The problem that arises when they make a movie out of a TV series is that what makes for good television is not generally the same stuff that makes for a movie blockbuster. You can see this in the hit-and-miss movie series based on the various incarnations of Star Trek. But it is most evident in the Mission Impossible series. Often these movies start with one of the elaborate schemes reminiscent of the TV show. Then something goes disastrously wrong and the rest of the movie abandons the successful TV formula for the more typical overblown movie blockbuster formula of explosions, gunplay and mano a mano fights that by all rights should leave both villain and hero permanently disabled if not dead.
The joy of the TV version of Mission Impossible was watching the team's meticulous plans unfold. Even so, the audience did not know the entire scenario Phelps and company had dreamt up. We knew who or what their target was. We got glimpses of the disguise Roland was working on. We saw some of Barney's gadgets, specially created for the mission. And then we watched the plan unfold, knowing only slightly more than the villains did. Yes, something unanticipated would happen in the third act to jeopardize the plot but the team deftly improvised until everything was back on track. If it was a good episode, the audience was as surprised as the bad guys but also gratified when the final piece of the Rube Goldberg scheme was triggered and the team walked away with the code key, or the crucial piece of an enemy's weapon, or the freed political prisoner they were seeking. And the IMF rarely had to fire a shot--unless the gun was filled with blanks.
In real life, such complicated plans rarely come off as envisioned. Though in World War 2, there were a number such espionage plots that the Brits pulled off. In "Operation Mincemeat," dramatized in the book "The Man Who Never Was," a corpse was given the identity of a fictitious naval officer, handcuffed to a briefcase with papers indicating that the Allies planned to invade Europe via Sardinia and Greece and then allowed to wash up on the shores of Spain. The Spanish passed the intelligence to the Nazis who were thus unprepared when the Allies invaded Sicily instead. In another elaborate ruse, Nazis were misled by a waiting invasion force of tanks, trucks and cannons that were in fact canvas, wood and inflatable props.
On a more serious note, the Brits had captured a German Enigma cipher machine that allowed Allies to decode intercepted Nazi military communications. Knowing when and where German forces would strike helped us foil their war strategy. But they could never suspect that the Allies had the decoder. The importance of this secret was the basis of one of Winston Churchill's toughest decisions. According to Group Captain F. W. Winterbotham, the British got the word that the Luftwaffe was going to bomb the cathedral city of Coventry. If the populace was evacuated, the Nazis would suspect that UK could decode their secret commands. So Churchill did nothing to give the city advance warning. The city was bombed; the cathedral was gutted by a firestorm; hundreds of people died. It was sacrificed to protect a vital secret.
Today's Bible readings are about valuable secrets. In Genesis 29, Jacob, who got his elder brother's birthright and blessing through trickery, is married to his beloved's elder sister through trickery. I know ancient Middle Eastern bridal veils were thick but the wine must have flowed freely because Jacob doesn't realize the deception until the morning after. He confronts Laban, his new father-in-law, and asks what gives. Laban explains that it is against local custom to marry off the younger daughter before the elder. Sure, now he brings that all-important custom up! Because Laban kept it secret, Jacob has to work another 7 years to gain the hand of Rachel, though Laban lets them marry after a week.
That secret is like the cons that the Impossible Mission Force ran on bad guys. And the eventual result is that the next act in Jacob's life reads like a French bedroom farce. Leah and Rachel are literally sister-wives and their rivalry for Jacob's affections leads to a baby arms race. Leah is first out of the gate giving birth to 4 sons, one after the other. Rachel is barren and, as was the custom since the time of Abraham, gives Jacob her maid Bilhah as a surrogate. Any children born to the maid count as Rachel's. Bilhah has 2 sons. That provokes Leah to do the same with her maid, Zilpah, who bears 2 more sons. Then we find that Jacob's sleeping arrangements can be adjusted by the wives trading nights with him for herbs. Leah meets him on his way home from the fields and tells him that the going rate for his services is a bunch of mandrakes. The result of this decidedly non-erotic schedule is 2 more sons and a daughter from Leah. Finally Rachel has a couple of sons, giving Jacob 12 sons, the ancestors of the 12 tribes of Israel.
This serio-comic family saga is a crucial step in God's plan to bless the world through Abraham's offspring. Which illustrates what Paul says in Romans 8:28--"We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose." This is a core concept of faith. If God is the master of creation, if he is good and loves us, then it follows that he would make all things work together for the good of those who love and obey him. But this is not always obvious at every point in life. I'm sure that when Jacob awoke with a massive hangover and the wrong woman as his wife he could not discern God's hand in that. When David, anointed to be Israel's next king, was a fugitive from Saul, his mentor, he probably couldn't detect how this served God. And the Friday of the crucifixion, Jesus' disciples thought that nothing about it made sense, much less that this was God's will.
The greatest test of faith is continuing to trust God when it is hard to see his hand in what is going on. Part of the problem is that we tend to see good in terms of what is good for ourselves. So it may be hard to see something as good if it does not seem to benefit us. Losing one's job is a disaster, though it may spur one's spouse or children to start down a path that ultimately becomes a good career. It's amazing how many successful men, like Charles Dickens or Arthur Conan Doyle, had unsuccessful fathers. Another example: having a handicapped child can be devastating, though the child may be the occasion of bringing a family closer and turning their minds to what is essential. C. S. Lewis pointed out the difference between a simple variety of goodness, which is obvious and unclouded by negative circumstances, such as love, and a complex kind of goodness, one that can only arise in response to evil, such as forgiveness or healing or reconciliation. A complex good or the opportunity to create one can be difficult to recognize.
Another reason we do not always perceive that God is indeed working all things together for our good is that we see good in terms of what is happening now. We have a hard time seeing the long term results of immediate pain or adversity. The whole premise of "Slumdog Millionaire" is that a young man's painful childhood and harrowing life is what prepares him for a great triumph. At times, the movie is hard to watch but that makes the resolution all the sweeter. During a period of trial, it may be hard to say, "This will prove to be a helpful experience down the road."
The ability to think long-term and delay gratification leads to a better life. In the 1960s, psychologist Walter Mischel gave a bunch of 4-year-olds one marshmallow each and told them that if they refrained from eating it for 20 minutes, they would get another. To fight temptation, some kids closed their eyes or kept thinking of how good 2 marshmallows would be to keep from eating the first one. One kid licked the table all around the marshmallow. On the other hand, some just scarfed it down. 14 years later, Mischel checked up on the children and found that those who couldn't wait and ate the marshmallow right away had low self-esteem, were impulsive, easily frustrated, prone to envy others and seen by their parents and teachers as stubborn. Those who were able to wait ended up doing better in school, were more intelligent emotionally and were self-motivated. They were better adjusted and more dependable.
In Matthew 13, Jesus talks of how those who wait and invest their time, labor and money in the Kingdom of God received a surprisingly big payoff. Plant a tiny mustard seed and you will get a huge tree. Put a pinch of yeast in your dough and it will yield a lot of food. Invest all you have in the Kingdom and you will receive a treasure beyond measure. Cast a wide net and you will get a boatful of fish. It requires patience, like waiting for a tree to grow. It requires work, like the woman kneading the dough or the fishermen pulling nets. It requires a big investment, such as buying a rich field or fabulous pearl. But the payoff will come. You just have to have faith in the God who is working through all things for our good.
We are really good with dealing with visible threats and working for immediate rewards. We have a harder time recognizing threats that are slowly creeping up on us or rewards that take time to materialize. Jacob originally sought immediate benefits through deceit, something that divided his family. He had to learn the benefits of achieving what you desire through long hard work and the importance of keeping peace in a tricky family situation. Only then was he the kind of man God intended him to be. And in hindsight, he could see how God was orchestrating all these unlikely elements--a conniving father-in-law, the rivalry of sisters, his discovery of his talent as a shepherd--to bring him to this point.
A lot of bad behavior comes from short-term thinking and acting impulsively. Jesus encouraged us to count the cost, to plan ahead, to wait, and to prepare for his coming. Our motivation is the hope we have in Christ, a hope not yet visible, as Paul pointed out in last week's epistle, but one which can inspire and guide us, especially in times of trial. And Paul knew what he was talking about. All the dire things he mentions towards the end of Romans 8--hardship, persecution, the sword--he endured. There had to be times when he wondered why, if God was behind the gospel, so many roadblocks were being thrown in his way. But he saw the power of the gospel--people healed, lives changed, different races reconciled, communities sprouting up all over the empire--and it encouraged him. And he saw things that defied his imagination, things way beyond coincidence, that revealed to him that God was indeed working behind the scenes, making things work out despite what appears to be happening.
There are people who take the brief mention of predestination in this passage and say that God has stage managed everything; that he's nailed down every detail; that not a single thing happens that he doesn't approve of. I don't think that's how it works. There are Bible passages in which God changes his mind and in which Jesus shows surprise at things both good and bad. I think that, to honor the free will that he has given us, God refrains from over-riding our wills or forcing us to do his bidding. Like the IMF, he has a master plan. And, like a chess master, he is carrying it out, countering moves made to stop it. I could not outmaneuver Garry Kasparov in a chess match. And Paul is saying that nothing in this world, least of all us, can stymie or frustrate or derail God's loving plan to restore his creatures or creation to their goodness. I can't put it more elegantly than the apostle himself: "Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will hardship, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?...No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor heights, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Monday, July 25, 2011
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Dirty Harry and the Problem of Evil
They had a Dirty Harry marathon on one of the channels last weekend. What's interesting about the series is how it justifies the fact that Police Inspector Harry Callahan has appointed himself judge, jury and executioner. In the first movie, he is up against a serial killer based on the unsolved Zodiac murders. And to make it absolutely clear that the suspect is actually guilty, the movie has the fictional Scorpio killer do what the real Zodiac killer only threatened to do: target a school bus. Harry chases the bus and shoots the killer. Of course, in real life, no one wants a cop to open fire around kids. In fact, in real life you don't want cops like Dirty Harry deciding who lives and who dies. So in each sequel, the bad guys are made even worse than Harry. Think Harry is taking justice into his own hands? In "Magnum Force," a secret squad of cops hunts down and kills bad guys in cold blood. Think Harry is sexist? In "The Enforcer," Harry gets partnered with a woman who proves to be as tough as he is when facing terrorists. Think Harry is a vigilante? In "Sudden Impact," Harry encounters a real vigilante--a woman taking revenge on the men who raped her. Think Harry's films inspire violence? In "The Dead Pool," Harry is up against someone modeling his murders after a popular horror movie franchise. Not only is each movie a rebuttal of a specific criticism of Harry, but each makes sure that its bad guys deserve to be shot--by the biggest gun Harry can lay his hands on.
Too bad Dirty Harry isn't a sci-fi franchise. Hollywood knows that you can kill all the robots, aliens or zombies you want and there are no moral objections. Outside of "District 9," no one doubts that non-humans are completely evil and exterminating thousands of them is heroism, not genocide.
But in real life, we don't fight bad guys with guns or machetes; we work and live with and among them. Nor are they usually serial killers or drug lords or monsters. They are liars and bigots and gossips and backstabbers and jerks and people who cut corners. Yes, there are extremely bad people out there, people who do major harm: physically, financially, sexually, psychologically, or socially. Most of us will never meet them, though occasionally we know of one, the quiet guy who seemed so nice and did something unthinkable.
And then there are the people we know whose sins we'll never know, the ones who secretly abuse their wives or children or aged parents, who drink or drug themselves into a stupor, who betray their spouses, who are up to no good on the computer, who cheat on their taxes, who steal from their employer, or indulge in other destructive and self-destructive habits.
These expressions of evil are varied, both in degrees of intention and the damage incurred. Some of these sins are in fact our own; some belong to those we love. Some we excuse, rightly or wrongly, for that reason or because we feel they are not that bad. Some we might even contend are necessary evils, like war, at least when it is waged to stop evil done by others. Of course, to our enemies, we are the evil ones. Vlad Tepes, the historical Dracula and model for the fictional vampire, was a prince of Transylvania who repelled Turkish invaders. He did this by lining the roads into his land with thousands of his impaled countrymen. After passing miles of this appalling spectacle, the Turks retreated, deciding they didn't want to fight someone with such a disregard for human life, especially that of his own people. To the Turks, he was a monster. In Transylvania, he's a national hero. People like Vlad Tepes beg the question of whether the end, in this case national security, justifies the means, like unspeakable cruelty. We had a version of this argument a while back when it was disclosed that, in interrogating terrorism suspects, our government authorized the use of waterboarding, for which we prosecuted the Japanese for using during World War 2. Does that make us bad? Is evil relative? Who is the final authority? If it is human government, how can we criticize Vlad Tepes or Saddam Hussein for what they did in their own countries? If it is God, then how does he see us? Should he be as ruthless as Dirty Harry in wiping out what and who is evil? If he doesn't, how can he be called good or powerful?
In Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43, Jesus deals with some of those questions. Jesus pictures a situation in which a farmer's rival has sown the seeds of weeds among his wheat. Once this becomes evident, the farmer's slaves suggest weeding the fields. But the farmer says no; the efforts to uproot the weeds would lead to the loss of some wheat. Wait until it's time to harvest the crop. At that time, the weeds can be separated. Jesus later explains that the sower is himself, the Son of Man, and the wheat and weeds are the children of the kingdom and of the evil one, respectively. They must live together in the world until the end of the world when the final judgment will sort out who is who.
Understanding this parable depends on noticing what specific question it is answering. And it is not about the existence of good and bad people, nor of the last judgment. You find those issues throughout the Bible. The unique feature about this parable is that it answers the question, "If God is all-good and all-powerful, why doesn't he eliminate all evil?" It is a question still asked by atheists hoping to prove that a good and powerful God does not exist. If God can't get rid of evil, he's not all-powerful. If he can but won't get rid of evil, then he must not be all-good. Thus the existence of evil shows that God is either not powerful or not good. Or that he doesn't exist.
The syllogism is not air-tight, however. There is another alternative. The answer Jesus gives for God not eradicating evil is that he is being merciful. What's more is God is being merciful to the good people! As we saw, the lives of the good and the bad are intertwined. The good and the bad are our friends, our relatives, our coworkers. In many cases, we don't know who is truly good or truly evil. Just as rigorous weeding would uproot some of the wheat, how could God pluck all the evil people out of the world without disrupting the lives of the good? And which of us can say without a doubt that we are among the righteous?
Parables, like all analogies, have their limits. And Jesus knows the situation is even more complex than this parable can show. There are no completely good people out there. Jesus picks up where John the Baptist left off. His message also begins with repentance. He is sent to save sinners, not the righteous. Jesus' message has a special resonance for society's notorious sinners, like corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes. Jesus knows that the righteous are not sinless but sinners who change their minds and lives and turn to God. For God to get rid of evil is for him to abort the process by which the children of the evil one become children of the kingdom.
One of the metaphors Paul uses to describe the process is that of adoption. In Romans 8, Paul says, "For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry 'Abba! Father!' it is the very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ." Adoption in the Roman era made one as fully a child as a natural born son or daughter, even in the matter of inheritance. To this, Paul adds the Semitic usage wherein the phrase "to be the child of" someone means to act like them. The children of God have his Spirit and act like him.
But learning about our God and how to behave in accordance with his Spirit takes time, just as it takes time for a child to grow to the maturity he needs to properly exercise his inheritance. It takes wisdom and self-discipline. In our passage from Genesis 28, we see the beginning of the transformation of Jacob. When we first meet him, he is a conman and trickster. He talks his brother, admittedly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, into giving up his birthright. Then, in an elaborate ruse, he impersonates his brother to steal his blessing. He is not what anyone would call a righteous person. But while fleeing his murderous brother, he has this vision of God. The Lord promises to fulfill his covenant to Abraham through Jacob. And yet, the fulfillment was years off. Jacob would meet his match in Laban, an even bigger conman than he is. Jacob will learn to work for and earn what he wants. He will have a family to provide for. He will, like his brother, have a lot to lose. And then he will go home and have to face his brother and reconcile with him. He will again see God and have his name changed to Israel. He will at last be a righteous man. But if his story ended with Jacob's ladder, he would not fulfill his potential to become the person God wanted him to be.
While a lot of people may get freaked out by the mention of the devil and the furnace of fire, the actual message of the parable is that God is merciful. He doesn't come on like Dirty Harry, taking out all the bad guys. Because we all start out as bad guys. But we can change. And thanks to God, we are given time to change. There will come a time at which God will decide that the process is done, just as there comes a time when a wise doctor realizes that a course of treatment is done. But as long as there's hope, God will not pull the plug, so to speak. And the hope, as Paul says, is for the redemption of our bodies. It is part of the redemption of the whole world, for which all of creation groans and longs. Why not? The human race, created to be just a little less than the gods, has used its powers of memory, reason and skill to really mess things up for each other and for the world in which we live. Our transformation into wise, loving stewards will transform the world as well. Paul's use of the phrase "redemption of our bodies" lets us know that Christianity has never been merely about saving souls. We were created as unities of body and spirit and the two are ultimately inseparable. That's why we say in the creed every Sunday that we look for the resurrection of the dead. The spirit gives meaning to the body; the body gives expression and impact to the spirit. God created both; God is interested in both; God will redeem both.
Unredeemed humanity's imagination has not been able to come up with a better solution to the problem of evil than "kill them all; let God sort them out!" God has a different idea. "Let me die for them all; let those who answer my call come to me and with my Spirit working through them, we will sort my new creation out."
Too bad Dirty Harry isn't a sci-fi franchise. Hollywood knows that you can kill all the robots, aliens or zombies you want and there are no moral objections. Outside of "District 9," no one doubts that non-humans are completely evil and exterminating thousands of them is heroism, not genocide.
But in real life, we don't fight bad guys with guns or machetes; we work and live with and among them. Nor are they usually serial killers or drug lords or monsters. They are liars and bigots and gossips and backstabbers and jerks and people who cut corners. Yes, there are extremely bad people out there, people who do major harm: physically, financially, sexually, psychologically, or socially. Most of us will never meet them, though occasionally we know of one, the quiet guy who seemed so nice and did something unthinkable.
And then there are the people we know whose sins we'll never know, the ones who secretly abuse their wives or children or aged parents, who drink or drug themselves into a stupor, who betray their spouses, who are up to no good on the computer, who cheat on their taxes, who steal from their employer, or indulge in other destructive and self-destructive habits.
These expressions of evil are varied, both in degrees of intention and the damage incurred. Some of these sins are in fact our own; some belong to those we love. Some we excuse, rightly or wrongly, for that reason or because we feel they are not that bad. Some we might even contend are necessary evils, like war, at least when it is waged to stop evil done by others. Of course, to our enemies, we are the evil ones. Vlad Tepes, the historical Dracula and model for the fictional vampire, was a prince of Transylvania who repelled Turkish invaders. He did this by lining the roads into his land with thousands of his impaled countrymen. After passing miles of this appalling spectacle, the Turks retreated, deciding they didn't want to fight someone with such a disregard for human life, especially that of his own people. To the Turks, he was a monster. In Transylvania, he's a national hero. People like Vlad Tepes beg the question of whether the end, in this case national security, justifies the means, like unspeakable cruelty. We had a version of this argument a while back when it was disclosed that, in interrogating terrorism suspects, our government authorized the use of waterboarding, for which we prosecuted the Japanese for using during World War 2. Does that make us bad? Is evil relative? Who is the final authority? If it is human government, how can we criticize Vlad Tepes or Saddam Hussein for what they did in their own countries? If it is God, then how does he see us? Should he be as ruthless as Dirty Harry in wiping out what and who is evil? If he doesn't, how can he be called good or powerful?
In Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43, Jesus deals with some of those questions. Jesus pictures a situation in which a farmer's rival has sown the seeds of weeds among his wheat. Once this becomes evident, the farmer's slaves suggest weeding the fields. But the farmer says no; the efforts to uproot the weeds would lead to the loss of some wheat. Wait until it's time to harvest the crop. At that time, the weeds can be separated. Jesus later explains that the sower is himself, the Son of Man, and the wheat and weeds are the children of the kingdom and of the evil one, respectively. They must live together in the world until the end of the world when the final judgment will sort out who is who.
Understanding this parable depends on noticing what specific question it is answering. And it is not about the existence of good and bad people, nor of the last judgment. You find those issues throughout the Bible. The unique feature about this parable is that it answers the question, "If God is all-good and all-powerful, why doesn't he eliminate all evil?" It is a question still asked by atheists hoping to prove that a good and powerful God does not exist. If God can't get rid of evil, he's not all-powerful. If he can but won't get rid of evil, then he must not be all-good. Thus the existence of evil shows that God is either not powerful or not good. Or that he doesn't exist.
The syllogism is not air-tight, however. There is another alternative. The answer Jesus gives for God not eradicating evil is that he is being merciful. What's more is God is being merciful to the good people! As we saw, the lives of the good and the bad are intertwined. The good and the bad are our friends, our relatives, our coworkers. In many cases, we don't know who is truly good or truly evil. Just as rigorous weeding would uproot some of the wheat, how could God pluck all the evil people out of the world without disrupting the lives of the good? And which of us can say without a doubt that we are among the righteous?
Parables, like all analogies, have their limits. And Jesus knows the situation is even more complex than this parable can show. There are no completely good people out there. Jesus picks up where John the Baptist left off. His message also begins with repentance. He is sent to save sinners, not the righteous. Jesus' message has a special resonance for society's notorious sinners, like corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes. Jesus knows that the righteous are not sinless but sinners who change their minds and lives and turn to God. For God to get rid of evil is for him to abort the process by which the children of the evil one become children of the kingdom.
One of the metaphors Paul uses to describe the process is that of adoption. In Romans 8, Paul says, "For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry 'Abba! Father!' it is the very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ." Adoption in the Roman era made one as fully a child as a natural born son or daughter, even in the matter of inheritance. To this, Paul adds the Semitic usage wherein the phrase "to be the child of" someone means to act like them. The children of God have his Spirit and act like him.
But learning about our God and how to behave in accordance with his Spirit takes time, just as it takes time for a child to grow to the maturity he needs to properly exercise his inheritance. It takes wisdom and self-discipline. In our passage from Genesis 28, we see the beginning of the transformation of Jacob. When we first meet him, he is a conman and trickster. He talks his brother, admittedly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, into giving up his birthright. Then, in an elaborate ruse, he impersonates his brother to steal his blessing. He is not what anyone would call a righteous person. But while fleeing his murderous brother, he has this vision of God. The Lord promises to fulfill his covenant to Abraham through Jacob. And yet, the fulfillment was years off. Jacob would meet his match in Laban, an even bigger conman than he is. Jacob will learn to work for and earn what he wants. He will have a family to provide for. He will, like his brother, have a lot to lose. And then he will go home and have to face his brother and reconcile with him. He will again see God and have his name changed to Israel. He will at last be a righteous man. But if his story ended with Jacob's ladder, he would not fulfill his potential to become the person God wanted him to be.
While a lot of people may get freaked out by the mention of the devil and the furnace of fire, the actual message of the parable is that God is merciful. He doesn't come on like Dirty Harry, taking out all the bad guys. Because we all start out as bad guys. But we can change. And thanks to God, we are given time to change. There will come a time at which God will decide that the process is done, just as there comes a time when a wise doctor realizes that a course of treatment is done. But as long as there's hope, God will not pull the plug, so to speak. And the hope, as Paul says, is for the redemption of our bodies. It is part of the redemption of the whole world, for which all of creation groans and longs. Why not? The human race, created to be just a little less than the gods, has used its powers of memory, reason and skill to really mess things up for each other and for the world in which we live. Our transformation into wise, loving stewards will transform the world as well. Paul's use of the phrase "redemption of our bodies" lets us know that Christianity has never been merely about saving souls. We were created as unities of body and spirit and the two are ultimately inseparable. That's why we say in the creed every Sunday that we look for the resurrection of the dead. The spirit gives meaning to the body; the body gives expression and impact to the spirit. God created both; God is interested in both; God will redeem both.
Unredeemed humanity's imagination has not been able to come up with a better solution to the problem of evil than "kill them all; let God sort them out!" God has a different idea. "Let me die for them all; let those who answer my call come to me and with my Spirit working through them, we will sort my new creation out."
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
The Secret is in the Soil
Remember when the big controversy fueling the news and talk shows was the presence of the Ten Commandments in government buildings? People were trying to have them removed to preserve the separation of church and state. This in turn got push back from conservatives who saw this as undercutting the Christian foundation for our society. The ironic thing is that many of the representations of the Ten Commandments had not been erected by either churches or states out of religious or civic fervor but had been donated by Paramount Pictures as a publicity campaign for the 1956 film "The Ten Commandments" directed by Cecil B. DeMille and starring Charlton Heston. I'm surprised Hollywood didn't decide to do a remake and cash in on all the public attention.
