Every time I see or use the word "emerging," I see in my mind's eye an image of a mosquito larva coming out of the water as a newly formed flying insect that makes a nuisance of itself in the summer. The first time I saw a photo of one of those transformed larvae emerging from the pond water, I was amazed. I ran to the pond at my grandfather's farm and lay on the ground waiting to see one of those elusive insects. I got a lot of mosquito bites that day, but I never got to see an actual, real-life mosquito emerging from its watery environment. Oh, I saw many mosquito larvae in the pond, but none of them willing, or ready, to move to its changed, blood-sucking form.
"Emerging Ministry" is the name of the book about which I've been blogging these past weeks. It seems to me there are some analogies that we can make with the mosquito larva. It may take some observation on our part, but the lowly mosquito may have something to teach us about ourselves.
In order for the mosquito larva to grow in the water, a mosquito egg must be deposited in the water. It's interesting to watch the dancing mosquito deposit her eggs one after another into the still water. She ever so lightly touches the surface of the water, so as not to be pulled down by a waiting fish, just breaking a small ripple. One has to be quick in observation; once you see the mosquito at the water's surface, the egg has already been deposited. Hours and days produce a tiny wiggly larva. Up and down like tiny submarines the tiny larvae move in the water. As shadows of predators or clouds creep over the water's surface, the larvae quickly wriggle to the bottom, to escape certain, or not so certain, death. Up and down, up and down they go, day after day until finally one day when they have eaten enough and the metamorphosis has taken place.
At that moment, they seem to attach to the surface of the water and the mysterious happens. Out of the snake-like larva emerges the humble, flying insect - a mosquito. The adult mosquito, then, goes on to live a few more days; mating, reproducing and starting again the cycle of depositing eggs that will continue the chain of life.
The emerging is not just from water, however; there is emerging of eggs from the adult mosquito. The tiny larvae emerge from their watery depths to the surface to feed and get oxygen to breathe. The adult mosquitoes hide in grass or crevices during the day, to emerge at night and buzz human ears. Then, there is, of course, the emerging of human blood as the mosquito removes its long proboscis from your arm, leg or neck. The humble, pesky mosquito is all about emerging!
The church, too, seems all about emerging. The followers of Jesus emerged long ago from the Jewish tradition. Originally a Jewish sect, Jesus' followers found themselves increasingly uncomfortable in synagogues and the Temple. The emerged as a new religion.
Throughout its history, the Church has emerged from difficult and dark times, to brighter, less challenging ones. The Church seems over and again to emerge from "crucified" moments of great challenge, to the moments of "resurrection". Followers of Jesus inevitably follow after the same life, death and resurrection of the Christ - continually emerging from ourselves and realizing that our task, our mission, is not personal and private, but one for the sake of the world.
Every morning, with the rising from our beds, the Church "emerges" from slumber; each week, as we spill out of worship spaces, the Church emerges as a people with a life-giving message for everyone; every year, with our liturgy, we proclaim that the Church is born anew at Pentecost - emerging from self-centeredness, fear and complacency to spirit-filled life.
There are 10 signs of "emerging church" that Nate Frambach uses:
1. worship is team oriented: it's designed, planned and led by a team
2. feedback loops: they provide on-going communication about the communities needs
3. the arts are back: banners, graphics, sculptures, poetry, drama
4. language matters: the "real" matters and how we tell about the "real" in our lives makes a difference in how people hear and respond to God
5. room for spontaneity: worship is ordered by not over-defined; sometimes it's ok to change it up in the middle of worship
6. music is at the core: when all else fails, sing
7. worship space and time: time and space are no longer bounded by a building
8. the function of humor: special attention needed here so that the humor does not detract from the overall message; but, its use can be crucial to touching lives
9. attention to texts: this means peaking the senses in as many ways as possible - texts can be poetry, biblical, movie, drama; the text conveys the message
10. the understanding of suffering: just keeping it real; suffering happens, we don't worship to escape it, but to look at it, hold it and affirm the hurt within us
So, my questions are many at this point: How does this word "emerge" fit with the Church? Or, does it not fit? Where do you see transformation/transfiguration/metamorphosis in your life or in the life of the Church? How accurate are Nate's 10 signs? Do you see any or all of these in your community? What other observations do you have about "emerging"?
That's enough for now. What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
How to pass on "my" story?
In the last post, I asked how stories show the connected-ness of all humanity. If all humanity is connected, it would seem that there are some shared stories - ones that we can repeat and talk about together. These kinds of stories help us to get closer to one another; they also give meaning to our community.
Today, I think it's important to ask, "How do I pass on a story that's been important to me?" Each community, organization, family, has its own story; how do you gather together to tell those stories and show how they have as much meaning today as when they were first told?
When Annie and I moved to France (in Cameroon and NW Ohio, incidentally, we have experienced the same thing) we were immediately thrust into an unknown culture. Subconsciously, we searched for the "untold" story that would help us navigate the new found world. No one seemed willing to divulge any secrets. To Annie and me, it seemed that our friends and family were right, "The French are rude, stuck up people who don't care about outsiders." As we stayed longer, we realized that first assumption was far from the truth. We could name numerous instances of encounters with French people who did not at all fit that stereotype.
