The trouble with life...

I read Roy Williams' Monday Morning Memo and have often shared his writing here. Today is especially worth reading. Here's a snippet:

Tom Hennen has a line in his poem, The Life of a Day, that says,

“We examine each day before us with barely a glance and say, ‘no, this isn’t one I’ve been looking for,’ and wait in a bored sort of way for the next, when we are convinced, our lives will start for real.”

That line is a little bit frightening because you read it and realize you’re guilty. You’ve been waiting for that day when your life will start “for real.”

The trouble with life is that it’s just so daily.

I love that last line--the trouble with life is that it's just so daily. How often are you waiting for some sense of higher purpose, some feeling that God is doing something great in you? To quote an old Steven Curtis Chapman song, "Are you waiting for lightning? A sign that it's time for a change...Are you listening for thunder, as He quietly whispers your name?"

May the monotony of today's tasks become the whisper of God, and may your today be "for real."

You can read the whole Memo here.

What's your elite status with God?

A couple of weeks ago I accomplished something new. I received an elite status with American Airlines.

Now it's just gold (which in ad-speak is always the lowest form of reward) but still--faster boarding, quicker access to first class seats or exit rows. I have always been a big Southwest guy, but living 15 minutes from DFW airport has forced a change. We'll see how that works.

But it made me think about how we approach God. Most of us--espesh those of us who grew up in church--have a hard time understanding that there is NO elite status with God. God doesn't give bonus upgrades to us to reward behavior he likes. How many times have I expected to be bumped into first class with God because I've been particularly good lately? Read my Bible every day, giving generously, sharing the kingdom message, voting Republican, attending church, etc, etc.

God has a first class, but it seems to be reserved for orphans, widows, prostitutes, tax-collectors and especially for martyrs. His first class is given out solely on the basis of what brings him glory.

So the next time I think my relative goodness gets me up to the front of the line in answered prayer, I should remember that there are 143,000,000 orphans in the world who just might be ahead of me.

Quick thought on patriotism

Over the past decade or so, as I've struggled with applying the teachings of Jesus to societal structures and not just on my own individual faith, I've thought a lot about national pride. I come from a wonderful family with many who served in the military, and who love this country. My wife, who is Argentine but became a US citizen in the 90s, has commented many times over the years at my patriotism, usually because she has seen how much I love the national anthem (and get really bothered when people start cheering at a sporting event before the song is actually over--it's very somber for me).

I've also spent time with many people from other countries and cultures, and think really about how much "God so loved the world", and wonder about the proper sense of national pride for one who lives in two worlds, one whose ultimate loyalty belongs to the King of kings, not to any man, woman, creed or ideology. I'm reading 5 Cities that Ruled the World: How Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, London and New York Shaped Global History, and came across this quote, which I wanted to share:

When patriotism goes to seed, becoming a jingoistic nationalism, it gives patriotism a bad name. It is the difference between gratitude and arrogant pride. Patriotism stifles the spirit of war, nationalism breeds wars. Patriotism is catholic, nationalism is sectarian. Patriotism understands and enters into the affection that others have for their place.

What do you think? How does a lover of Jesus loyal to the kingdom of God live a patriotic life in the US? What about those believers who live in Argentina, or Spain? Or Iraq or Palestine?

I thank God for the freedom I've been able to enjoy in this life. May I never take for granted political and economic freedom, or the spiritual freedom that comes only from Jesus.

A short book review: Chasing Francis by Ian Cron OOOOO

Yes, 5 out of 5 bellybuttons. For only the 2nd time ever (the first being Dallas Willard's The Diving Conspiracy) I give all 5 bellybuttons up. The book is that good.

I've always thought that I didn't get enough out of my books. There are 20 or 30 that I think I should just read over and over, instead of buying new books. So last week I picked up Chasing Francis off my shelf and read it through for a 2nd time. And it's still just as good.

Cron writes one of those semi-fictional accounts like Brian McLaren's New Kind of Christian. And the topic is similar--a New England pastor named Chase Falson blows a fuse about his misgivings concerning Evangelicalism and has a total meltdown in front of his congregation. Chase has been a successful pastor, growing a massive church and doing great things, but has increasingly become cynical about the whole USAmerican evangelical culture. (Sound familiar?)

So the elders give him some time off, and he travels to Italy and with the guidance of his Uncle Kenny, gets to know the little saint from Assisi, Francis. No matter how familiar you are with the story of Saint Francis, this book is worth the read. The newer versions even come with a study guide for individual or group digestion.