What bothered me at the time, as it had after the Columbine shootings when once again it was proposed by some that the Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms, is that both those championing these Decalogue displays and those opposing them seemed to think they were imbued with a mystical power. Did they really think that their presence would make people appearing in court spontaneously repent or convert? Or that looking at them would make teenage gunmen hunting classmates suddenly go, "'Thou shalt not kill?' D'oh! I forgot!" If so, it shows that what both sides really believe in is magic. Magic is the belief that the mere incantation of certain words will alter reality to suit someone's will. Magically endowed items are what Indiana Jones pursues in the movies. In real life, the cup that Christ used would be the greatest archeological treasure ever found. It would not, however, turn Nazis to dust or heal Sean Connery or convert Harrison Ford. It would not be an Energizer battery powered by God.
Even the scriptures do not posit Jesus himself as having this kind of power. In the 6th chapter of Mark, we are told that in his hometown of Nazareth he was able to do no deeds of power, other than heal a few of the sick. Why? Because of their unbelief. They knew him as the carpenter's son, Mary's boy, whose others sons and daughters were still living among them. He was a wise speaker, yes, but they just couldn't see him as a prophet of God. Without their trust, he couldn't do much for them.
When I wrote radio ads, I would sometimes encounter clients who expected their commercials to have a magical effect on their business. One high-toned restaurant in Key West, trying to drum up business in the doldrums of summer, tried to pass off a $27 fixed price lunch as a local's special. I tried to explain that "local's special" means something cheap and affordable and that using those words would not induce most workers in a tourist town to blow a week's lunch budget on one meal. But the salesperson who dreamt it up would not listen to reason. After running it a week with no results, the place's food and beverage manager was willing to change the ad to reach the audience that would be receptive to it.
Jesus knew this marketing truth. That's why he said in Matthew 13, where we find the parable of the sower, "Let anyone with ears listen!" The version of the passage used in our lectionary omitted some verses, obscuring the fact that Jesus explained the parable to his disciples privately. As for the others listening, Jesus quotes Isaiah to the effect that he is purposefully keeping it obscure so that its hearers will not understand it. That sounds shocking but there are 2 ways of looking at this which justify Jesus' words. The first is one I read of when researching this passage this week. The idea is that what Jesus was preaching was aimed at oppressed people and was so radical that if their oppressors understood it, they would suppress Jesus' preaching. It's an interesting theory and there are 2 things to commend it. First, that is exactly why the Book of Revelation is so hard to interpret. The writer used a lot of opaque Old Testament imagery and even a numerological code to hide his message from the Roman officials who were persecuting the church. Unfortunately, this has led some Christians to take what was intended to be a message of comfort about trusting in God's sure victory over violent persecutors into a Rorschach test for those who wish to combine bloodlust and Christianity, not noticing that Christians are depicted as non-combatants. And its numerical pattern, built around Sabbaths, attracts those who think God's Word is a cross between a Will Shortz puzzle and a Dorothy L. Sayers railway schedule mystery.
Secondly, up until the creation of the United States, religion and politics were inextricably combined. Rome usually insisted that its conquered peoples make room in their pantheons for the divine Emperor, who called himself King of kings and Lord of lords. So what might sound to us as a merely spiritual message could be perceived as a political message. The religious leaders of Judea played that card to get the belligerent Pilate, already on shaky ground with Rome, to go along with Jesus' crucifixion.
But I think something else is at work here. I opt for William Barclay's idea that Jesus is talking about people who just don't get it when it comes to spiritual wisdom. They have closed minds and though they might hear Jesus' words, they really aren't listening to the meaning. They have a kind of intentional deafness, akin to the intentional blindness that psychologists note in humans. In an experiment you can see on the internet, psychologists filmed people passing basketballs and instructed subjects watching the video to keep track of how many times the players passed the ball. People did pretty well at what they were instructed to do. But they were so focused on their task that they missed something else in the video. And it wasn't subtle at all. While the viewers were counting passes, they did not see a person in a gorilla suit saunter into the middle of the screen, beat his chest and stroll off camera. Many viewers did not believe the researchers when they were told what they had missed, until they were shown the video again. You tend to see what you expect to see. It's the same with hearing.
And the point of the parable is that, just as Jesus could not reach people who were not receptive, neither can the Word of God magically change everyone. And Jesus lists the main reasons.
For some, the word just does not penetrate. These people simply don't get it. Tell them they can have eternal life and they will cancel their life insurance. Like seed on a sidewalk, the word never gets below the surface. The next idea or desire flits by and it's gone.
Then there are the folks which do seem to react to the gospel. And how! "Eternal life? I'm all for it! Give me my WWJD bracelet and cross necklace! Slap on the "In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned" bumper sticker! Love the Praise music! Go, team Jesus!" And then things get tough. And the person has no roots. He's just not that grounded in the faith. He doesn't seem to realize that the cross around his neck stands for suffering, and that following Jesus doesn't grant you a sweeping exemption from all "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune." To be fair, such a person today may have been sold a bill of goods. If he was enticed to come to church by hearing someone preach a "prosperity gospel" that tells you that following Jesus automatically means health and wealth and invincible happiness, he may be unprepared for the reality of discipleship. I don't subscribe to that form of devotion that fetishizes suffering but neither should its existence be denied. Judaism and Christianity are 2 religions that admit that not all misfortune is caused by sin and that even the innocent suffer. But not all believers seem to have gotten the memo. And for some that's a deal breaker.
Then there are the people who may be rooted in the faith but their expression of it gets choked off by the weeds, "the cares of the world and the lure of wealth." It is interesting that Jesus lumps these 2 together. The cares of the world is better translated the "anxiety of the age." It carries a sense of distraction. So this does not rise to the level of the troubles or persecution that laid low the previous kind of believer. Here we are talking about the everyday things that continually demand our attention and chip away at our calm and our trust in God. If you let them, they will distract you and make it hard to keep your focus on God and his priorities.
To them Jesus adds the lure of wealth. And the word translated "lure" has overtones of deceit, the way a fishing lure is not a real fish or worm. When we feel well-off and prosperous, we should be thankful to God. But often that's when we forget him. We go to him in times of trial but when good times come, we are too busy enjoying our good fortune to take time for him. Plus riches do have a downside. They may solve some problems but they create others. When you have more money, you tend to spend more. You have more choices to make. You have more property to protect. You in fact have more cares of the world. And maybe that's what Jesus meant by the deceit of wealth. Studies show that after you make enough to live comfortably, any additional money doesn't really make you happier. Winning the lottery briefly makes people happier…and then they go back to however they originally felt. So unnecessary amounts of wealth do not deliver more delight. But they can crowd out the author of delight.
Finally Jesus speaks of the good soil and how the Word of God, planted there, is amazingly fruitful. Jesus doesn't define what makes this type of hearer good. One can assume that, in contrast to the others, that person has spiritual depth and is not being strangled by worldly cares and wealthy snares. But the main factor is his or her receptiveness to the Word. There are no barriers, only a desire to understand what God is saying and a willingness to put it into practice. Only then can the Word have results.
Which is why posting the Ten Commandments in public places is not going to have a magical effect on everyone seeing them. For one thing, if the words are there every day, they, like the color of the walls, will be not be noticed by those who frequent the courthouses and schoolrooms. But should someone notice, only the person who is already receptive to God's Word will get any benefit. And odds are that person already knows the words.
God knows that as long as his commandments remain external they will not work. In Jeremiah 31:33, the Lord says of his new covenant, "I will put my law in their very core and upon their hearts will I write it." Just as a seed needs more than a surface on which to grow, God's Word, his law, the expression of his true nature, cannot bear fruit if it does not burrow itself into the good soil of our hearts and minds. It must send down its roots deep within us. Only then can it grow, sprout and produce what it is supposed to.
Even the farmers of Jesus' day knew that soil didn't just remain fertile. It needed to remain fallow ever so often. It needed nutrients. It needed to be plowed and have its soil stirred up. It needed to be weeded. And it needed to get seeded properly. Just so we need our rest, the Sabbath. We need the nourishment of the fellowship of those united in the Holy Spirit. We need to have our habits of thought overturned from time to time, so we don't overlook what new and unexpected things God is trying to show us. We need to ruthlessly weed out the stuff that distracts us and lures us away from God. And we need to receive God's Word. We need to let it germinate, change and then break forth in riotous new growth. Only by receiving the Word, in all its unlikeliness, can we hope to bear sweet fruit.
What bothered me at the time, as it had after the Columbine shootings when once again it was proposed by some that the Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms, is that both those championing these Decalogue displays and those opposing them seemed to think they were imbued with a mystical power. Did they really think that their presence would make people appearing in court spontaneously repent or convert? Or that looking at them would make teenage gunmen hunting classmates suddenly go, "'Thou shalt not kill?' D'oh! I forgot!" If so, it shows that what both sides really believe in is magic. Magic is the belief that the mere incantation of certain words will alter reality to suit someone's will. Magically endowed items are what Indiana Jones pursues in the movies. In real life, the cup that Christ used would be the greatest archeological treasure ever found. It would not, however, turn Nazis to dust or heal Sean Connery or convert Harrison Ford. It would not be an Energizer battery powered by God.
Even the scriptures do not posit Jesus himself as having this kind of power. In the 6th chapter of Mark, we are told that in his hometown of Nazareth he was able to do no deeds of power, other than heal a few of the sick. Why? Because of their unbelief. They knew him as the carpenter's son, Mary's boy, whose others sons and daughters were still living among them. He was a wise speaker, yes, but they just couldn't see him as a prophet of God. Without their trust, he couldn't do much for them.
When I wrote radio ads, I would sometimes encounter clients who expected their commercials to have a magical effect on their business. One high-toned restaurant in Key West, trying to drum up business in the doldrums of summer, tried to pass off a $27 fixed price lunch as a local's special. I tried to explain that "local's special" means something cheap and affordable and that using those words would not induce most workers in a tourist town to blow a week's lunch budget on one meal. But the salesperson who dreamt it up would not listen to reason. After running it a week with no results, the place's food and beverage manager was willing to change the ad to reach the audience that would be receptive to it.
Jesus knew this marketing truth. That's why he said in Matthew 13, where we find the parable of the sower, "Let anyone with ears listen!" The version of the passage used in our lectionary omitted some verses, obscuring the fact that Jesus explained the parable to his disciples privately. As for the others listening, Jesus quotes Isaiah to the effect that he is purposefully keeping it obscure so that its hearers will not understand it. That sounds shocking but there are 2 ways of looking at this which justify Jesus' words. The first is one I read of when researching this passage this week. The idea is that what Jesus was preaching was aimed at oppressed people and was so radical that if their oppressors understood it, they would suppress Jesus' preaching. It's an interesting theory and there are 2 things to commend it. First, that is exactly why the Book of Revelation is so hard to interpret. The writer used a lot of opaque Old Testament imagery and even a numerological code to hide his message from the Roman officials who were persecuting the church. Unfortunately, this has led some Christians to take what was intended to be a message of comfort about trusting in God's sure victory over violent persecutors into a Rorschach test for those who wish to combine bloodlust and Christianity, not noticing that Christians are depicted as non-combatants. And its numerical pattern, built around Sabbaths, attracts those who think God's Word is a cross between a Will Shortz puzzle and a Dorothy L. Sayers railway schedule mystery.
Secondly, up until the creation of the United States, religion and politics were inextricably combined. Rome usually insisted that its conquered peoples make room in their pantheons for the divine Emperor, who called himself King of kings and Lord of lords. So what might sound to us as a merely spiritual message could be perceived as a political message. The religious leaders of Judea played that card to get the belligerent Pilate, already on shaky ground with Rome, to go along with Jesus' crucifixion.
But I think something else is at work here. I opt for William Barclay's idea that Jesus is talking about people who just don't get it when it comes to spiritual wisdom. They have closed minds and though they might hear Jesus' words, they really aren't listening to the meaning. They have a kind of intentional deafness, akin to the intentional blindness that psychologists note in humans. In an experiment you can see on the internet, psychologists filmed people passing basketballs and instructed subjects watching the video to keep track of how many times the players passed the ball. People did pretty well at what they were instructed to do. But they were so focused on their task that they missed something else in the video. And it wasn't subtle at all. While the viewers were counting passes, they did not see a person in a gorilla suit saunter into the middle of the screen, beat his chest and stroll off camera. Many viewers did not believe the researchers when they were told what they had missed, until they were shown the video again. You tend to see what you expect to see. It's the same with hearing.
And the point of the parable is that, just as Jesus could not reach people who were not receptive, neither can the Word of God magically change everyone. And Jesus lists the main reasons.