It took Annie and me reflecting, talking and living with the people we encountered to start to piece together the "story". Eventually, we realized that the French people were not rude but felt vulnerable. Throughout history, they had been overrun by Spain, England, Germany, The Holy Roman Empire. I, too, would not want to open up quickly with people. We learned that life in France was very "eucharistic". This revelation changed our whole attitude to the French and to life itself. If you wanted to get to know someone, it now became important to sit down, have a cup of coffee or a glass of wine, eat a meal and enjoy one another's company. Slowly, the "story" that gave meaning to our French friends began to materialize - not just in conversation, but in our life together. The experience reminded me of the walk to Emmaus.
Remember in the story how the two followers of Jesus are talking about the resurrection event and suddenly Jesus appears? They don't know who he is until that evening, around the table, as he breaks bread with them. Then the two disciples realize that he had been with them all along. Had they walked away from the encounter and branded him a "weird outsider" who was the "only one in Jerusalem who didn't know what was going on", the world could be different today. Yet, they took the time to listen to this stranger and to invite him in to eat with them.
I am sure that we have the same kind of encounters within our own community. I am certain that I miss opportunities to delve deeper into the story because I don't take the time to do just that - "go deeper". Eucharistic means "thankful"; that's exactly the way life seemed to Annie and me in France - thankful: thankful for the stranger in the midst, thankful for good food and someone to enjoy it with, thankful for life itself. How this world could change if I lived a "eucharistic" attitude to life everyday.
Oh, yeah, there is the theological dimension to this "eucharistic life" as well: in the breaking of bread, even at the simplest of tables, our common story reminds us that the Christ is with us. Where the Christ is, there is God's kingdom; where the kingdom is, God's mercy and justice reign supreme. Imagine an end to hatred, violence, injustice; imagine making swords into plowshares and studying war no more! I guess we do have a common story; do we live it? That seems the primary way of sharing it! In the meanwhile, let's sit down, converse with one another, and enjoy some food!
Peace,
Tim
Today, I think it's important to ask, "How do I pass on a story that's been important to me?" Each community, organization, family, has its own story; how do you gather together to tell those stories and show how they have as much meaning today as when they were first told?
When Annie and I moved to France (in Cameroon and NW Ohio, incidentally, we have experienced the same thing) we were immediately thrust into an unknown culture. Subconsciously, we searched for the "untold" story that would help us navigate the new found world. No one seemed willing to divulge any secrets. To Annie and me, it seemed that our friends and family were right, "The French are rude, stuck up people who don't care about outsiders." As we stayed longer, we realized that first assumption was far from the truth. We could name numerous instances of encounters with French people who did not at all fit that stereotype.
It took Annie and me reflecting, talking and living with the people we encountered to start to piece together the "story". Eventually, we realized that the French people were not rude but felt vulnerable. Throughout history, they had been overrun by Spain, England, Germany, The Holy Roman Empire. I, too, would not want to open up quickly with people. We learned that life in France was very "eucharistic". This revelation changed our whole attitude to the French and to life itself. If you wanted to get to know someone, it now became important to sit down, have a cup of coffee or a glass of wine, eat a meal and enjoy one another's company. Slowly, the "story" that gave meaning to our French friends began to materialize - not just in conversation, but in our life together. The experience reminded me of the walk to Emmaus.
Remember in the story how the two followers of Jesus are talking about the resurrection event and suddenly Jesus appears? They don't know who he is until that evening, around the table, as he breaks bread with them. Then the two disciples realize that he had been with them all along. Had they walked away from the encounter and branded him a "weird outsider" who was the "only one in Jerusalem who didn't know what was going on", the world could be different today. Yet, they took the time to listen to this stranger and to invite him in to eat with them.
I am sure that we have the same kind of encounters within our own community. I am certain that I miss opportunities to delve deeper into the story because I don't take the time to do just that - "go deeper". Eucharistic means "thankful"; that's exactly the way life seemed to Annie and me in France - thankful: thankful for the stranger in the midst, thankful for good food and someone to enjoy it with, thankful for life itself. How this world could change if I lived a "eucharistic" attitude to life everyday.
Oh, yeah, there is the theological dimension to this "eucharistic life" as well: in the breaking of bread, even at the simplest of tables, our common story reminds us that the Christ is with us. Where the Christ is, there is God's kingdom; where the kingdom is, God's mercy and justice reign supreme. Imagine an end to hatred, violence, injustice; imagine making swords into plowshares and studying war no more! I guess we do have a common story; do we live it? That seems the primary way of sharing it! In the meanwhile, let's sit down, converse with one another, and enjoy some food!
Peace,
Tim
Friday, April 12, 2013
Whose story: Yours, mine, ours...
