inside my consciousness. Maybe I should've figured out this whole presence thing before I had kids and then I could've been the calm, fun, intentional, idealized mother I'd always figured I would naturally be.

And yet, the only way to experience true comfort is in Christ. Brother Lawrence said that "God won't allow a soul that is searching for Him to be comforted anywhere other than with Him" (31-32). All other attempts to find comfort will fail. I think the same can be said for contentment, joy, peace, etc. So, unless I believe that being a mom makes practicing God's presence impossible, I've got to keep trying to figure it out. What does practicing God's presence look like to me at this point in my life - a wife and mother of three children, a woman struggling with guilt and failure and discontent? How does God's presence transform and redeem and alter my perspective on these things?

***

"Faith gave Brother Lawrence a firm hope in God's goodness, confidence in His providence, and the ability to completely abandon himself into God's hands. He never worried about what would become of him; rather he threw himself into the arms of infinite mercy. The more desperate things appeared to him, the more he hoped - like a rock beaten by the waves of the sea and yet settling itself more firmly in the tempest. This is why he said that the greatest glory one can give to God is to entirely mistrust one's own strength, relying completely on God's protection. This constitutes a sincere recognition of one's weakness and a true confession of the omnipotence of the creator. (89)

"Brother Lawrence saw nothing but the plan of God in everything that happened to him. Because he loved the will of the Lord so much he was able to bring his own will into total submission to it. This kept him in continuous peace." (89)

Share

The Annoyance of Spiritual Maturity and The Offense of Wise Words

2010-01-05T23:43:00.010-07:00

The Practice of the Presence of God, by Brother Lawrence, Part 2
progress: completed

Although I appreciated and was challenged by Brother Lawrence's ideas about continuous living in the presence of God, I had to ask the question: Did people actually like being around this guy, or was he the teensiest bit annoying? As my husband Steve pointed out, the answer is perhaps not so telling as the question: why would I think that?

My first thought was that, in the flesh, he might exude an overpowering and obnoxious air of classic holier-than-thou, pontificating on his own spiritual prowess to the rest of us regular spiritual joes. How could you not feel condemned by this man's goodness and perfection? Ah - there! I have just exposed my faulty thinking: my feelings have given me away. It is my own sense of unholiness that is the issue here; it has little or nothing to do with this man's obvious holiness, except perhaps in that it awakens my own (human) tendency to compare. The honest answer, then, is that a very spiritually mature person such as Brother Lawrence makes me feel insecure in my own spirituality - he would be "annoying" to me because he was succeeding where I was failing. He would have the joy, peace, contentment, and radiance which I did not, and such characteristics would in fact highlight their absence in my own life.

Of course this was just my initial gut response - I'm being honest enough to admit it, embarrassing as it is. What I do with that response is what matters. Proverbs 23:9 warns, "Do not speak to a fool, for he will scorn the wisdom of your words." A fool will respond to one such as Brother Lawrence with offense at the suggestion or intimation that one can be holier than one currently is. She (or he) will find - or invent - reasons to discard the words of wisdom: It's too hard. It's not possible. It's not practical. He's annoying. I don't want to play the part of the fool, allowing my insecurities and sinfulness to cause me to scorn wisdom!

While taking the warning of Proverb 23:9 to heart, I can also take comfort in the promise of Proverbs 14:33, "Wisdom reposes in the heart of the discerning and even among fools she lets herself be known." There is hope for me yet! The wisdom reposing in me is this: Jesus' holiness and righteousness was perfect, and it offended people too. Too often I see in myself the Pharisee, so blinded by self-righteousness that I can hardly recognize the real thing. So, I have to honestly ask myself the question: Would Jesus have annoyed me too? I would like to think that he was so wonderfully mesmerizing, and charismatic, and full of authority and wisdom and compassion, and kindness-to-women that I would've just followed him around like a lovesick schoolgirl. I would like to think it would be easier to follow him if I knew him in the flesh. And yet I wonder. If I entered his world as I am today - a privileged, middle-class, seminary-educated woman, would I "need" him enough to consider his words? Or would I take offense at his presumption? I might have to keep asking myself these questions for a while, until each bit of spiritual pride, offense and hypocrisy is rounded up and exposed to the light of God's holiness.

Before I conclude this assortment of thoughts, I think it is only fair to quote from Joseph de Beaufort on the character of Brother Lawrence:

"He developed a gentle disposition, complete honesty, and the most charitable heart in the world. his kind face, his gracious and affable air, his simple and modest manner immediately won him the esteem and the good will of everyone who saw him... (83)

"Despite his simple and common life in the monastery, he did not pretend to be austere or melancholy, which only serves to rebuff people. On the contrary, he fraternized with everyone, and treated his brothers as friends, without trying to be distinguished from them. He never took the graces of God for granted, and never paraded his virtues in order to win esteem, trying rather to lead a hidden and unknown life. Though he was indeed a humble man, he never sought the glory of humility, but only its reality. He wanted no one but God to witness what he did, just as the only reward he expected was God himself." (84-85)

"Since loving God and loving one's neighbor are really the same thing, Brother Lawrence regarded those around him with the same affection he felt for the Lord." (93)

I would indeed be a fool to be offended by this man.