For some, the word just does not penetrate. These people simply don't get it. Tell them they can have eternal life and they will cancel their life insurance. Like seed on a sidewalk, the word never gets below the surface. The next idea or desire flits by and it's gone.
Then there are the folks which do seem to react to the gospel. And how! "Eternal life? I'm all for it! Give me my WWJD bracelet and cross necklace! Slap on the "In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned" bumper sticker! Love the Praise music! Go, team Jesus!" And then things get tough. And the person has no roots. He's just not that grounded in the faith. He doesn't seem to realize that the cross around his neck stands for suffering, and that following Jesus doesn't grant you a sweeping exemption from all "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune." To be fair, such a person today may have been sold a bill of goods. If he was enticed to come to church by hearing someone preach a "prosperity gospel" that tells you that following Jesus automatically means health and wealth and invincible happiness, he may be unprepared for the reality of discipleship. I don't subscribe to that form of devotion that fetishizes suffering but neither should its existence be denied. Judaism and Christianity are 2 religions that admit that not all misfortune is caused by sin and that even the innocent suffer. But not all believers seem to have gotten the memo. And for some that's a deal breaker.
Then there are the people who may be rooted in the faith but their expression of it gets choked off by the weeds, "the cares of the world and the lure of wealth." It is interesting that Jesus lumps these 2 together. The cares of the world is better translated the "anxiety of the age." It carries a sense of distraction. So this does not rise to the level of the troubles or persecution that laid low the previous kind of believer. Here we are talking about the everyday things that continually demand our attention and chip away at our calm and our trust in God. If you let them, they will distract you and make it hard to keep your focus on God and his priorities.
To them Jesus adds the lure of wealth. And the word translated "lure" has overtones of deceit, the way a fishing lure is not a real fish or worm. When we feel well-off and prosperous, we should be thankful to God. But often that's when we forget him. We go to him in times of trial but when good times come, we are too busy enjoying our good fortune to take time for him. Plus riches do have a downside. They may solve some problems but they create others. When you have more money, you tend to spend more. You have more choices to make. You have more property to protect. You in fact have more cares of the world. And maybe that's what Jesus meant by the deceit of wealth. Studies show that after you make enough to live comfortably, any additional money doesn't really make you happier. Winning the lottery briefly makes people happier…and then they go back to however they originally felt. So unnecessary amounts of wealth do not deliver more delight. But they can crowd out the author of delight.
Finally Jesus speaks of the good soil and how the Word of God, planted there, is amazingly fruitful. Jesus doesn't define what makes this type of hearer good. One can assume that, in contrast to the others, that person has spiritual depth and is not being strangled by worldly cares and wealthy snares. But the main factor is his or her receptiveness to the Word. There are no barriers, only a desire to understand what God is saying and a willingness to put it into practice. Only then can the Word have results.
Which is why posting the Ten Commandments in public places is not going to have a magical effect on everyone seeing them. For one thing, if the words are there every day, they, like the color of the walls, will be not be noticed by those who frequent the courthouses and schoolrooms. But should someone notice, only the person who is already receptive to God's Word will get any benefit. And odds are that person already knows the words.
God knows that as long as his commandments remain external they will not work. In Jeremiah 31:33, the Lord says of his new covenant, "I will put my law in their very core and upon their hearts will I write it." Just as a seed needs more than a surface on which to grow, God's Word, his law, the expression of his true nature, cannot bear fruit if it does not burrow itself into the good soil of our hearts and minds. It must send down its roots deep within us. Only then can it grow, sprout and produce what it is supposed to.
Even the farmers of Jesus' day knew that soil didn't just remain fertile. It needed to remain fallow ever so often. It needed nutrients. It needed to be plowed and have its soil stirred up. It needed to be weeded. And it needed to get seeded properly. Just so we need our rest, the Sabbath. We need the nourishment of the fellowship of those united in the Holy Spirit. We need to have our habits of thought overturned from time to time, so we don't overlook what new and unexpected things God is trying to show us. We need to ruthlessly weed out the stuff that distracts us and lures us away from God. And we need to receive God's Word. We need to let it germinate, change and then break forth in riotous new growth. Only by receiving the Word, in all its unlikeliness, can we hope to bear sweet fruit.
Monday, July 4, 2011
For a Baptism
I wrote this for a baptism. I removed the name of the child because I don't know if the parents want their child to be Google-able.
In my other job, as a nurse, I've been taking care of an infant with health issues for the better part of a year. So I've been paying attention to whether he is hitting certain developmental landmarks. And it suddenly hit me one day that this is only possible because these landmarks are programmed into us. Practically all healthy children can smile when smiled at by 3 months and smile at themselves in a mirror at 6 months. By 1 year, a healthy child should say at least one word, crawl, and walk while holding onto furniture or another person's hand. There is a range of time in which these things are achieved, of course, with some kids talking or walking a few months earlier and others a few months later. But the fact that the vast majority of children reach these landmarks at approximately the same time means this is not a random process. It is hardwired into them. If a child is very far behind in most of these, his or her doctor will suggest medical tests to see what might be causing these developmental delays.
It used to be thought that morality was not part of human pre-programming. But now we know that a sense of fairness is found in certain primates and other animals. And any parent with more than one child will tell you that they demand equality of treatment--for themselves, at least. If his sister gets a cookie, he will insist on getting one himself. And heaven forbid you should give her chocolate milk in a glass shorter than the one you give her brother. Kids don't understand how the same volume of liquid can look unequal in different diameter glasses. But aside from such basics, much of morality's finer points must be taught. Yet in our society we pretty much leave the development of moral impulses, such as fairness and empathy, into more complex moral concepts, such as justice, forgiveness and duty, to our schools, special episodes of TV shows, and occasional long talks when specific issues rear their heads. This leads to our children getting mixed messages from various sources rather than learning any kind of systematic approach to morality. It's too bad there isn't some place in every community where people could take their kids and have them educated in a comprehensive system of time-tested morality and age old wisdom! Somewhere so dedicated to teaching people how to think and act ethically that they don't charge a set fee but let people voluntarily pay whatever they can and feel they should pay. Where would you find such a place?
Today we will witness the baptism of a child. And in a few minutes, I will be asking the parents and godparents if they will bring him up in the Christian faith and life. Because baptism is not a magic spell; we are not imposing our will on reality. It is a sacrament; we are accepting God's offer of grace on behalf of this child. It is like giving him dual citizenship: that of earth and the Kingdom of God. But like all those with dual citizenship, one day he'll have to choose for himself. But how will he choose if he doesn't know the treasured heritage to which he is heir?
Forget the arguments about whether the U. S. was ever intended to be a Christian nation. Today, it is, at best, post-Christian. And I'm not talking about the fact that Americans identifying themselves as Christians has dropped from 86% to 76% of the population, or that, at most, less than 20% of the population go to church on an average Sunday. I am talking about the fact that many Christians do not live very differently than non-Christians and do not seem to know much about the Bible. The only part of the Gospel that most Christians know is that God loves us and forgives us. The necessary response to that, repentance and obedience, has been quietly dropped. And this is part of the reason we see the culture coarsening. Our society is much more indulgent towards, if not actually encouraging, rage, lust, envy, laziness, gluttony, arrogance, and, until recently, greed. Those used to be considered by Christian society as deadly sins; now they are seen as, at worst, stupid and, at best, as natural. Our leaders and celebrities flout them. Only if someone has gone too far and been caught does he make a show of regret and talk of going into rehab. I have nothing against rehab, but it seldom seems to come from a true realization that one must totally change one's lifestyle. Only a radical rethinking of how one lives will do, as anyone working in rehabilitation knows.
We have a wealth of information of the effects regular church attendance has on kids. Children who go to church at least once a week are less likely to commit crimes, less prone to drug and alcohol abuse and have higher recovery rates, less likely to have sex or get pregnant outside marriage, less likely to divorce as adults, less likely to engage in domestic abuse, less likely to commit suicide, less prone to depression and more likely to recover faster, more likely to do better in school, be happier, be healthier and live 8 years longer. If I could bottle that, I'd be a millionaire. But it's like exercise: to get the full benefit, you have to commit yourself and just do it.
We also know that a child's church attendance is usually dependent upon his parent's attendance, especially that of the father. And, of course, it doesn't work as well if the things they learn in church are not modeled in the home. Children have first rate BS detectors. If your works do not match your words, they will see that and live their lives accordingly.
So it is with faith and hope and love that his parents and godparents present this child and make these promises on his behalf. They will vow to renounce all evil, be it spiritual, worldly or personal. They will promise to turn to Jesus Christ, accept him as Savior, trust, obey and follow him as Lord. And then we will all of us renew our own baptismal vows, to continue in the apostle's teachings and fellowship, in the breaking of the bread and prayers. We will vow to persist in resisting evil, to repent when we do wrong, to proclaim the Gospel by with our lips and in our lives, to seek and serve Christ in all people and to work for justice, peace and dignity for all created in God's image. We are conspiring, so to speak, to be Christlike and raise this child to be the same.
And we all need to be reminded periodically of what that entails, because we are all developing short attention spans and humans are already terrible at spotting slow motion threats. Thus we are only vaguely aware of the things gradually eroding our faith. Like the sense that all is or will be well. The vast majority of scientists see the signs of global climate change but absent something with the scale and speed of a Hollywood disaster, much of the public doesn't perceive it as worrisome. So, too, we Christians have let essential articles of the faith be silently dropped from serious consideration because of the relentless waves of materialism, secularism, hedonism and political correctness. The proclamation that there is one God, revealed in Scripture as our righteous and loving creator, is dismissed as naïve. The uniqueness of the Incarnation of God in Christ is denounced as exclusivist. The death of Christ on the cross for our sins is seen not as a revelation of God's deep love but of his barbarism. Jesus' bodily resurrection from the dead is considered irreconcilable with science. And his command to go throughout the world and teach others to believe in and follow him is intrusive on other cultures. Other systems of thought may assert themselves wherever they wish but for us to do so is thought disruptive. And so we are left with a timid inoffensive message that would not seem out of place in a greeting card and which is just as memorable a call to action.
And action is what we need today. But not just any kind of action. We need action based on the affirmation that God created this world, pronounced it good and is working to make it so again. We need action based on the belief that God so loved the world that he entered it in the form of Jesus Christ so that in him we see both what God is like and what we can become. We need action based on the example of God's self-sacrificial love revealed in Christ willingly crucified to save us from our sins. We need action based on the proclamation that God raised Jesus from the dead, so we need not fear anything in following Jesus. And we need action based on Jesus' command to share the Good News about what God has done and is doing in Christ, to make disciples and spread his reign and his kingdom.
Don't worry: we are not putting all this on this child. But he has a part, large or small, to play in God's plan. Even if his role is small, we know that from God's point of view, size and importance are two different things. David was the smallest of his brothers but God selected him to become a great king. The mustard seed was the smallest that the ancient Jews knew and yet it grew into a huge plant. We don't know this child's destiny. But our task is to make sure he is planted on solid ground, to properly nourish his body, mind and spirit and then watch him blossom.
In my other job, as a nurse, I've been taking care of an infant with health issues for the better part of a year. So I've been paying attention to whether he is hitting certain developmental landmarks. And it suddenly hit me one day that this is only possible because these landmarks are programmed into us. Practically all healthy children can smile when smiled at by 3 months and smile at themselves in a mirror at 6 months. By 1 year, a healthy child should say at least one word, crawl, and walk while holding onto furniture or another person's hand. There is a range of time in which these things are achieved, of course, with some kids talking or walking a few months earlier and others a few months later. But the fact that the vast majority of children reach these landmarks at approximately the same time means this is not a random process. It is hardwired into them. If a child is very far behind in most of these, his or her doctor will suggest medical tests to see what might be causing these developmental delays.
It used to be thought that morality was not part of human pre-programming. But now we know that a sense of fairness is found in certain primates and other animals. And any parent with more than one child will tell you that they demand equality of treatment--for themselves, at least. If his sister gets a cookie, he will insist on getting one himself. And heaven forbid you should give her chocolate milk in a glass shorter than the one you give her brother. Kids don't understand how the same volume of liquid can look unequal in different diameter glasses. But aside from such basics, much of morality's finer points must be taught. Yet in our society we pretty much leave the development of moral impulses, such as fairness and empathy, into more complex moral concepts, such as justice, forgiveness and duty, to our schools, special episodes of TV shows, and occasional long talks when specific issues rear their heads. This leads to our children getting mixed messages from various sources rather than learning any kind of systematic approach to morality. It's too bad there isn't some place in every community where people could take their kids and have them educated in a comprehensive system of time-tested morality and age old wisdom! Somewhere so dedicated to teaching people how to think and act ethically that they don't charge a set fee but let people voluntarily pay whatever they can and feel they should pay. Where would you find such a place?