"Having" something denotes possession. I have a car = there is a car in my possession; I bought it, I put gas in it, I drive it, I pay for upkeep and insurance. Having a story differs in some ways. When someone says, "I have a story to tell;" or, "That's my story and I'm stickin' to it," that person means, "This story doesn't belong to me like a car or a piece of jewelry. The stories we tell do not "belong" to us in the same way; they are ways for you and me to communicate things that have happened to us.
For example, I once read a story by C.S. Lewis, called Until we have Faces. It's a wonderful story about a young woman who is deformed from birth and has to wear a mask to cover her deformity. One day she finally realizes that her face does not determine who she is; it's what is inside that is more important. At that moment, she takes off her mask and never wears it again.
Now, I can say, and I have many times, that is my story to tell, although I did not imagine it or write it. So powerful is that story that it gives life to my own experiences of life. I tell the story to others because I think it is powerful enough to give life to others as well. Others can claim the story as their own! Yet, the story remains one of C.S. Lewis.
Each person has a story about her or his life to share. Everyone alive deserves my attention as she or he tells that story - and, who knows, I may just learn something about myself, about others, about God from listening.
When Nate Frambach claims that humanity is made of stories, I think he's getting at that very simple point: each human being has a story to tell and each other human being can take the time to listen to it. In the telling and the listening, we re-claim our common humanity. You see, when I take the time to listen to someone else's story, without judgment or criticism, I change. It's hard to judge someone when I see someone as a fellow human being!
I once had a teacher who had a very challenging relationship with a fellow on a board on which she served. Every time my teach would walk into the board room, she would tense up and fill with anxiety. She knew that within a short period of time, that offending individual would upset her. Then one day she consciously decided to say to herself, "This person is a human being like me, and worthy of God's love as well as mine." She started saying that to herself as she drove. When she arrived at the meeting, she was still saying that mantra. In a short period of time, just like clockwork, the colleague said something that offended her. This time, however, she didn't tense up; she changed her whole demeanor toward the man and was able to talk with him during the meeting - something that, in the before-time was practically impossible.
When I hear stories like that, they are moments to pause and reflect on my own life. How could I adopt that same attitude? Do I really need to hate or antagonize others because I disagree or because the other offends me?
I don't know about you, but I am a "storied one". Stories not only remind me who I am, they also remind me that others are part of my story. We all know that when we include others in the story, the whole ending changes, doesn't it?
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
For example, I once read a story by C.S. Lewis, called Until we have Faces. It's a wonderful story about a young woman who is deformed from birth and has to wear a mask to cover her deformity. One day she finally realizes that her face does not determine who she is; it's what is inside that is more important. At that moment, she takes off her mask and never wears it again.
Now, I can say, and I have many times, that is my story to tell, although I did not imagine it or write it. So powerful is that story that it gives life to my own experiences of life. I tell the story to others because I think it is powerful enough to give life to others as well. Others can claim the story as their own! Yet, the story remains one of C.S. Lewis.
Each person has a story about her or his life to share. Everyone alive deserves my attention as she or he tells that story - and, who knows, I may just learn something about myself, about others, about God from listening.
When Nate Frambach claims that humanity is made of stories, I think he's getting at that very simple point: each human being has a story to tell and each other human being can take the time to listen to it. In the telling and the listening, we re-claim our common humanity. You see, when I take the time to listen to someone else's story, without judgment or criticism, I change. It's hard to judge someone when I see someone as a fellow human being!
I once had a teacher who had a very challenging relationship with a fellow on a board on which she served. Every time my teach would walk into the board room, she would tense up and fill with anxiety. She knew that within a short period of time, that offending individual would upset her. Then one day she consciously decided to say to herself, "This person is a human being like me, and worthy of God's love as well as mine." She started saying that to herself as she drove. When she arrived at the meeting, she was still saying that mantra. In a short period of time, just like clockwork, the colleague said something that offended her. This time, however, she didn't tense up; she changed her whole demeanor toward the man and was able to talk with him during the meeting - something that, in the before-time was practically impossible.
When I hear stories like that, they are moments to pause and reflect on my own life. How could I adopt that same attitude? Do I really need to hate or antagonize others because I disagree or because the other offends me?
I don't know about you, but I am a "storied one". Stories not only remind me who I am, they also remind me that others are part of my story. We all know that when we include others in the story, the whole ending changes, doesn't it?
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Human Beings are Storied Creatures
Do you have memories of sitting around a campfire, telling ghost stories? Maybe you told stories about maniacal creatures that roamed the woods at night, making noise and frightening campers? How important were those stories to you?
I remember my Granny telling us grandchildren about the fairies that would come out of the trees in early Spring. We couldn't wait to go to Granny's house in Spring to catch a glimpse of the elusive fairy, emerging from hibernation.
Are those stories wrong to tell children? I don't think so; I still foster belief in fairies with my children. Stories like that are important to my Irish roots; they help me remember who I am and where I came from - maybe they can even tell me where I am going. Someone could ask me, "Do you believe in those stories?" I guess my answer is a resounding, "Yes!"
I do believe in the stories that we tell around the campfire; I do believe in the fairy stories; I do believe it is important to pass on the stories that have nurtured my imagination. The stories need not be "true" in the scientific, factual sense; they are "true" in that they give meaning to my life.