But here's the quote that convicted me this time around:

It was the communal example of Francis and his followers, rather than rhetoric, which offered the critique and provided the challenge...For the past few years I've been a self-righteous critic of the church and all of Christendom, and I need to give that up...Maybe I should try to live the gospel without gloss and keep my mouth shut? Chase Falson

I guess I need to say and pray those words myself. A lot. I think I've said it before; one of the most challenging things about Rich Mullins was that while he lived Jesus he loved the church, no matter her shortcomings. I need to give that up myself, and simply live the gospel without gloss.

Like Francis. I hope you read the book.

Book Review - The Next Evangelicalism by Soong-Chan Rah OOOO (4 of 5 bellybuttons)

I do a book review every so often here, but lately have been wanting to revive the olden days. A decade or so ago I would do a book review for all the youth pastors in El Paso. It was called the Phatter than Oprah book club, and books got 1 to 5 bellybuttons based on my preference. Not wanting to be too insensitive, we're just gonna shorten it to Phatter than O, but the bellybuttons are back.

So, at the risk of opening a big can of worms...Soong-Chan Rah's book "The Next Evangelicalism" is worth the price. It's an intentionally provocative book (as shown by the quote from it that I put as my Facebook status a couple of days ago; you might want to stop reading now if you felt that was divisive and unnecessary), and for many people it will feel harsh to read. But I recommend you pick it up.

There are two ways to consider the interplay between gospel and culture. The common assumption is that the gospel is somehow supra-cultural. The other idea is that the gospel doesn't exist in a vacuum, but takes root in a culture and begins to redeem it, becoming something beautiful without losing any truth. The closest metaphor I can think of is an peach tree. The gospel is represented in the seed--all the DNA of the tree is there. But what the tree looks like as it grows is determined also by the climate, the soil, the food, etc. The gospel is pure and true, but it grows within the contexts of the environment (culture) of the people being redeemed. So the problem with the supra-cultural view is that we can become ignorant of how our own culture shapes and interprets the gospel for us, and we begin to equate the way the gospel redeems our culture with the way the gospel always works. This can lead to an elitism that is a hindrance to the community of believers, where we think all peach trees should look exactly the same.

Rah's main point is that the USAmerican church is by and large captive to a western, white culture. I cannot do justice to his defining this here (and I'm sure that just the way Rah says it offends some, for which I apologize, but hope you will push through), but a short definition would be that several centuries of consumerism, materialism, and individualism combined with the less than stellar record we have on treatment of racial minorities have led to a church that at times displays unredeemed or unbiblical values but equates them with redemptive living. His chapter on racism being inherent in the system is particularly challenging.

After discussions of the church growth movement, the emerging church, and other examples of what he terms the "cultural imperialism" of the USAmerican evangelical movement, Rah makes 3 challenges. First, we need to learn from African American and Native American Christian communities. The value of suffering in the scriptures is clear. The suffering of these two communities over the past 400 years has shaped their belief and practice in ways from which white Christians can learn much. Second, Rah challenges us to embrace the alien and stranger among us and learn from the immigrant church. Finally, Ray pushes us to a multicultural understanding of the gospel by learning from the second generation immigrants, who live in two or more cultures--something that from experience I know to open incredible insight into God and the gospel.

The main negative I would suggest about the book is that I wanted a few more practical applications for the lofty principles Rah discusses; for instance what does it look like for a church today to ask forgiveness for racism? What is the best way for churches to embrace a multicultural environment? But if you like to read a book that will challenge your thinking, this is a good one.

Hypocrites in the Church? Sproul says overplayed...

R. C. Sproul is a good Christian thinker. Along with John Piper and my own pastor Matt Chandler, Sproul is perhaps the top USAmerican reformed thinker and teacher.

But I'm not sure I agree with his article here. Basically he says that the charge from outsiders that the church is full of hypocrites is patently false. He does a great job of outlining where the word "hypocrite" actually comes from (ancient Greek acting term for wearing a mask). But he then states that Christians are sinners and that doesn't make them hypocrites so the outsiders are wrong.

Really, what makes Christians hypocrites is their hypocrisy, not their sinfulness.