Today we will witness the baptism of a child. And in a few minutes, I will be asking the parents and godparents if they will bring him up in the Christian faith and life. Because baptism is not a magic spell; we are not imposing our will on reality. It is a sacrament; we are accepting God's offer of grace on behalf of this child. It is like giving him dual citizenship: that of earth and the Kingdom of God. But like all those with dual citizenship, one day he'll have to choose for himself. But how will he choose if he doesn't know the treasured heritage to which he is heir?
Forget the arguments about whether the U. S. was ever intended to be a Christian nation. Today, it is, at best, post-Christian. And I'm not talking about the fact that Americans identifying themselves as Christians has dropped from 86% to 76% of the population, or that, at most, less than 20% of the population go to church on an average Sunday. I am talking about the fact that many Christians do not live very differently than non-Christians and do not seem to know much about the Bible. The only part of the Gospel that most Christians know is that God loves us and forgives us. The necessary response to that, repentance and obedience, has been quietly dropped. And this is part of the reason we see the culture coarsening. Our society is much more indulgent towards, if not actually encouraging, rage, lust, envy, laziness, gluttony, arrogance, and, until recently, greed. Those used to be considered by Christian society as deadly sins; now they are seen as, at worst, stupid and, at best, as natural. Our leaders and celebrities flout them. Only if someone has gone too far and been caught does he make a show of regret and talk of going into rehab. I have nothing against rehab, but it seldom seems to come from a true realization that one must totally change one's lifestyle. Only a radical rethinking of how one lives will do, as anyone working in rehabilitation knows.
We have a wealth of information of the effects regular church attendance has on kids. Children who go to church at least once a week are less likely to commit crimes, less prone to drug and alcohol abuse and have higher recovery rates, less likely to have sex or get pregnant outside marriage, less likely to divorce as adults, less likely to engage in domestic abuse, less likely to commit suicide, less prone to depression and more likely to recover faster, more likely to do better in school, be happier, be healthier and live 8 years longer. If I could bottle that, I'd be a millionaire. But it's like exercise: to get the full benefit, you have to commit yourself and just do it.
We also know that a child's church attendance is usually dependent upon his parent's attendance, especially that of the father. And, of course, it doesn't work as well if the things they learn in church are not modeled in the home. Children have first rate BS detectors. If your works do not match your words, they will see that and live their lives accordingly.
So it is with faith and hope and love that his parents and godparents present this child and make these promises on his behalf. They will vow to renounce all evil, be it spiritual, worldly or personal. They will promise to turn to Jesus Christ, accept him as Savior, trust, obey and follow him as Lord. And then we will all of us renew our own baptismal vows, to continue in the apostle's teachings and fellowship, in the breaking of the bread and prayers. We will vow to persist in resisting evil, to repent when we do wrong, to proclaim the Gospel by with our lips and in our lives, to seek and serve Christ in all people and to work for justice, peace and dignity for all created in God's image. We are conspiring, so to speak, to be Christlike and raise this child to be the same.
And we all need to be reminded periodically of what that entails, because we are all developing short attention spans and humans are already terrible at spotting slow motion threats. Thus we are only vaguely aware of the things gradually eroding our faith. Like the sense that all is or will be well. The vast majority of scientists see the signs of global climate change but absent something with the scale and speed of a Hollywood disaster, much of the public doesn't perceive it as worrisome. So, too, we Christians have let essential articles of the faith be silently dropped from serious consideration because of the relentless waves of materialism, secularism, hedonism and political correctness. The proclamation that there is one God, revealed in Scripture as our righteous and loving creator, is dismissed as naïve. The uniqueness of the Incarnation of God in Christ is denounced as exclusivist. The death of Christ on the cross for our sins is seen not as a revelation of God's deep love but of his barbarism. Jesus' bodily resurrection from the dead is considered irreconcilable with science. And his command to go throughout the world and teach others to believe in and follow him is intrusive on other cultures. Other systems of thought may assert themselves wherever they wish but for us to do so is thought disruptive. And so we are left with a timid inoffensive message that would not seem out of place in a greeting card and which is just as memorable a call to action.
And action is what we need today. But not just any kind of action. We need action based on the affirmation that God created this world, pronounced it good and is working to make it so again. We need action based on the belief that God so loved the world that he entered it in the form of Jesus Christ so that in him we see both what God is like and what we can become. We need action based on the example of God's self-sacrificial love revealed in Christ willingly crucified to save us from our sins. We need action based on the proclamation that God raised Jesus from the dead, so we need not fear anything in following Jesus. And we need action based on Jesus' command to share the Good News about what God has done and is doing in Christ, to make disciples and spread his reign and his kingdom.
Don't worry: we are not putting all this on this child. But he has a part, large or small, to play in God's plan. Even if his role is small, we know that from God's point of view, size and importance are two different things. David was the smallest of his brothers but God selected him to become a great king. The mustard seed was the smallest that the ancient Jews knew and yet it grew into a huge plant. We don't know this child's destiny. But our task is to make sure he is planted on solid ground, to properly nourish his body, mind and spirit and then watch him blossom.
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Gotta Serve Somebody
There are a lot of things that go into good writing. Spelling and grammar are important, of course, as is the ability to choose the right words. But I think what is essential to really good writing is the ability to select precisely the right analogy. A lot of writing, whether fiction or non-fiction, revolves around making comparisons. When communicating to another person, you want the same thoughts that are going through your head to go through his or her head, and often, the same feelings as well. Sometimes a mere recitation of facts won't do. If you want to communicate a rather abstract process, the best way to do so is to pick as a metaphor something your audience recognizes and understands. So Einstein's theory of general relativity, as it relates to the distortions of space-time caused by the gravity of massive objects, might be best illustrated by asking people to imagine a large rubber sheet which is holding up a bowling ball, representing a large planet. I have heard financial reporters describe the way Wall Street has been operating for the last couple of decades as being almost indistinguishable from a casino. And the infatuation of love has been described as an addiction, something neuro-scientists say is right on the money.
In Romans 6:12-23, Paul uses the analogy of slavery both for being dominated by sin as well as for serving God. And though slavery was a very ancient, universally practiced and legal activity, that analogy might be hard to digest for modern readers. First, because in the West, we don't really don't have any first hand knowledge of slavery. What we know is influenced by the specific kind of slavery we used to have in this country. And, secondly, we see slavery as such a great evil that we cannot see it as a metaphor for anything good. So I'm going to first give a brief description of slavery in Roman times. And then I will suggest a metaphor that may make it easier for believers today to understand what Paul was getting at.
In the US, when we hear about slavery, we think of how it was practiced here until after the Civil War, that is, a racial, involuntary, and lifelong condition. Slaves in the US were not educated (it was illegal) and were confined to menial or manual labor. But slavery in ancient Israel was more complex. There were many ways in which one could have become a slave. One could have been captured in a war. One's parents could have been slaves and so in that case, any children they had were automatically slaves. Children might be sold into slavery by desperate parents. Worse, unwanted infants born to poor parents were often just left in a field or by a road to die. Some were fortunate enough to be rescued and raised as slaves. Or, finally, one could have sold oneself into slavery to work off a debt. In this last case, sheer survival motivated these slaves. Biblical laws protected them and ensured they were fed and clothed. A master could adopt a slave and make him his heir. A slave could own property, make money, save it and buy him or herself out of slavery. Or a relative could redeem someone who had become a slave for financial reasons. And all such slaves were freed every 7 years and during the Jubilee year, observed twice a century. The kind of slavery found in ancient Israel was therefore neither racial, lifelong nor necessarily involuntary.
Even in the Roman Empire, where slaves were considered chattel, they could be educated and become doctors, teachers, or even civil servants in fairly high positions. Some of the Church's early bishops were slaves. So slavery, while not an ideal state, was not as hopeless a position in which to find oneself as we think today.
Thus when Paul uses slavery, it is not entirely a negative term, especially if one had a good and fair master. And he is saying here that one either serves sin or serves God. To Christians he says, "you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God…" So we should not be serving our old master. We are no longer under his domination. And it's a good thing, too, for to remain enslaved to sin leads ultimately to death, eternal separation from God, the source of all that is good. Serving God leads to eternal life in Christ Jesus. It's a clear-cut choice.
But the use of the term "slavery" makes the metaphor a problem today. So I want to propose a different metaphor: that of addiction.
I've used addiction as an analogy for sin before, having seen and treated patients suffering from it. And this week, as I was contemplating the passage in Romans, I heard an episode of "Fresh Air with Terry Gross" in which she interviewed David Linden, professor of neuroscience at John Hopkins University School of Medicine. In his new book, "The Compass of Pleasure," Linden explains how addiction works in the brain. Addicts actually have an impaired ability to experience pleasure. When doing things others find pleasurable, their brains do not secrete the same amount of dopamine, the reward chemical. So whereas a normal person might get a buzz after one or 2 drinks, an alcoholic may have to drink 6 or more to get the same effect. The problem is that this pushes the addict to overdo things that are fine in moderation, like eating or sex, but have negative consequences when taken to excess. And if their particular addiction is to something that is not even safe at low levels, like heroin or cocaine, they may eventually overdose. The odd thing is that, even if the thing they are addicted to gave them pleasure at first, eventually it loses that ability and they simply continue so as to avoid the awful effects of stopping. As many smokers will tell you, they no longer enjoy it; it has become something akin to a need. Quitting is very daunting. Withdrawal from certain hard drugs will not only be extremely painful and sickening but can be dangerous if not properly monitored. And ironically, forcing your body to secrete dopamine artificially damages its ability to do so naturally. The recovering addict may find himself in worse shape when it comes to feeling happy.
It's not hopeless. People do get weaned from drugs, alcohol, overeating, gambling, and compulsively seeking sex. But it almost always requires getting help. And one of the most effective ways is through the 12-step program. In a little over 2 weeks Alcoholics Anonymous will see its 76th anniversary. As Dr. Drew Pinsky says, "In my 20 years of treating addicts, I've never seen anything else that comes close to the 12 steps….In my world, if someone says they don't want to do the 12 steps, I know they aren't going to get better."
But how does addiction make a more insightful analogy for sin today than slavery?
First, there is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors in both addiction and sin. An addict has a genetic flaw that makes him or her susceptible. Yet if he or she never starts the addictive behavior, he will not succumb. 80% of those who try smoking will become addicted to it. (Only 30% of those who try heroin become addicted to it.) But 100% of those who never try it will not develop the habit. In Genesis 4:7 God tells Cain, "If you do well, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it." God is saying that the possibility of sin is always there but it can only get its hooks into us if we let it. The problem is, we do let it. We give in to selfishness, to rage, to lust, to greed, to laziness, to envy, to gluttony, to arrogance. Once we open that door, sin, like addiction, gets in the driver's seat and takes control of our lives.
So are we responsible or not? Linden makes an important distinction. If addiction is a disease, one cannot condemn a person for having it, anymore than we condemn a person for having heart disease. Linden tells Terry Gross "We should say, okay, well, you're an addict. You have something wrong with your brain the way this other guy had something wrong with his heart. But it's not a free ride. Now that you know you're an addict, you better get in treatment. You should do stress reduction strategies. You should avoid the triggers for your addiction. You should be in a group that can offer you social support. And if you don't do those things, it's your own darn fault." As a nurse, I've been telling patients with diseases the same thing for years. Even with a disease like diabetes, while you may not be responsible for having the illness, if you don't follow the rules for treating it, you will be responsible for the escalating complications of it.
Notice that Linden specifically mentions things like stress reduction. Prayer and worship have been scientifically shown to reduce stress. He says to avoid triggers for your addiction. It's been shown that even seeing places where one used to buy drugs or shoot up trigger cravings in addicts. We call them temptations. Linden talks about being in a group that offers social support. He's talking about group therapy or a 12-step group. The 12-step movement was started by 2 Christians, one an Episcopalian, who were alcoholics. The first step involves admitting one has no control over one's addiction. And the next step is coming to believe that there is a power greater than oneself that can restore the addict. Step 3 is turning over one's life and will to God however one understands God. Basically, the 12 Steps involve what the church calls humility, faith, repentance, confession, prayer and evangelism. The group is like a church in that it is a bunch of people coming together with the purpose of supporting each other in changing their lives for the better.
So maybe addiction is a good analogy for being dominated by sin. But Paul talks of being enslaved to God. Surely the metaphor of addiction is inappropriate in speaking of devotion to God.