It may sound odd, but the stories of the Bible can give the same life. For a long time, scientifically minded individuals and religiously minded individuals have fought over the significance of the Bible. Is it important to say the everything happened, exactly, word-for-word as it is written in the Bible? Or, is it more important to understand the meaning behind what the author is saying?
For example, there are 2 creation stories in the Bible (Genesis 1.1-2.4a and Genesis 2.4b-25). Which one should a literal interpretation of the Bible choose? They are, after all, two different stories from two different perspectives. Can a believer in God also believe in evolution?
Nathan Frambach reminds us in his 3rd chapter that one's faith is not based on "right belief" but on, what he calls, "God-spotting". I think what he means is the believer's ability to see God at work, even in the mundane things of life. The Bible contains the stories of faithful people who have experienced God at work in daily life. Their stories give examples of the humanness of faith. Sometimes people fail, sometimes people succeed, but the Bible was written in order to show the believers that God does not give up - even in failure, even in the pride-filled moments of success.
So, what is your story? What are your key stories, values and beliefs that others have passed on to you? Are they worth passing on? How will you do it?
Peace,
Tim
I remember my Granny telling us grandchildren about the fairies that would come out of the trees in early Spring. We couldn't wait to go to Granny's house in Spring to catch a glimpse of the elusive fairy, emerging from hibernation.
Are those stories wrong to tell children? I don't think so; I still foster belief in fairies with my children. Stories like that are important to my Irish roots; they help me remember who I am and where I came from - maybe they can even tell me where I am going. Someone could ask me, "Do you believe in those stories?" I guess my answer is a resounding, "Yes!"
I do believe in the stories that we tell around the campfire; I do believe in the fairy stories; I do believe it is important to pass on the stories that have nurtured my imagination. The stories need not be "true" in the scientific, factual sense; they are "true" in that they give meaning to my life.
It may sound odd, but the stories of the Bible can give the same life. For a long time, scientifically minded individuals and religiously minded individuals have fought over the significance of the Bible. Is it important to say the everything happened, exactly, word-for-word as it is written in the Bible? Or, is it more important to understand the meaning behind what the author is saying?
For example, there are 2 creation stories in the Bible (Genesis 1.1-2.4a and Genesis 2.4b-25). Which one should a literal interpretation of the Bible choose? They are, after all, two different stories from two different perspectives. Can a believer in God also believe in evolution?
Nathan Frambach reminds us in his 3rd chapter that one's faith is not based on "right belief" but on, what he calls, "God-spotting". I think what he means is the believer's ability to see God at work, even in the mundane things of life. The Bible contains the stories of faithful people who have experienced God at work in daily life. Their stories give examples of the humanness of faith. Sometimes people fail, sometimes people succeed, but the Bible was written in order to show the believers that God does not give up - even in failure, even in the pride-filled moments of success.
So, what is your story? What are your key stories, values and beliefs that others have passed on to you? Are they worth passing on? How will you do it?
Peace,
Tim
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Church as Family?
Ok, if one uses the family metaphor for Church, how easily can we do the reverse? Does the family see itself as Church? If the family does see itself as "church", then how does the family carry out ministry?
It seems that this is at the heart of what it means to be "people of God" or "followers of Jesus". Does the community that calls itself "family" come together to sing hymns, listen to pretty music and listen to Bible stories, or is something else going on? You see, this is where the rubber meets the road. Jesus was "radical" in the truest sense: he was changing society at its roots and the move to take Jesus' message to the streets, as it were, makes that change happen.
Merely meeting together one day a week - no matter the day one would pick - does not change a person. Take, for instance, a self-help group. If they meet once a week for information and some encouragement, that is great; but how do the individuals who participate in the group change their habits? The church is not a "self-help" group. The church does meet once a week, but how do the individual participants in worship actually apply and live what they celebrate on Saturday night/Sunday morning? Do they tell others about the changes God has made in them? Do they live as people who have a wonderful message of "great joy" or do they act in another way? Do they live the new commandment Jesus gives in John's gospel, "love one another"?
It takes some time for a congregation to move from old lifestyles to new ones - you know the old proverb about "old dogs and new tricks"... Humans like our habits - they're comfortable. The problem is, we also want to see changes in our communities. Some famous person once said that insanity is "doing the same things and expecting different results" - that applies here.
To be fair, life is change; it is inevitable that everything change. We grow old, we die, we move from one house to another, we move away and go to college, change is all around us. The change we are talking about here is the change within us that accepts and uses the inevitable changes around us for communal good. A mind change has to happen in order to think in this way and we need mentors to help us along the way. How does our congregation/community use mentors? Do we care about helping one another through the changes and chances of life? What can we do?
Well, what do you think?
Tim
It seems that this is at the heart of what it means to be "people of God" or "followers of Jesus". Does the community that calls itself "family" come together to sing hymns, listen to pretty music and listen to Bible stories, or is something else going on? You see, this is where the rubber meets the road. Jesus was "radical" in the truest sense: he was changing society at its roots and the move to take Jesus' message to the streets, as it were, makes that change happen.