***

            Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
          All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained.
          Join with others in following my example, brothers, and take note of those who live according to the pattern we gave you. For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things. But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.

-Philippians 3:12-20

Share

Life That Looks Like Death, Surrender That Brings Satisfaction

2010-01-04T22:26:00.007-07:00

The Practice of the Presence of God, by Brother Lawrence, Part 1
progress: page 40/95

This book had my attention in the very first paragraph. It begins with Brother Lawrence's close friend, Joseph de Beaufort, describing Lawrence's spiritual awakening which took place after observing a tree in winter. By all appearances it was a barren, dead thing, ready for the fire. And yet, recognizing the season, he knew it would bud, flower and bear fruit again. This revelation gave him insight into God's character that changed his life. If God could bring this dead thing to life, how much more could he restore men's souls, if only they committed themselves to his care. Thus began his own journey into God's presence.

Being in what has sometimes felt like a dead place in my own life, this image resonated with me, reminding me of God's care and providence even when it is not immediately evident. In the Christian life, as in nature, what appears dead is often only in hibernation -secret happenings are taking place under the cloak of darkness and cold, preparing for new life to unfold. To be sure, it's been a long winter, but winter, by definition, is only a season, and spring will follow...eventually. Until then, there is some hope that I have some secret happenings of my own taking place within me, growth that will break through the surface like the long-awaited first green tips of crocuses in the snow.

In the meantime, according to Brother Lawrence, I should be practicing the presence of God. Or rather, there is no meantime: God himself is the end. Life, death, pleasures, and plans are all overshadowed in the pure joy of pursuing God and God alone, with no ulterior motives. To be sure, there are great treasures to be gained in wholeheartedly pursuing God, but they are trinkets compared to the gift of God himself.

"He sought only God, and not His gifts...Rather than desiring them from Him, he chose to look beyond the gift, hoping to learn more about God Himself." (10)

So, he sacrificed his pleasures (dreams?) and received for his troubles wholehearted satisfaction.

If God is the end, he is also the means to himself. God alone can lead us to God. He calls us, leads us and causes us to respond all by his grace. We get to know him by practicing the presence of God until it becomes habit - indeed, "a pleasurable habit" (21) - until we are so used to the comfort and joy of his presence that we feel a sharp and immediate sense of loss when we stray from him. For Brother Lawrence this meant complete surrender to the person and will and love of God.

"He wasn't afraid of dying to self or losing himself in Christ, because complete surrender to God's will is the only secure road to follow. In it, there is always enough light to assure safe travel." (17)

Complete surrender to the person and will and love of God? Practice, indeed!

Share

What is Spiritual Reading?

2010-01-02T16:41:00.002-07:00

"It is a way of reading that shapes the heart
at the same time that it informs the intellect,

sucking out the marrow-nourishment from the bone-words."

(Eugene Peterson, from the introduction to
Take and Read: Spiritual Reading: An Annotated List)

My understanding of spiritual reading has expanded in the years since I began my studies at Regent College (1998). Prior to that, my list would've been fairly narrow and quite homogeneous: I would read the opinions of others who thought like me. I think it was my year of studying abroad in Scotland (1996) that it all began: one of our assignments at Glasgow Bible College was to read and discuss Vatican II - quite a stretch for me, being the daughter of a Baptist pastor and all. After that it was second-year Greek exegesis class (1997), in which I rather obsessively consulted about 15 commentators per verse. I think at the time I figured a broad range of opinions would give me more to write about in my exegesis assignments, but through it I discovered the richness of sharing "conversation" with godly scholars of differing backgrounds and opinions. This was also the year I decided to try a Presbyterian church, just for a bit of change. In addition to the thoughtful sermons, beautiful music and gorgeous cathedral, I also liked the after-church coffee on fine china.

In the fall of 1998, I moved to Vancouver, British Columbia to attend graduate studies at Regent College, "An International Graduate School of Christian Studies" (http://www.regent-college.edu/) and immersed myself in Christian studies with Baptists, Anglicans, Pentecostals, Catholics, pastors, missionaries, artists, scholars, laypeople, Africans, Asians, North Americans, South Americans, Europeans, Faroe Islanders (that one's for Poul), Australians...well, you get the idea. Here I got to experience in the flesh the grace of sharing fellowship with the godly and generous body of Christ - in all its diversity. I probably learned the most from the individuals, books and authors with whom I most disagreed. Believe it or not, sometimes I even changed my mind!