This week I also read that love can be compared to addiction. The same reward system in the brain is activated. And anyone whose ever gone through a break up can agree with scientists that it is a form of withdrawal that can affect our sleep, eating, concentration, mood and more. But we would not say that love is something to be avoided. In fact, on the Diane Rehm show, a study showed that love, marriage and kids were all major reasons that can motivate long-time offenders to abandon a criminal career. To break an addiction, you need something stronger than the thing that enslaves you. If love for a person or your children can do it, how much more can love of God free you?
Sin, like addictions, can promise to give us the pleasure we feel we are missing in life. But like addictions, sin really can't do the job and we often end up caught in patterns of behavior that we really hate but are afraid to abandon lest we face an awful emptiness. God's love can fill that void. He can liberate us from the self-destructive habits that enchain us. By giving our lives to him, praying, worshiping, maintaining spiritually and morally healthy practices and seeking the support of a group of like-minded people, we can find a life of true pleasure. As Psalm 34:8 says, "O taste and see that the Lord is good."
As Bob Dylan sang, "You're gonna have to serve somebody." The choice is ours. We can fall victim to the law of diminishing returns that comes when we try to find pleasure in things, or we can obey the law Jesus pronounced the greatest of all: to love God with all we are and have. If we do that, we will find that loving those created in God's image, including ourselves, follows naturally. I can think of worse fates than being hooked on a life of loving God and his creatures.
In Romans 6:12-23, Paul uses the analogy of slavery both for being dominated by sin as well as for serving God. And though slavery was a very ancient, universally practiced and legal activity, that analogy might be hard to digest for modern readers. First, because in the West, we don't really don't have any first hand knowledge of slavery. What we know is influenced by the specific kind of slavery we used to have in this country. And, secondly, we see slavery as such a great evil that we cannot see it as a metaphor for anything good. So I'm going to first give a brief description of slavery in Roman times. And then I will suggest a metaphor that may make it easier for believers today to understand what Paul was getting at.
In the US, when we hear about slavery, we think of how it was practiced here until after the Civil War, that is, a racial, involuntary, and lifelong condition. Slaves in the US were not educated (it was illegal) and were confined to menial or manual labor. But slavery in ancient Israel was more complex. There were many ways in which one could have become a slave. One could have been captured in a war. One's parents could have been slaves and so in that case, any children they had were automatically slaves. Children might be sold into slavery by desperate parents. Worse, unwanted infants born to poor parents were often just left in a field or by a road to die. Some were fortunate enough to be rescued and raised as slaves. Or, finally, one could have sold oneself into slavery to work off a debt. In this last case, sheer survival motivated these slaves. Biblical laws protected them and ensured they were fed and clothed. A master could adopt a slave and make him his heir. A slave could own property, make money, save it and buy him or herself out of slavery. Or a relative could redeem someone who had become a slave for financial reasons. And all such slaves were freed every 7 years and during the Jubilee year, observed twice a century. The kind of slavery found in ancient Israel was therefore neither racial, lifelong nor necessarily involuntary.
Even in the Roman Empire, where slaves were considered chattel, they could be educated and become doctors, teachers, or even civil servants in fairly high positions. Some of the Church's early bishops were slaves. So slavery, while not an ideal state, was not as hopeless a position in which to find oneself as we think today.
Thus when Paul uses slavery, it is not entirely a negative term, especially if one had a good and fair master. And he is saying here that one either serves sin or serves God. To Christians he says, "you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God…" So we should not be serving our old master. We are no longer under his domination. And it's a good thing, too, for to remain enslaved to sin leads ultimately to death, eternal separation from God, the source of all that is good. Serving God leads to eternal life in Christ Jesus. It's a clear-cut choice.
But the use of the term "slavery" makes the metaphor a problem today. So I want to propose a different metaphor: that of addiction.
I've used addiction as an analogy for sin before, having seen and treated patients suffering from it. And this week, as I was contemplating the passage in Romans, I heard an episode of "Fresh Air with Terry Gross" in which she interviewed David Linden, professor of neuroscience at John Hopkins University School of Medicine. In his new book, "The Compass of Pleasure," Linden explains how addiction works in the brain. Addicts actually have an impaired ability to experience pleasure. When doing things others find pleasurable, their brains do not secrete the same amount of dopamine, the reward chemical. So whereas a normal person might get a buzz after one or 2 drinks, an alcoholic may have to drink 6 or more to get the same effect. The problem is that this pushes the addict to overdo things that are fine in moderation, like eating or sex, but have negative consequences when taken to excess. And if their particular addiction is to something that is not even safe at low levels, like heroin or cocaine, they may eventually overdose. The odd thing is that, even if the thing they are addicted to gave them pleasure at first, eventually it loses that ability and they simply continue so as to avoid the awful effects of stopping. As many smokers will tell you, they no longer enjoy it; it has become something akin to a need. Quitting is very daunting. Withdrawal from certain hard drugs will not only be extremely painful and sickening but can be dangerous if not properly monitored. And ironically, forcing your body to secrete dopamine artificially damages its ability to do so naturally. The recovering addict may find himself in worse shape when it comes to feeling happy.
It's not hopeless. People do get weaned from drugs, alcohol, overeating, gambling, and compulsively seeking sex. But it almost always requires getting help. And one of the most effective ways is through the 12-step program. In a little over 2 weeks Alcoholics Anonymous will see its 76th anniversary. As Dr. Drew Pinsky says, "In my 20 years of treating addicts, I've never seen anything else that comes close to the 12 steps….In my world, if someone says they don't want to do the 12 steps, I know they aren't going to get better."
But how does addiction make a more insightful analogy for sin today than slavery?
First, there is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors in both addiction and sin. An addict has a genetic flaw that makes him or her susceptible. Yet if he or she never starts the addictive behavior, he will not succumb. 80% of those who try smoking will become addicted to it. (Only 30% of those who try heroin become addicted to it.) But 100% of those who never try it will not develop the habit. In Genesis 4:7 God tells Cain, "If you do well, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it." God is saying that the possibility of sin is always there but it can only get its hooks into us if we let it. The problem is, we do let it. We give in to selfishness, to rage, to lust, to greed, to laziness, to envy, to gluttony, to arrogance. Once we open that door, sin, like addiction, gets in the driver's seat and takes control of our lives.
So are we responsible or not? Linden makes an important distinction. If addiction is a disease, one cannot condemn a person for having it, anymore than we condemn a person for having heart disease. Linden tells Terry Gross "We should say, okay, well, you're an addict. You have something wrong with your brain the way this other guy had something wrong with his heart. But it's not a free ride. Now that you know you're an addict, you better get in treatment. You should do stress reduction strategies. You should avoid the triggers for your addiction. You should be in a group that can offer you social support. And if you don't do those things, it's your own darn fault." As a nurse, I've been telling patients with diseases the same thing for years. Even with a disease like diabetes, while you may not be responsible for having the illness, if you don't follow the rules for treating it, you will be responsible for the escalating complications of it.
Notice that Linden specifically mentions things like stress reduction. Prayer and worship have been scientifically shown to reduce stress. He says to avoid triggers for your addiction. It's been shown that even seeing places where one used to buy drugs or shoot up trigger cravings in addicts. We call them temptations. Linden talks about being in a group that offers social support. He's talking about group therapy or a 12-step group. The 12-step movement was started by 2 Christians, one an Episcopalian, who were alcoholics. The first step involves admitting one has no control over one's addiction. And the next step is coming to believe that there is a power greater than oneself that can restore the addict. Step 3 is turning over one's life and will to God however one understands God. Basically, the 12 Steps involve what the church calls humility, faith, repentance, confession, prayer and evangelism. The group is like a church in that it is a bunch of people coming together with the purpose of supporting each other in changing their lives for the better.
So maybe addiction is a good analogy for being dominated by sin. But Paul talks of being enslaved to God. Surely the metaphor of addiction is inappropriate in speaking of devotion to God.
This week I also read that love can be compared to addiction. The same reward system in the brain is activated. And anyone whose ever gone through a break up can agree with scientists that it is a form of withdrawal that can affect our sleep, eating, concentration, mood and more. But we would not say that love is something to be avoided. In fact, on the Diane Rehm show, a study showed that love, marriage and kids were all major reasons that can motivate long-time offenders to abandon a criminal career. To break an addiction, you need something stronger than the thing that enslaves you. If love for a person or your children can do it, how much more can love of God free you?
Sin, like addictions, can promise to give us the pleasure we feel we are missing in life. But like addictions, sin really can't do the job and we often end up caught in patterns of behavior that we really hate but are afraid to abandon lest we face an awful emptiness. God's love can fill that void. He can liberate us from the self-destructive habits that enchain us. By giving our lives to him, praying, worshiping, maintaining spiritually and morally healthy practices and seeking the support of a group of like-minded people, we can find a life of true pleasure. As Psalm 34:8 says, "O taste and see that the Lord is good."
As Bob Dylan sang, "You're gonna have to serve somebody." The choice is ours. We can fall victim to the law of diminishing returns that comes when we try to find pleasure in things, or we can obey the law Jesus pronounced the greatest of all: to love God with all we are and have. If we do that, we will find that loving those created in God's image, including ourselves, follows naturally. I can think of worse fates than being hooked on a life of loving God and his creatures.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Word of Power
Harold Camping, the radio preacher who predicted the Rapture would come last May, had a stroke recently. His speech has been slurred. Some people see this as punishment from God for being a false prophet. (What an unfortunate time to be an atheist! All they can say is that it is meaningless happenstance, nothing more.)
I think the disappointment, humiliation and universal scorn he had to bear might have had a lot to do with the 89 year old's health problems. What is ironic is that instead of seeing the end of the world at large, he has instead witnessed the end of his world as a authoritative preacher of the Bible. Very few of his former listeners are going to pay attention to him, should he return to the airwaves. The board of his Family Radio network is going to be questioning the wisdom of spending 100 million dollars on advertising a wrong rapture date. This isn't going to help their contributions either. This isn't a time for gloating; it's a tragic ending to a hitherto impressive career.
Like a lot of people who have disgraced themselves in the ministry, Camping lost sight of the heart of the faith: the Gospel. The word means good news. It is the good news how God in Christ is working to redeem the world, not smash it to pieces like a frustrated child. It is surprising how little of the Bible is apocalyptic: 2 books and a handful of chapters scattered among 66 books. The fact that it draws so much attention in certain sections of the Church says more about them than about God. It's like someone constantly rehashing how bloody it will be when the surgeon cuts the patient open and ignoring the fact that the patient will have a better life ahead of him.
Today we read the entire first chapter of Genesis. Never mind the controversy of whether it's bad science or good poetry; notice how lovingly the creation is described. God creates not just vegetation but, according to Everett Fox's closer translation "sprouting-growth, plants that seed forth seed, fruit trees that yield fruit, after their kind and in which is their seed." God doesn't just create life but says, "Let the waters swarm with a swarm of living things, and let fowl fly above the earth, across the dome of the heavens!" And then "Let the earth bring forth living beings after their kind, herd-animals, crawling things, and the wildlife of the earth after its kind." And after making each, God sees that they are good and blesses them. This is not a mere catalogue; this is a craftsman looking over his work, lingering on the details and saying, "I did a good job." And he's not eager to see it thrown in the dumpster. He's going to restore it, however hard it will be.
And he's going to do it with his word, his God-breathed word. That's the literal translation of the Greek term usually rendered "inspired by God." God weaves the world into existence with his words. And he uses words to restore it. He calls Abraham, sends him to the distant land of Canaan, and makes a agreement, a covenant, with him. All words but words of power. He calls Moses, sends him to Egypt to free his people, and at Sinai, he makes them a people by binding them to him in a covenant. The preamble of that covenant becomes the basis of the ethics of the Western world. They are called in Hebrew "the Ten Words." God-breathed words. Words of power.
God's people want a king. God calls David, the legend against which all subsequent kings are measured. But the power of the kingship seduces. God calls the prophets, who speak his words of judgment to the powerful and his words of comfort to the powerless. Through the prophets, God calls his people back to the Spirit of his original words. The people listen and then forget. They do this over and over until they are so lost, they end up exiles. Then they remember and write down his words. And they put his words into action. They become people of the Book, God's Word. God-breathed words. Words of power.
The people return home as God promised but they squander their freedom. Their would-be king seizes power with the help of a powerful empire, who becomes the new oppressor of God's people. Starved for God's word, the people cry out. And God sends his Word, his living Word, his deepest expression of himself, to his people, as one of his people. And he speaks words of power. They try to silence the living Word with the power of death. But the Word cannot stay silent, cannot stay buried, cannot be stopped. And the living Word sends out his disciples, his students, to speak his word to others and make them students. And the word spreads. And the word, the God-breathed word, is love, the most powerful word there is.