Merely meeting together one day a week - no matter the day one would pick - does not change a person. Take, for instance, a self-help group. If they meet once a week for information and some encouragement, that is great; but how do the individuals who participate in the group change their habits? The church is not a "self-help" group. The church does meet once a week, but how do the individual participants in worship actually apply and live what they celebrate on Saturday night/Sunday morning? Do they tell others about the changes God has made in them? Do they live as people who have a wonderful message of "great joy" or do they act in another way? Do they live the new commandment Jesus gives in John's gospel, "love one another"?
It takes some time for a congregation to move from old lifestyles to new ones - you know the old proverb about "old dogs and new tricks"... Humans like our habits - they're comfortable. The problem is, we also want to see changes in our communities. Some famous person once said that insanity is "doing the same things and expecting different results" - that applies here.
To be fair, life is change; it is inevitable that everything change. We grow old, we die, we move from one house to another, we move away and go to college, change is all around us. The change we are talking about here is the change within us that accepts and uses the inevitable changes around us for communal good. A mind change has to happen in order to think in this way and we need mentors to help us along the way. How does our congregation/community use mentors? Do we care about helping one another through the changes and chances of life? What can we do?
Well, what do you think?
Tim
Saturday, April 6, 2013
Sin: the good, the bad and the ugly
I have been thinking about the "code words" that we use in Church. One that is particularly perplexing to people today is the word "sin". The meaning of the word does not often explain the gravity, nor the systemic nature of the problem. As with all evolutionary processes, the word has changed over time. I think that today's understanding of sin is often ridiculous.
Take for example, someone who hoards to the extent that his house becomes inhabitable. He no longer takes care of his animals, letting them defecate wherever and whenever they wish. The outside of the house starts to tell the tale of what's going on inside, as weeds take over, trash cans are left unemptied and miscellaneous junk sits idly for "later use". Inside the house, the kitchen sink is full of dishes and rats have started to invade for the half-eaten food that remains on each plate and bowl. Where carpet used to invite guests, holes are worn throughout so that sub-flooring shows through. The smell of the house is so heavy that it takes your breath away as you enter to see the shell of an individual who is just out of control and has nowhere to turn.
In this hypothetical scenario, society immediately gravitates toward getting "help" for the person: "Get him out of the house. Get him to a doctor for some medication for his problem." In reality, society has helped to create the problem. Western culture for too long has imprinted its citizens with the need for more. Desire out of control is the problem at the root of so many of the economic, educational and societal problems today. The deepest problem of all, however, is that the problem is spiritual: it reaches into the very spirit and soul of individuals and changes our very make-up. Is there some kind of ontological change going on at a molecular level? I don't know. Of course, the individual in question must come to a point of realization that he (or she, as this applies to anyone) really is out of control and needs help.
But, and here's the clencher, society carries an equally powerful, perhaps more responsible part in the person's demise. Yes, you read that correctly; we all are to blame for the deep, systemic, societal problems that separate us from one another. In Hebrew thought, especially seen in the Old Testament, sin itself is a systemic problem that we all participate in, that we all must fight against together. In New Testament terminology, Jesus the Christ has given us power over sin by placing humanity in a position of power over it. Sin no longer need have a power over humanity as Jesus has conquered its power for us. The new reality for humanity is to believe that God has acted on behalf of humanity and in humanity's favor.
So what to do about the hypothetical scenario? Well, once humanity realizes that we all are in this situation together, moralistic blame and guilt no longer make sense. Now, we work to show the one who suffers from sin that God still cares for them. And if God can care for them, so can I; no judgments, no characterizations - just pure selfless acts of compassion.
True, the individual in sin will have to move definitively from the situation, but that move may take more steps than I desire. The house still needs to be cleaned, the individual still needs to move away from the lethal situation. However, the long, hard work of relationship building can begin wheresoever the person finds himself/herself.
What do you think?
Take for example, someone who hoards to the extent that his house becomes inhabitable. He no longer takes care of his animals, letting them defecate wherever and whenever they wish. The outside of the house starts to tell the tale of what's going on inside, as weeds take over, trash cans are left unemptied and miscellaneous junk sits idly for "later use". Inside the house, the kitchen sink is full of dishes and rats have started to invade for the half-eaten food that remains on each plate and bowl. Where carpet used to invite guests, holes are worn throughout so that sub-flooring shows through. The smell of the house is so heavy that it takes your breath away as you enter to see the shell of an individual who is just out of control and has nowhere to turn.
In this hypothetical scenario, society immediately gravitates toward getting "help" for the person: "Get him out of the house. Get him to a doctor for some medication for his problem." In reality, society has helped to create the problem. Western culture for too long has imprinted its citizens with the need for more. Desire out of control is the problem at the root of so many of the economic, educational and societal problems today. The deepest problem of all, however, is that the problem is spiritual: it reaches into the very spirit and soul of individuals and changes our very make-up. Is there some kind of ontological change going on at a molecular level? I don't know. Of course, the individual in question must come to a point of realization that he (or she, as this applies to anyone) really is out of control and needs help.