Sproul is correct in a couple of ways. First, those outside the church will often use any excuse to avoid dealing with their own sinfulness, and pointing to Christian hypocrisy is one such way. We should not give them such easy outs. Second, probably the vast majority of believers are not hypocrites, just as Sproul says. However, too many well-known believers (and by "well-known" I'm not just referring to famous ones, but ones well-known in their own communities too) pretend that their sin is not as bad as those outside the church. They pretend that the sin they struggle with isn't really there, or doesn't really ever win.

This is what the world sees and calls hypocrisy, the hiding of our dirty laundry. So what are we to do? Shout our sins in public? Stand on the corner and confess our darkest lusts and fears? Probably not, although that might be better than sweeping it under the rug. But there should not be a hint of "betterness" in us. The whole "one beggar showing other beggars where he found something to eat" has much truth in it for us. We did nothing and have done nothing to impress God. Honesty with him, with ourselves, and even with the world is the best policy, even when it comes to our showing our sin. After all, where sin abounds, grace abounds even more. I've read that somewhere.

Bible quoting cheerleaders

One of the recent flaps in US religious circles has been the recent ruling that cheerleaders at Lakeview-Fort Oglethorp High School can no longer use Bible verses on the banners that the football team breaks through before games. There has been much discussion about whether or not uniform-wearing cheerleaders represent the school (in which case the verses constitute school support for religion) or only themselves (in which case it's a matter of freedom of religious expression.

Choosing between the two might prove a conundrum.

Unless more spiritually mature heads prevail. I have 2 questions, and neither of them is about the constitutionality of the case:

1. Why would believers consider it profitable to write verses on banners that will be broken through? I would think the symbolism alone would be enough to put us off, not to mention the silly misapplication of Bible verses. [As a former athlete, I am amazed at the misuse--including my own once or twice--of verses like quoting "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" before a bench press.]

2. How would verses on banners advance the kingdom of heaven?

We continue to promote a civil American religion that does not resemble worship of the God revealed in Jesus.

Book Review: The Great Emergence by Phyllis Tickle

It's probably no surprise to the 2.3 of you that I really enjoy reading books that I disagree with the premise. As long as they are well written and well thought out I like opposing points of view.

It may be a surprise that I really, really like reading books that say what I've tried to say, anticipate questions that I've had, and lay out a reasoned point of view that codifies my own thoughts. The Great Emergence is definitely the latter.

I've read books before that point out the appearance of radical change in church and surrounding culture about every 500 years. (Note, the first time I remember reading it was in a Pat Robertson book--please don't hold that against me.) You can look back through history, really even before the greatest of all upheavals--the life and death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth--and find that just about every half millennium the underpinnings of society, so often reflected in the dominant religious system, are undermined, examined, rethought and reformed. Tickle refers to this as a "rummage sale", where the church and society at large take a look at the "stuff", the accouterments, of worldview and purpose, and "sell off" pieces that don't seem to fit anymore. Here is an overview of the major rummage sales as we refer to them today--keep in mind that these are broad generalizations:

• The exodus of the Jews from Egypt
• The anointing of a human king over Israel
• Return from exile and eventual Maccabean revolt
• The life of Jesus Christ
• The papacy of Gregory the Great and the monastic movement he helped perpetuate
• The Great Schism between Eastern and Western churches
• The Great Reformation
  
• The Great Emergence

These rummage sales are not just religious, but the intertwining of the dominant religious structures and the culture in which they reside make them broad events, impacting millions of people. Tickle describes each of these as unraveling the cord that tethers us to shore.

The unraveling happens really in response to one question: where now is our authority? In her words:

The question of "where now is our authority?" is the fundamental or foundational question of all human existence and/or endeavor, be it individual or that of a larger, social unit. Without an answer to it, the individual personality or the personality of the group at large alike fall into disarray and ultimate chaos. It is Hell where there is no answer to that question.

In our time, the Great Emergence is questioning the worldview that emerged in the Great Reformation, namely sola scriptura. That is not to say that the Bible is unimportant to emergents, but that the way we approach the Bible will be redefined. The rules we use to obey God's authority are changing.

Tickle takes some shots at defining what that emerging thing looks like, and I'll try to get to that in my next post. Until then, what do you think about this idea of where authority comes from? In my own tradition, there was in the past decade heated debate about whether the Bible is our authority or whether Jesus was our authority. Is there a difference?

The places God lives

I'm in Amarillo tonight.