Since then the word has covered the world. But we haven't always trusted the power of the God-breathed word of love. We have trusted in our own power, our power to manipulate, to intimidate, to harm, to kill. And we have tried to spread the word that way. And people don't trust the word of love when it hides behind the point of a sword. If we trusted the power of the word, we wouldn't need a sword, a least not one of iron or steel. When Paul describes the armor of God in Ephesians 6, the only thing that is not purely defensive is "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."
God made the world with words of power. He will recreate it the same way. He has entrusted to us the words of power. If we mean it when we say them, if we live what we say, who can stop the power of the God-breathed word of love?
I think the disappointment, humiliation and universal scorn he had to bear might have had a lot to do with the 89 year old's health problems. What is ironic is that instead of seeing the end of the world at large, he has instead witnessed the end of his world as a authoritative preacher of the Bible. Very few of his former listeners are going to pay attention to him, should he return to the airwaves. The board of his Family Radio network is going to be questioning the wisdom of spending 100 million dollars on advertising a wrong rapture date. This isn't going to help their contributions either. This isn't a time for gloating; it's a tragic ending to a hitherto impressive career.
Like a lot of people who have disgraced themselves in the ministry, Camping lost sight of the heart of the faith: the Gospel. The word means good news. It is the good news how God in Christ is working to redeem the world, not smash it to pieces like a frustrated child. It is surprising how little of the Bible is apocalyptic: 2 books and a handful of chapters scattered among 66 books. The fact that it draws so much attention in certain sections of the Church says more about them than about God. It's like someone constantly rehashing how bloody it will be when the surgeon cuts the patient open and ignoring the fact that the patient will have a better life ahead of him.
Today we read the entire first chapter of Genesis. Never mind the controversy of whether it's bad science or good poetry; notice how lovingly the creation is described. God creates not just vegetation but, according to Everett Fox's closer translation "sprouting-growth, plants that seed forth seed, fruit trees that yield fruit, after their kind and in which is their seed." God doesn't just create life but says, "Let the waters swarm with a swarm of living things, and let fowl fly above the earth, across the dome of the heavens!" And then "Let the earth bring forth living beings after their kind, herd-animals, crawling things, and the wildlife of the earth after its kind." And after making each, God sees that they are good and blesses them. This is not a mere catalogue; this is a craftsman looking over his work, lingering on the details and saying, "I did a good job." And he's not eager to see it thrown in the dumpster. He's going to restore it, however hard it will be.
And he's going to do it with his word, his God-breathed word. That's the literal translation of the Greek term usually rendered "inspired by God." God weaves the world into existence with his words. And he uses words to restore it. He calls Abraham, sends him to the distant land of Canaan, and makes a agreement, a covenant, with him. All words but words of power. He calls Moses, sends him to Egypt to free his people, and at Sinai, he makes them a people by binding them to him in a covenant. The preamble of that covenant becomes the basis of the ethics of the Western world. They are called in Hebrew "the Ten Words." God-breathed words. Words of power.
God's people want a king. God calls David, the legend against which all subsequent kings are measured. But the power of the kingship seduces. God calls the prophets, who speak his words of judgment to the powerful and his words of comfort to the powerless. Through the prophets, God calls his people back to the Spirit of his original words. The people listen and then forget. They do this over and over until they are so lost, they end up exiles. Then they remember and write down his words. And they put his words into action. They become people of the Book, God's Word. God-breathed words. Words of power.
The people return home as God promised but they squander their freedom. Their would-be king seizes power with the help of a powerful empire, who becomes the new oppressor of God's people. Starved for God's word, the people cry out. And God sends his Word, his living Word, his deepest expression of himself, to his people, as one of his people. And he speaks words of power. They try to silence the living Word with the power of death. But the Word cannot stay silent, cannot stay buried, cannot be stopped. And the living Word sends out his disciples, his students, to speak his word to others and make them students. And the word spreads. And the word, the God-breathed word, is love, the most powerful word there is.
Since then the word has covered the world. But we haven't always trusted the power of the God-breathed word of love. We have trusted in our own power, our power to manipulate, to intimidate, to harm, to kill. And we have tried to spread the word that way. And people don't trust the word of love when it hides behind the point of a sword. If we trusted the power of the word, we wouldn't need a sword, a least not one of iron or steel. When Paul describes the armor of God in Ephesians 6, the only thing that is not purely defensive is "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."
God made the world with words of power. He will recreate it the same way. He has entrusted to us the words of power. If we mean it when we say them, if we live what we say, who can stop the power of the God-breathed word of love?
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Catching the Spirit
A lot of us are eagerly awaiting the Avengers movie. Not only will this film feature Captain America, Iron Man, Thor and the Incredible Hulk but it's written and directed by Joss Whedon. Besides doing movies and TV, most notably "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Serenity," Joss has written comic books. So we know he will do it right. It's only too bad he didn't do the other Avengers film, by which I mean, not the Marvel Comics superhero team but the movie version of the 1960s British spy series. At a time when everyone was trying to do a TV series that looked like the James Bond films, this show mixed satire with sci fi and spy tropes and came up with a wonderfully frothy confection. A key element was the chemistry of the lead characters, played by Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg. Macnee played John Steed, a smiling secret agent in a Saville Row suit complete with bowler hat and umbrella. Rigg played Emma Peel, a cool beauty who dressed in Carnaby Street mod clothes and was a master of the martial arts. They symbolically represented Old England and Swinging London. The sexual tension between the characters and their tongue-in-cheek approach to the bizarre threats they faced made the program a hit on both sides of the Atlantic. When the inevitable movie remake came out in 1998, the notable cast included Ralph Fiennes, Uma Thurman and Sean Connery. But Fiennes' Steed was dour, not jovial; Thurman's Peel was frantic, not coolly confident; and Connery uncharacteristically chewed the scenery as the villain. The result was a movie that totally missed the spirit of the original. I wish I'd never seen it.
As someone who has seen and read far too many bad versions of Sherlock Holmes, I can tell you that it's not enough to get the superficial details right about a character being portrayed. You need to capture his or her spirit. Thus all the pipes and deerstalker caps in the world could not get a good Holmes out of Roger Moore, Stewart Granger or even Tom Baker. Whereas Peter Cushing, Jeremy Brett and even Benedict Cumberbatch's updated Sherlock got the character's personality perfectly, even though each brought something different to the role. This is even more noticeable in Doctor Who. Each actor who plays the role brings something new to the title character. The Doctor can be heroic, wily, rude, inoffensive, madcap, or formidable but always he is the same person, a champion of justice who uses his brain rather than brawn, and who encourages others to act their best.
The problem with talking about the spirit of something or someone is that it is notoriously hard to define. It's easy to say that Richard Roxburgh's Holmes was all wrong because he portrayed the Great Detective as a hardboiled private eye who beat information out of his suspects. It's tougher to put one's finger on how that is different from Robert Downey Jr.'s action hero version, who, while he did display prominently Holmes' canonical prowess at fisticuffs, fencing, and the single stick, somehow managed to play him as a person who thought first and fought only or mainly when necessary. It comes down to a matter of emphasis and is best seen by contrasting it to something that is antithetical to the spirit you are seeking.
Sunday was Pentecost, the anniversary of when the Holy Spirit was poured out liberally on the disciples and kicked off the growth of the church. And at a time when church is seen as increasingly irrelevant by those of the Millennial generation, I think we must ask if we have somehow lost the Spirit of our faith.
In the Old Testament, God's Spirit is an extension of his power, synonymous with the hand of God, by which he accomplishes his mighty acts. It is also chiefly thought of as the spirit of prophesy. The Spirit comes upon a prophet and he or she announces the word of the Lord. The prophets also spoke of God's wisdom as semi-autonomous aspect of the creator, attributing to Wisdom many of the characteristics we see in the way the New Testament speaks about the Spirit. Between the Testaments, Jews recognized that no one spoke with the power and authority of God's Spirit anymore. One of their hopes was for the day when God's Spirit would be poured out on all of his people. This would happen when the Messiah inaugurated God's kingdom.
So when Jesus spoke of God sending his Spirit upon his disciples, his audience understood it in this way. What Jesus added to this was the realization that the Spirit is not an impersonal power, but God himself. In John 14:15,16, Jesus says, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever." In verse 26, he explicitly says the Advocate is the Holy Spirit. And in verse 23, he says, "Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them." The parallel shows that the Spirit is to be identified with the Father and the Son who will be with believers forever.
In addition, Jesus calls him "the Spirit of Truth" and elsewhere says of himself "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." In Romans 8:9, Paul calls the Spirit of God the Spirit of Christ. Which makes sense since it is the indwelling Spirit that makes believers into the Body of Christ. So the Spirit we are to embody is that of Christ, God Incarnate. If we do so, one can see how that will draw people to the church. But if they do not perceive in the church the Spirit of God but some other spirit, that's not going draw them to us.
How do we embody the Spirit? Looking back to the prophets there are a handful of characteristics that stand out. First, the Spirit speaks out against evil. This is what the world primarily hears and why it thinks that all we talk about is negativity. And yet we don't say doctors should lighten up on warnings about disease. Oh, wait, we do. I remember an incident that took place here in the Keys. Solares Hill newspaper gave space on its front page to Dr. Mark Whiteside, who wrote an article reacting to the upsurge of HIV infections and detailing the specific practices that were responsible. There was a huge backlash that essentially called Dr. Whiteside a traitor to the community he so selflessly served. But he was concerned with saving lives and there was a generation that did not remember how AIDS devastated the gay community in the 1980s and were not practicing safe sex. He had to speak the truth, however unpopular, and warn people, even persecuted people, about self-destructive behaviors.
The prophets were received in much the same way. They pronounced God's judgment on political as well as spiritual evils. They talked about private sins as well as social injustices. They often ran counter to the culture and they paid for it, some with their lives. We can all find in the writings of the prophets things we like and things we don't. We Episcopalians enthusiastically go after social injustice but are less comfortable with pronouncements on people's personal sins. Evangelicals tend to do the opposite. Either is unbalanced. Despite constant reminders of our duty to the poor, Leviticus 19:15 says, "You shall not render an unjust judgment. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbor." There is no protected class; there are no forms of dysfunction that are acceptable. I can cause a car accident by breaking laws, speeding and passing where I shouldn't, as well as by texting on my phone or reaching for something or having an argument with my passenger. It doesn't matter to the person I hit if I was deliberately or inadvertently being reckless, whether my focus was on getting ahead or on personal matters.
As C. S. Lewis pointed out, in an orchestra, not only do the musicians have to harmonize with each other and keep the same beat, each individual instrument must be maintained and in tune, or the symphony will be a disaster. It's not an either/or situation. And we keep seeing how the self-destructive personal habits of the prominent can derail their effectiveness as leaders, regardless of their position or politics. You can't completely compartmentalize your life. Neither should we try to do so with our faith.
But the doctor doesn't tell you about your bad habits simply to bum you out. He offers hope of healing if you change. Things are only hopeless when nothing more can be done. One of the bizarre features of the aftermath of Harold Camping's busted rapture prediction is that he says the final judgment of the world happened in May instead. It's too late for repentance now. Everyone's fate is set in stone when the world ends, according to his calculations, in October. If you're not already a Christian, you're doomed. Not only is his math off, so is his theology.
The prophets did not come just to afflict the comfortable but also to comfort the afflicted. God had not abandoned his people, nor were they beyond his mercy. God is primarily about forgiveness, reconciliation, restoration and resurrection. That last part is key. Death should be the point at which all hope is lost. Certainly the disciples thought so. One of the men walking to Emmaus said, "We had hoped he was the one to redeem Israel." Notice the past tense. Jesus' death meant that hope was dead as well. But all things are possible with God. And the men traveling to Emmaus were in for a big surprise. There is no end to hope when love is present, Paul reminds us. And God is love.
I recently heard someone disparage the saying, "God loves you just as you are and he loves you too much to leave you that way." But that's the essence of our hope. I know building up people's self esteem by telling them they are perfect just the way they are is the vogue. Too bad there's no evidence that making people feel good about themselves actually makes them good. Too bad that they've discovered that incompetent people often have good self esteem as well as bullies and psychopaths. Being told you're all right when you're not is cruel. Ask the person struggling with addiction if God's love would mean anything if it didn't mean she could change. Ask the person who has spent his youth getting into trouble and bouncing in and out of prison if he merely wants God to affirm who he is and not transform him. Ask the person who has spent his life chasing money, material things, or women if he wants God to simply say he's fine as he is, without filling the void in his existence he is so obviously feels and making him complete. Jesus said that the sick, not the healthy, need a doctor. So he comes to call, not the righteous, but sinners. When you realize that you need healing, the Divine Physician is your greatest hope.