But, and here's the clencher, society carries an equally powerful, perhaps more responsible part in the person's demise. Yes, you read that correctly; we all are to blame for the deep, systemic, societal problems that separate us from one another. In Hebrew thought, especially seen in the Old Testament, sin itself is a systemic problem that we all participate in, that we all must fight against together. In New Testament terminology, Jesus the Christ has given us power over sin by placing humanity in a position of power over it. Sin no longer need have a power over humanity as Jesus has conquered its power for us. The new reality for humanity is to believe that God has acted on behalf of humanity and in humanity's favor.
So what to do about the hypothetical scenario? Well, once humanity realizes that we all are in this situation together, moralistic blame and guilt no longer make sense. Now, we work to show the one who suffers from sin that God still cares for them. And if God can care for them, so can I; no judgments, no characterizations - just pure selfless acts of compassion.
True, the individual in sin will have to move definitively from the situation, but that move may take more steps than I desire. The house still needs to be cleaned, the individual still needs to move away from the lethal situation. However, the long, hard work of relationship building can begin wheresoever the person finds himself/herself.
What do you think?
Friday, April 5, 2013
The Gathered and Gathering Community
Family: you don't get to pick them, someone once famously said; it's not like your friends! Nate Frambach feels at once comfortable and uncomfortable with thinking of the Church as "family". Family can be the place where one receives nurture - that would be good for anyone. Family can be to place you go when you're in trouble or have tough times to go through. There are too many instances of families that do not nurture and are not available for one another in difficult times. Sometimes, family is the last place to go because no one will listen, no one will nurture.
Another problem with calling the church community, "family" is that it can convey an idea that the specific little piece of real estate where "my family" worships, is not open to "you" because you are not part of the "family". To break into such an atmosphere is difficult, often daunting. Couple this with the fact that, in this family we use a code language in order to communicate. We use words like "faith", "salvation", "heaven", "hell", "God" - all words that can be interpreted in many different ways, depending on which "family" you talk to. Why would someone want to become part of a "family" if they couldn't even speak the language?
For Nate, a better terminology for the church is the "gathering community" or the "fellowship". In scripture, when the word for Church is used, it's always "ecclesia" - the called out ones, and it refers to a gathered community called by someone to a specific task. In the case of the Church, God calls humanity to live together and to spread the gospel.
As Nate directs, so we can ask, "What are favorite metaphors for church? Which metaphor best explains the community where you worship?" Further, do you, like Nate, bristle at calling the church a "family"? What would be a better way for the church to call herself?
Finally, concerning the "code language" of the church, how can we seek to talk among ourselves and with others so as to live and act as people who desire to spread God's good news? What words do we need to change? What words can we keep? Remember, the church does not exist for the sake of itself, but for the sake of the "other".
Another problem with calling the church community, "family" is that it can convey an idea that the specific little piece of real estate where "my family" worships, is not open to "you" because you are not part of the "family". To break into such an atmosphere is difficult, often daunting. Couple this with the fact that, in this family we use a code language in order to communicate. We use words like "faith", "salvation", "heaven", "hell", "God" - all words that can be interpreted in many different ways, depending on which "family" you talk to. Why would someone want to become part of a "family" if they couldn't even speak the language?
For Nate, a better terminology for the church is the "gathering community" or the "fellowship". In scripture, when the word for Church is used, it's always "ecclesia" - the called out ones, and it refers to a gathered community called by someone to a specific task. In the case of the Church, God calls humanity to live together and to spread the gospel.
As Nate directs, so we can ask, "What are favorite metaphors for church? Which metaphor best explains the community where you worship?" Further, do you, like Nate, bristle at calling the church a "family"? What would be a better way for the church to call herself?
Finally, concerning the "code language" of the church, how can we seek to talk among ourselves and with others so as to live and act as people who desire to spread God's good news? What words do we need to change? What words can we keep? Remember, the church does not exist for the sake of itself, but for the sake of the "other".
Thursday, April 4, 2013
"Being" Church
"Where are the new wilderness roads that are emerging around us? Where are the new wilderness roads to which you are being called, along which perhaps you are already walking?"
Two rather involved questions, aren't they? First, one must identify the "wilderness" areas for the community. Where do you feel least comfortable? Does the breadth of the work take your breath away? Do you thirst for something more than just "same old same old"? For me, the last question is the first place to start.
In the wilderness (i.e., desert) thirst moves one forward. Something to quench the thirst must be found before dehydration and rigor mortis takes over the body. So often, I think of the desert as the barren place of nothing; but, I wonder, can the desert be the place that shows me the thing that I thirst for the most and the deepest? Can the wilderness be that place that helps me to realize my deepest desires? I think it's common to humanity to have "wilderness times" - those times when one must seek with lots of effort to find what is most important, most desirable. For our community, can we identify the personal, individual wildernesses of self? Does that wilderness place coincide with the wilderness areas of our community?