Therefore, in choosing my reading list I have tried to include a broad range of books that represent viewpoints from within the realm of Christendom: Protestants, Catholics, Mennonites, Germans, Americans, Canadians, scholars, monks, artists, proponents of social justice and earthkeeping (I'm still looking for good titles in these categories), mystics, farmers, etc. After all, it is the combination of flavours, subtle and complementary, that make a meal truly delicious, and nourishing. I expect to be affirmed, challenged, perturbed, flustered, surprised and transformed by each of these good saints.

But that's not to say that spiritual reading must be limited to Christian writers. Eugene Peterson writes, "Spiritual reading does not mean reading on spiritual or religious subjects, but reading any book that comes to hand in a spiritual way, which is to say, listening to the Spirit, alert to intimations of God." He goes on to explain that "all honest words can involve us in some way, if we read with our hearts as well as our heads, in an eternal conversation that got its start in the Word that 'became flesh'" (from the introduction to Take and Read). This is why I can call reading the newspaper or a non-Christian novel or Eat, Pray, Love "spiritual reading" - if I read it in a thoughtful way, being attentive to the Spirit who teaches us "all things" (John 14:6).

Because my goal for reading is primarily transformation and not just information, my book menu will largely consist of Christian authors who, though each of them are different from me in one way or another, hold to the basic tenet of my Christian faith (Jesus is Lord). I would like to include a few other works as well. I bought five books at Value Village last weekend and got the sixth - A Year of Living Biblically by A. J. Jacobs - for free, so I thought that might be a fun one to throw into the mix: a secular Jew's attempt to follow the Bible literally for a year. And it's absolutely essential to throw in a good novel or two as well.

But for now, my first book: The Practice of the Presence of God by Brother Lawrence.

The first course is served!

Share

Happy New Year!

2010-01-01T10:31:00.001-07:00

The first book I opened on this first day of the year was the Bible. I have resisted making a New Year's Resolution this year per se, although this project is sort of an extreme version of one of my typical resolutions - read more, study more, learn more. My hope is that the blog aspect of this project will provide the accountability I need to follow through with my plan.

I only have one "official" resolution this year, and I will mention it here for the same reason of accountability. My plan is to read the Bible every day. Where this resolution differs from past (failed) resolutions is in that there are no specifics: on a given day, I can read as much or as little, from wherever in the Bible that I want. No legalism. A few months ago, a friend of mine made a passing comment about how Christians often ask for wisdom but never actually get around to reading the Bible, the primary source for gaining wisdom. It's a thought that's stayed with me.

It's also occurred to me that regular Bible reading is essential for this project to succeed. Of course it's essential for a plethora of other ideas as well, but my point is this: the goal of spiritual reading is transformation, and the Bible provides a two-way street (or a double-edge sword, if you like) for that process to take place. It points outward, informing and enlightening my spiritual reading, and it points inward, drawing me into intimate relationship with Jesus, who transforms me from the inside out.

My first reading of the new year was a passage specially chosen to bless Steve and me for 2010 by Steve's dad: Psalm 20. Verse 4 especially stands out, and fills me with aching:

"May he give you the desire of your heart

and make all your plans succeed."

In many ways, 2009 was a year of failed plans and unfulfilled desires, of pain and struggle and desperation in wanting to know God's will and meeting with utter silence and darkness, or so it has often seemed to me.

It is at this final place of desperation that I am finally willing to consider anything, and that leads me to the question: What do I desire? and What should I desire? The answer to the first is a list several pages long. The answer to the second is simply: God himself. The distance between the two is infinite. I have been trying to merge the two for too long, or perhaps mistaking one for the other, as silly as that sounds, and the result is only grief and discontent.

So, it seems the first action of this verse is to transform my desire. Psalm 37:4 gives us a glimpse into the prerequisite (if you will) for Psalm 20:4. It states,

"Delight yourself in the Lord,

and he will give you the desires of the heart."

Easier said than done. There is so much to give up, so much control to relinquish, so many dreams to lay at the altar. But this is my goal. My hope is that this project can be a part of that process, and I pray that as long as that goal remains, these plans will indeed succeed.

Let the feasting begin! And may we find nourishment, communion and joy at the table.

Share

The Menu, Draft 1: Choosing The Reading List

2009-12-31T17:00:00.001-07:00

The attempt at list-making has begun, and it is already a very large list. I am overwhelmed, but excited. Ever since I left Regent College (Vancouver, BC) I have kept a running list in my head of books and authors I heard about but didn't get to read (yet). There are just too many to choose! I might end up choosing each book as I go, and let the books themselves recommend which ones should follow. My experience of spiritual reading and study is that it often occurs in waves, with recurring themes that weave together to make a larger picture that is often only perceived after the words and ideas have had time to mingle and meld inside my head. Books, scripture, news, sermons, and casual conversations all work together to hammer an idea into my stubborn mind and heart.