This is the message we so often neglect to proclaim. Even John the Baptist at his most scathing did not forget about hope. He didn't water down the diagnosis but he was able to offer a promising prognosis because God's Spirit renews lives. And his Spirit is available to all who let him in and let him do whatever he wishes with us. When you don't try to limit what God can do in you, he can do amazing things. Scary, perhaps, but amazing, nevertheless.
And when hope bubbles up within you, when you see the triumph of God's goodness, when you glimpse the beauty and promise of his love, the natural reaction is joy. And that is also a characteristic of the Spirit. In the Old Testament we see at times companies of prophets singing, dancing, and making music. When Saul, Israel's first king, was anointed he ran into a band of prophets and we are told that the Spirit of God came over him mightily him and he prophesied with them. The Hebrew word for "come over" has the sense of being pushed powerfully or overwhelmed and so some translations speak of him being "seized," "possessed," or "ecstatic." It sounds rather like joy.
Joy is one of the fruits of the Spirit. Jesus said that he had come so that our joy may be complete. Joy is an quality Christians, especially in the affluent West, are not known for. We are seen as dour killjoys. And we wonder why people aren't going to church as much as they used to.
The church grew like crazy when the Spirit was poured out. The apostles spoke the truth about people's need to be saved. They offered the hope that in Christ people could be changed for the better. And they showed joy.
Why aren't we growing today? Is it that we aren't telling people the truth? Is it that we aren't admitting that something deep within us needs healing? Is it that the message we offer is no different from the "feel good" messages that people can get elsewhere in our culture?
Is it that we are ashamed of the hope we can offer in Christ? Is it that, for fear of sounding exclusive, we are sending the message that you don't have to come to him; you don't have to come here; you can get the same thing down the road, somewhere else, anywhere else?
Is it that we don't do joy? Is it that we are so afraid of what the Spirit will do if we unleash him, so worried that people will think we are drunk or crazy, that we settle for a sedate, measured, dull presentation of what should be great good news? Have we rendered boring what should be a joyous proclamation of what God in Christ has done, is doing and will do for us? Christ has died--for us! Christ is risen--for us! Christ will come again--for us! How mindblowing is that? How can we not be excited at what he is doing in and for us and others? And how can we not be thrilled over what God will do next and what our part in it will be?
We wore red Sunday to recall the fiery tongues that appeared over the apostles on that first Pentecost. Jesus said he came to set the world on fire. Let us not quench that fire. Let us stoke it. May our prayer be from this day forward: Holy Spirit of the living God, who appeared to Moses as a blazing bush, who lead the children of Israel to freedom as a pillar of fire, who transfigured our Lord Jesus Christ so that he appeared to shine like the sun, purify our souls, illumine our minds and set our hearts on fire for you!
As someone who has seen and read far too many bad versions of Sherlock Holmes, I can tell you that it's not enough to get the superficial details right about a character being portrayed. You need to capture his or her spirit. Thus all the pipes and deerstalker caps in the world could not get a good Holmes out of Roger Moore, Stewart Granger or even Tom Baker. Whereas Peter Cushing, Jeremy Brett and even Benedict Cumberbatch's updated Sherlock got the character's personality perfectly, even though each brought something different to the role. This is even more noticeable in Doctor Who. Each actor who plays the role brings something new to the title character. The Doctor can be heroic, wily, rude, inoffensive, madcap, or formidable but always he is the same person, a champion of justice who uses his brain rather than brawn, and who encourages others to act their best.
The problem with talking about the spirit of something or someone is that it is notoriously hard to define. It's easy to say that Richard Roxburgh's Holmes was all wrong because he portrayed the Great Detective as a hardboiled private eye who beat information out of his suspects. It's tougher to put one's finger on how that is different from Robert Downey Jr.'s action hero version, who, while he did display prominently Holmes' canonical prowess at fisticuffs, fencing, and the single stick, somehow managed to play him as a person who thought first and fought only or mainly when necessary. It comes down to a matter of emphasis and is best seen by contrasting it to something that is antithetical to the spirit you are seeking.
Sunday was Pentecost, the anniversary of when the Holy Spirit was poured out liberally on the disciples and kicked off the growth of the church. And at a time when church is seen as increasingly irrelevant by those of the Millennial generation, I think we must ask if we have somehow lost the Spirit of our faith.
In the Old Testament, God's Spirit is an extension of his power, synonymous with the hand of God, by which he accomplishes his mighty acts. It is also chiefly thought of as the spirit of prophesy. The Spirit comes upon a prophet and he or she announces the word of the Lord. The prophets also spoke of God's wisdom as semi-autonomous aspect of the creator, attributing to Wisdom many of the characteristics we see in the way the New Testament speaks about the Spirit. Between the Testaments, Jews recognized that no one spoke with the power and authority of God's Spirit anymore. One of their hopes was for the day when God's Spirit would be poured out on all of his people. This would happen when the Messiah inaugurated God's kingdom.
So when Jesus spoke of God sending his Spirit upon his disciples, his audience understood it in this way. What Jesus added to this was the realization that the Spirit is not an impersonal power, but God himself. In John 14:15,16, Jesus says, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever." In verse 26, he explicitly says the Advocate is the Holy Spirit. And in verse 23, he says, "Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them." The parallel shows that the Spirit is to be identified with the Father and the Son who will be with believers forever.
In addition, Jesus calls him "the Spirit of Truth" and elsewhere says of himself "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." In Romans 8:9, Paul calls the Spirit of God the Spirit of Christ. Which makes sense since it is the indwelling Spirit that makes believers into the Body of Christ. So the Spirit we are to embody is that of Christ, God Incarnate. If we do so, one can see how that will draw people to the church. But if they do not perceive in the church the Spirit of God but some other spirit, that's not going draw them to us.
How do we embody the Spirit? Looking back to the prophets there are a handful of characteristics that stand out. First, the Spirit speaks out against evil. This is what the world primarily hears and why it thinks that all we talk about is negativity. And yet we don't say doctors should lighten up on warnings about disease. Oh, wait, we do. I remember an incident that took place here in the Keys. Solares Hill newspaper gave space on its front page to Dr. Mark Whiteside, who wrote an article reacting to the upsurge of HIV infections and detailing the specific practices that were responsible. There was a huge backlash that essentially called Dr. Whiteside a traitor to the community he so selflessly served. But he was concerned with saving lives and there was a generation that did not remember how AIDS devastated the gay community in the 1980s and were not practicing safe sex. He had to speak the truth, however unpopular, and warn people, even persecuted people, about self-destructive behaviors.
The prophets were received in much the same way. They pronounced God's judgment on political as well as spiritual evils. They talked about private sins as well as social injustices. They often ran counter to the culture and they paid for it, some with their lives. We can all find in the writings of the prophets things we like and things we don't. We Episcopalians enthusiastically go after social injustice but are less comfortable with pronouncements on people's personal sins. Evangelicals tend to do the opposite. Either is unbalanced. Despite constant reminders of our duty to the poor, Leviticus 19:15 says, "You shall not render an unjust judgment. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbor." There is no protected class; there are no forms of dysfunction that are acceptable. I can cause a car accident by breaking laws, speeding and passing where I shouldn't, as well as by texting on my phone or reaching for something or having an argument with my passenger. It doesn't matter to the person I hit if I was deliberately or inadvertently being reckless, whether my focus was on getting ahead or on personal matters.
As C. S. Lewis pointed out, in an orchestra, not only do the musicians have to harmonize with each other and keep the same beat, each individual instrument must be maintained and in tune, or the symphony will be a disaster. It's not an either/or situation. And we keep seeing how the self-destructive personal habits of the prominent can derail their effectiveness as leaders, regardless of their position or politics. You can't completely compartmentalize your life. Neither should we try to do so with our faith.
But the doctor doesn't tell you about your bad habits simply to bum you out. He offers hope of healing if you change. Things are only hopeless when nothing more can be done. One of the bizarre features of the aftermath of Harold Camping's busted rapture prediction is that he says the final judgment of the world happened in May instead. It's too late for repentance now. Everyone's fate is set in stone when the world ends, according to his calculations, in October. If you're not already a Christian, you're doomed. Not only is his math off, so is his theology.
The prophets did not come just to afflict the comfortable but also to comfort the afflicted. God had not abandoned his people, nor were they beyond his mercy. God is primarily about forgiveness, reconciliation, restoration and resurrection. That last part is key. Death should be the point at which all hope is lost. Certainly the disciples thought so. One of the men walking to Emmaus said, "We had hoped he was the one to redeem Israel." Notice the past tense. Jesus' death meant that hope was dead as well. But all things are possible with God. And the men traveling to Emmaus were in for a big surprise. There is no end to hope when love is present, Paul reminds us. And God is love.
I recently heard someone disparage the saying, "God loves you just as you are and he loves you too much to leave you that way." But that's the essence of our hope. I know building up people's self esteem by telling them they are perfect just the way they are is the vogue. Too bad there's no evidence that making people feel good about themselves actually makes them good. Too bad that they've discovered that incompetent people often have good self esteem as well as bullies and psychopaths. Being told you're all right when you're not is cruel. Ask the person struggling with addiction if God's love would mean anything if it didn't mean she could change. Ask the person who has spent his youth getting into trouble and bouncing in and out of prison if he merely wants God to affirm who he is and not transform him. Ask the person who has spent his life chasing money, material things, or women if he wants God to simply say he's fine as he is, without filling the void in his existence he is so obviously feels and making him complete. Jesus said that the sick, not the healthy, need a doctor. So he comes to call, not the righteous, but sinners. When you realize that you need healing, the Divine Physician is your greatest hope.
This is the message we so often neglect to proclaim. Even John the Baptist at his most scathing did not forget about hope. He didn't water down the diagnosis but he was able to offer a promising prognosis because God's Spirit renews lives. And his Spirit is available to all who let him in and let him do whatever he wishes with us. When you don't try to limit what God can do in you, he can do amazing things. Scary, perhaps, but amazing, nevertheless.
And when hope bubbles up within you, when you see the triumph of God's goodness, when you glimpse the beauty and promise of his love, the natural reaction is joy. And that is also a characteristic of the Spirit. In the Old Testament we see at times companies of prophets singing, dancing, and making music. When Saul, Israel's first king, was anointed he ran into a band of prophets and we are told that the Spirit of God came over him mightily him and he prophesied with them. The Hebrew word for "come over" has the sense of being pushed powerfully or overwhelmed and so some translations speak of him being "seized," "possessed," or "ecstatic." It sounds rather like joy.
Joy is one of the fruits of the Spirit. Jesus said that he had come so that our joy may be complete. Joy is an quality Christians, especially in the affluent West, are not known for. We are seen as dour killjoys. And we wonder why people aren't going to church as much as they used to.
The church grew like crazy when the Spirit was poured out. The apostles spoke the truth about people's need to be saved. They offered the hope that in Christ people could be changed for the better. And they showed joy.
Why aren't we growing today? Is it that we aren't telling people the truth? Is it that we aren't admitting that something deep within us needs healing? Is it that the message we offer is no different from the "feel good" messages that people can get elsewhere in our culture?
Is it that we are ashamed of the hope we can offer in Christ? Is it that, for fear of sounding exclusive, we are sending the message that you don't have to come to him; you don't have to come here; you can get the same thing down the road, somewhere else, anywhere else?
Is it that we don't do joy? Is it that we are so afraid of what the Spirit will do if we unleash him, so worried that people will think we are drunk or crazy, that we settle for a sedate, measured, dull presentation of what should be great good news? Have we rendered boring what should be a joyous proclamation of what God in Christ has done, is doing and will do for us? Christ has died--for us! Christ is risen--for us! Christ will come again--for us! How mindblowing is that? How can we not be excited at what he is doing in and for us and others? And how can we not be thrilled over what God will do next and what our part in it will be?
We wore red Sunday to recall the fiery tongues that appeared over the apostles on that first Pentecost. Jesus said he came to set the world on fire. Let us not quench that fire. Let us stoke it. May our prayer be from this day forward: Holy Spirit of the living God, who appeared to Moses as a blazing bush, who lead the children of Israel to freedom as a pillar of fire, who transfigured our Lord Jesus Christ so that he appeared to shine like the sun, purify our souls, illumine our minds and set our hearts on fire for you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)