To identify the wilderness wandering, it helps to focus on the present moment. Let go of the past and don't try to make the future real at the moment; just focus on the present moment. In the moment, one most easily realizes the opportunities available. When the opportunities arise, it's much easier to act on them for future development.
So, what is emerging around us?
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
Two rather involved questions, aren't they? First, one must identify the "wilderness" areas for the community. Where do you feel least comfortable? Does the breadth of the work take your breath away? Do you thirst for something more than just "same old same old"? For me, the last question is the first place to start.
In the wilderness (i.e., desert) thirst moves one forward. Something to quench the thirst must be found before dehydration and rigor mortis takes over the body. So often, I think of the desert as the barren place of nothing; but, I wonder, can the desert be the place that shows me the thing that I thirst for the most and the deepest? Can the wilderness be that place that helps me to realize my deepest desires? I think it's common to humanity to have "wilderness times" - those times when one must seek with lots of effort to find what is most important, most desirable. For our community, can we identify the personal, individual wildernesses of self? Does that wilderness place coincide with the wilderness areas of our community?
To identify the wilderness wandering, it helps to focus on the present moment. Let go of the past and don't try to make the future real at the moment; just focus on the present moment. In the moment, one most easily realizes the opportunities available. When the opportunities arise, it's much easier to act on them for future development.
So, what is emerging around us?
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
"Being"
The verb "to be" is a weird one. In just about every language - maybe all of them, I don't know - it is an "irregular verb". Anyone remember what that means from school? It doesn't conjugate in a normal way; as a matter of fact, it changes throughout its conjugation: Present tense - I am, you are, he/she/it is; past tense - I was, you were, he/she/it was; future tense - I will be, you will be, we shall be...enough for the grammar. Enough to be said that it's a weird verb.
If we were to define the verb, it means, "to exist, to remain or continue, to come to or belong, to happen or occur". Of all of those words, I like "exist" the most. It comes from two Greek words "ex" and "istemi"; together they mean "to stand out". That's interesting to me when we think about what it means "to be" something - like a fireman, a nurse, a doctor, a secretary. It means that the one who is playing the role is "standing out" as that role.
There is a deeper meaning behind that, however: whatever role you play in life, you are still you and not the role itself. When you or I are "being" whatever role in our job, or another position in life, we are not really that role! That's interesting because one of the first questions I always ask someone when I meet for the first time is, "What's your name? What do you do?" - as if the role determined what kind of individual the person is.
What, then, does it mean "to be" the Church? First and foremost, it is a role that you and I play. Now, to play a role is an important thing. The better you play your role at a job, the better you get at the job, the more confidence the boss has in you. It's important to play all roles properly and with our best effort. The role does not tell who you are, however. Underneath the role is the real you, so "to be" Church is "to be" the real you.
All of this may sound weird, but think about it: let's say you like a nice juicy piece of bacon every once in a while, but are part of a community that does not condone it on moral/religious grounds. If you continue to be in that group, you will have to reveal "less than" your real self to the group. "To be" true to yourself, you will have to reveal that you are "a pork lover." Such a revelation can get you ousted from your community. Truly standing up for what you believe in can cause division in a community. I guess what I am insisting is that "being" the Church is a whole lot more involved than reciting a creed, or singing the right kind of hymns, or even confessing things with the right words. "Being" the Church is radically different! Being the Church means knowing that deep down you are loved by God; you are a child of God, and that realization has implications to change your whole outlook on life.
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
If we were to define the verb, it means, "to exist, to remain or continue, to come to or belong, to happen or occur". Of all of those words, I like "exist" the most. It comes from two Greek words "ex" and "istemi"; together they mean "to stand out". That's interesting to me when we think about what it means "to be" something - like a fireman, a nurse, a doctor, a secretary. It means that the one who is playing the role is "standing out" as that role.
There is a deeper meaning behind that, however: whatever role you play in life, you are still you and not the role itself. When you or I are "being" whatever role in our job, or another position in life, we are not really that role! That's interesting because one of the first questions I always ask someone when I meet for the first time is, "What's your name? What do you do?" - as if the role determined what kind of individual the person is.
What, then, does it mean "to be" the Church? First and foremost, it is a role that you and I play. Now, to play a role is an important thing. The better you play your role at a job, the better you get at the job, the more confidence the boss has in you. It's important to play all roles properly and with our best effort. The role does not tell who you are, however. Underneath the role is the real you, so "to be" Church is "to be" the real you.
All of this may sound weird, but think about it: let's say you like a nice juicy piece of bacon every once in a while, but are part of a community that does not condone it on moral/religious grounds. If you continue to be in that group, you will have to reveal "less than" your real self to the group. "To be" true to yourself, you will have to reveal that you are "a pork lover." Such a revelation can get you ousted from your community. Truly standing up for what you believe in can cause division in a community. I guess what I am insisting is that "being" the Church is a whole lot more involved than reciting a creed, or singing the right kind of hymns, or even confessing things with the right words. "Being" the Church is radically different! Being the Church means knowing that deep down you are loved by God; you are a child of God, and that realization has implications to change your whole outlook on life.
What do you think?