Anyway, here's a first draft of possibilities:

*already read

+partially read and/or currently reading

My Personal Wish List:

*Letters to Malcolm – CS Lewis
Dark Night of the Soul – St John of the Cross
*Restoring the Woven Cord: Principles of Celtic Christianity for the Church Today – Michael Mitton
Interior Castles – St. Theresa of Avila
+The Transforming Friendship – James Houston
The Wounded Healer – Henri Nouwen
*Discipleship on the Edge – Darrell Johnson
+The Cloister Walk – Kathleen Norris
Discovering Biblical Equality – Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, general editors, with Gordon D. Fee, contributing editor
There is No Difference – Maxine Hancock
Basic Christianity – John Stott
+The Mind Matters – John Stott
+Home Economics – Wendell Berry
*The Rule of St. Benedict
+The Practice of the Presence of God – Brother Lawrence
+The Cost of Discipleship – Dietrich Bonhoeffer
+A Year of Living Biblically – A. J. Jacobs
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance – Robert M. Pirsig
*Confessions – St. Augustine
Unspoken Sermons (Series One) – George MacDonald
*Holy Masquerade – Olov Hartman
*The Pursuit of God – AW Tozer
Middlemarch – George Eliot
*Till We Have Faces – CS Lewis
*The Book of the Dun Cow – Walter Wangerin, Jr.
Paradise Lost – John Milton
+The Way is Made by Walking: A Pilgrimage Along the Caminode Santiago – Paul Boers
Something by Eugene Peterson, GK Chesterton, Annie Dillard, Flannery O’Connor, Kathleen Norris, Ron Sider, Ann Lamott
Something about earthkeeping and Christian Stewardship

Others' Suggestions:

Divine Conspiracy - Dallas Willard
+Studies in the Sermon on the Mount - D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones
The End of Suffering: Finding Purpose in Pain - Scott Cairns
The World of Silence - Max Picard
Acedia & me: A Marriage, Monks, and a Writer's Life - Kathleen Norris
Take This Bread: A Radical Conversion - Sara Miles
A Holy Meal: The Lord's Supper in the Life of the Church (Gordon Smith)
Freedom in Exile: The Autobiography of the Dalai Lama
Many of Walter Wangerin's works: for you, I'd recommend (+)Little Lamb, Who Made Thee? (essays on parenting, etc.) and (*)The Book of the Dun Cow (novel)
Just about anything by Henri Nouwen
"The Life Giving Sword", Yagyu Munenori. "Wisdom From the Book of I Ching", Wu Wei
Feminist Theory and Christian Theology - Serene Jones
Sermons of Henry Codman Potter
Sermons of Fleming Rutledge
When God is Silent – Barbara Brown Taylor
The Crime of Living Cautiously – Luci shaw
“Weeds Among the Wheat: Discernment: Where Prayer & Action Meet" and "When the Well Runs Dry: Prayer Beyond the Beginnings" by Thomas H. Green
"Sleeping with Bread: Holding What Gives You Life" by Dennis Linn, Sheila Linn & Matthew Linn
Anything by Robert Farrar Capon, especially "An Offering of Uncles" (or the whole trilogy in which it appears: "The Romance of the Word") and "The Supper of the Lamb."
Already Gone - Ken Ham and Britt Beemer
Can We Be Good Without God?- Paul Chamberlain
Brothers Karamazov
*The Body - Chuck Colson
The Sparrow - Mary Doria Russell

Yikes!

Many thanks to all the friends on Facebook who offered their best. I now have a list of good reading to last me beyond this one year.

So far I am finding it difficult to get any amount of (quiet, kid-free, uninterrupted and still conscious) time to devote to this blog, but I'll do my best to get the details finalized soon so I can get reading!

Share

Inspiration Strikes

2009-12-28T23:47:00.001-07:00

I've been thinking about starting a blog for a little while now, primarily to encourage myself to do some regular writing. Although I'm sure my personal life would fascinate at least one person out here in cyberspace, I've decided on something that I hope will be a bit more rewarding, both to myself and any other readers who may pass through.

After rejecting many unimpressive and some downright embarrassing ideas for blog topics, inspiration struck, right in the midst of a good sermon - a common situation in which inspiration occurs, floating into my mind like a message in a bottle from a distant shore.

I will commit myself to a year of spiritual reading, and call it a feast. I will dine on the thoughts of great thinkers, past and present, and find nourishment for my own soul. With God's help, perhaps others will be fed also.

52 weeks, 20 books, that's the plan. Though I have many ideas of potential books/authors for this project, I welcome suggestions. I'll try to finalize a list in the next few weeks.

Stay tuned!

Share