When I was a kid, Amarillo was the biggest city in the world. At least to me. And as I flew in from the southeast, and saw Palo Duro Canyon out my window (it's the 2nd largest canyon in the country; do you know which is first?), I thought about the places I had lived, and the differences between them.

The Texas Panhandle, where I was born and lived until I was 14, is the flattest land you can imagine, with only mostly dry riverbeds interrupting the plains. Two trees together constitutes a forest.

The south central part of Oklahoma, where I sojourned like Jesus in Egypt as a baby, is a beautiful piece of hill country. Hills and bottoms, with a little town on the top of every hill. And I loved how those little towns consolidated their school districts--Velma, Alma, Loco, Weed, etc all towns that went to my school. And I still only had 25 classmates.

The Permian Basin is like half desert, half plains. And flatter than the panhandle. Okay, so I lived in Hobbs, NM, but let's be honest--it's really Texas. We would run to Texas and back during off-season football; it was only 2 miles to the border.

The El Paso desert and Franklin Mountains remain one of the most beautiful places in my mind. The city wrapping around the mountains, the twinkling night-lights that Marty saw from the sky--El Paso's beauty must be looked for, but when you do find it--wow, it's awesome!

San Antonio and the hill country are perfect in October, when leaves start to turn (as much as they can in Texas), and we're still working on learning the north Texas tastes.

But the greatest thing about every one of those places is that God lives there. David said you can't escape from his presence--and he was right.

One of the greatest books of the 20th century was "The Divine Conspiracy" by Dallas Willard. In it he discusses the kingdom of heaven. We have this bad tendency to think of heaven as "way out there." God lives way out there in heaven. But truthfully, heaven is like atmosphere, it is the air we breath, it is all around us.

And God lives there.

The caricature debate--a soapbox plea to Christians

Caricature: a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things. (HT: dictionary.com).

I'm going to get on a soapbox. Leave now if you want.

Those who know me well know I love a good debate. I was having dinner with a member of my team and mentioned that when I was in college I loved debating just about any topic, and he commented that I had not stopped that in college. Yes, the very name of this blog (stimulation) invokes the thought of irritating in order to stimulate good thinking. I appreciate good thinking, whether or not I agree with the conclusion.

But there is a complete lack of good thinking going on these days. I am sick and tired of the caricature debate.

As dictionary.com says above, caricature is defined as "ludicrously exaggerating" a person or something about them. I'm not opposed to caricature--in fact it can be an important point of stimulating thought. In private conversations, good caricatures can be funny and witty. But even when used this way, it's obviously caricature. The dark side is when caricature is used to shout down an opponent and shut down a conversation. And honestly, even if those in the world want to use caricature in this way, it's not going to bother me too much.

No, the problem that makes me sick is that followers of Jesus are using caricature not as a ludicrous exaggeration, but as a point of factual argument. From my soapbox I'm going to call this like I see it--lying.

We have a horrible tendency to see someone who disagrees with us and "extremify" their positions, ludicrously exaggerating, or worse, mocking them. And when we do this, when we caricature or exaggerate, we are not portraying truth. We lie, either ignorant of the truth because we no longer think well, or promoting doomsday because we know fear-mongering might cause a knee-jerk reaction in our favor.

I say that this has no place among believers.

Are you a fiscal conservative who believes the current government is overstepping bounds and indebting our children and grandchildren to pay for current programs? Great, argue those points without caricaturizing the president or Democrats.

Are you a progressive who believes that we somehow need to have universal health coverage and take of those who cannot care for themselves? Great, argue those points without labeling all Republicans as greedy, uncaring rich white people.

I could go on and on (war, sexuality, abortion, etc. etc.)--but let me end my rant with these thoughts:

1. Diversify your source of news. Stop getting all your information from one source or one viewpoint.

2. Think. Boy, I wish I didn't have to say more about this, but much of this rant boils down to people who just regurgitate what they hear without checking facts or thinking about consequences.

3. Do not mock. This is inappropriate for followers of Jesus to mock as a form of argument. If you're mocking because you think something funny, then portray it as such. Don't use it to bolster a discussion.

4. Discuss. Discuss passionately if you need to, but discuss. Discuss spiritedly. But discuss. Discussion requires relationship, and it's no secret that I believe we need relationship even (especially?) with those we disagree with.

And so I step down, knowing that I fall short of my own standards. But lets hope that caricature debating gives way to well thought and reasoned debating.