Peace,
Tim
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Living God's Mission Today: An Emerging Landscape
From the first chapter, Nate Frambach observes many of the same trends in mission and ministry with which many of us are already acquainted: people today, in general, don't read the Bible and therefore many people make uneducated assumptions/observations about the biblical story; there are some general identity challenges for the Church today, and for "lutheranism" in particular - who are we? what makes our message important?
Nate makes, I think, a very important point from the beginning, and he even reiterates that point at the end of the chapter as he adds some questions and thoughts for reflection. The first question starts with an assignment to read Acts 8.26-40. From the familiar story, what did you learn about telling others about God? What does it mean to "be" a follower of Jesus?
In keeping this story in mind, what does it say about how God works in any community? He suggests that it may be important to discuss how our community came into being. In our own story we may find out something about ourselves as well as about God. I think what Nate intends for us to understand is that to follow the Risen Christ, is really about a state of "being" at every point in our lives. No matter where we are, no matter who we meet, no matter what we are doing, if we remain focused on "being" a follower of Jesus, our actions and words should show Christ to the world. Here's what I mean.
I saw a video last night of a little boy holding a placard that said something like, "God hates sin - repent or die". He stood outside of a congregation that was leaving worship - a congregation that had apparently voted to affirm gays and lesbians and their privilege to celebrate life with someone of the same sex. As he stood there, the boy shouted out that he loved them and God loved them as well, but God wanted them to change. If they did not change, God would hate them. The parishioners filed out and walked past the boy, but one older woman walked up to the boy and said that she loved him and wanted to know if she could hug him. He responded, "No. Go away," and then went back to his preaching. It would be no surprise to you to know that the little boy was from a well-known church in the US. It would also not surprise you to know that the man filming this "event" was standing behind the boy saying, "Preach it, boy!"
I will be the first to say that each of us has the right to free speech. I wonder, however, if the little boy had grown up in a community that knew the same Jesus that this congregation professed? The two communities clashed on that sidewalk in the name of one who is supposed to unify and repair creation itself. Whether we agree with the boy or with the congregation he protested is not so much the point. The focus of the struggle is that neither community was able to hear the other because they spoke different "languages". The little boy spoke of a God who was just and a rule maker. The congregation spoke of a God who was merciful. Which one was right?
Read the story of Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch in the text mentioned above. What do you think the story says about how one tells others the Good News of God?
Well, what do you think?
Nate makes, I think, a very important point from the beginning, and he even reiterates that point at the end of the chapter as he adds some questions and thoughts for reflection. The first question starts with an assignment to read Acts 8.26-40. From the familiar story, what did you learn about telling others about God? What does it mean to "be" a follower of Jesus?
In keeping this story in mind, what does it say about how God works in any community? He suggests that it may be important to discuss how our community came into being. In our own story we may find out something about ourselves as well as about God. I think what Nate intends for us to understand is that to follow the Risen Christ, is really about a state of "being" at every point in our lives. No matter where we are, no matter who we meet, no matter what we are doing, if we remain focused on "being" a follower of Jesus, our actions and words should show Christ to the world. Here's what I mean.
I saw a video last night of a little boy holding a placard that said something like, "God hates sin - repent or die". He stood outside of a congregation that was leaving worship - a congregation that had apparently voted to affirm gays and lesbians and their privilege to celebrate life with someone of the same sex. As he stood there, the boy shouted out that he loved them and God loved them as well, but God wanted them to change. If they did not change, God would hate them. The parishioners filed out and walked past the boy, but one older woman walked up to the boy and said that she loved him and wanted to know if she could hug him. He responded, "No. Go away," and then went back to his preaching. It would be no surprise to you to know that the little boy was from a well-known church in the US. It would also not surprise you to know that the man filming this "event" was standing behind the boy saying, "Preach it, boy!"
I will be the first to say that each of us has the right to free speech. I wonder, however, if the little boy had grown up in a community that knew the same Jesus that this congregation professed? The two communities clashed on that sidewalk in the name of one who is supposed to unify and repair creation itself. Whether we agree with the boy or with the congregation he protested is not so much the point. The focus of the struggle is that neither community was able to hear the other because they spoke different "languages". The little boy spoke of a God who was just and a rule maker. The congregation spoke of a God who was merciful. Which one was right?
Read the story of Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch in the text mentioned above. What do you think the story says about how one tells others the Good News of God?
Well, what do you think?
Emerging Ministry: Being Church Today
Being Church today, with intentional emphasis on the verb. That's the name of Nate Frambach's book. Nate was at the Synod Assembly in 2012 and he presented the main ideas from his book in a keynote session he led. I like the book because it's short and it says some important things for the Church in a succint way. For the next few weeks, I would like to get some discussion on Nate's book. You may want to buy it, but you don't have to do so. Here is the book at Augsburg fortress (www.augsburgfortress.org) :
In stock.
Friday, April 13, 2007
This item is part of Lutheran Voices
Curious about the world in which we live and informed by the emerging church conversation, Nathan Frambach asks, "What does it mean to be the church as we... read more
$11.99
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)