It's been a weekend of saying "if only."
It began about 1:00 on Sunday, just about the time the Atlanta Falcons kicked the game-winning field goal over the Seattle Seahawks, following Seattle's furious fight back from the brink of total domination.
If only the defense could have made a play in the last 30 seconds, they'd be playing again this Sunday.
If only the Seahawks had held a lead earlier in the season against Miami. If only they had found a way to beat Arizona or St. Louis or one of the other teams they should have beaten this year. Then they would have been the NFC West champs and had home-field advantage, and they're still playing this weekend against San Francisco.
If only they actually showed up in the first three quarters and played like they're capable of. If only Chris Clemons isn't hurt in the game against the Redskins.
Any number of tiny details, had they gone the other way, and Seattle is still in the hunt for the Super Bowl. Which made the loss bitter, and the response a litany of "if only?"
But then Monday morning rolled around, and I took a call from a church member who is also the local school librarian. In a broken voice, she told me that a young mother in the community had killed herself over the weekend, taking a gun to her own head to end her life. And that her two daughters and their dad were in the house and heard the shot, and he went in and found her dead on the floor.
This mother used to bring her daughters to the activities at our church. Her youngest was part of our children's group, her older daughter came to the girls' Bible study led by my wife. More recently, that youngest daughter had come to our youth group in the last few months.
Last Thursday I went to the Middle School for a band concert. At the intermission I was standing near the front and saw this mother near the back, standing by herself. You know the thought that runs through your mind. "I should go say hi." But then somebody wanted to talk to me, and the concert began again, and afterward you have to pick up your kid and it's all chaotic and you never do go say "hi."
And there's a whole new slew of "if only."
If only I had gone and said "hi" on Thursday. If only our kids' program had been healthier, and the Bible study hadn't fallen apart in turmoil at the end. If we'd been able to keep them in our loop, instead of losing them when our church went through some hard times a few years ago.
But, no. There's really no blame to be had, no great lesson to be learned. Not knowing the explanation behind the act, there's no knowing whether we could have made a difference. The only truth is that a woman was distraught enough to end her life, and she's left behind a grieving, broken family. The mind begins to run down the "if only" road, but I can't go there. Yes, I wish I'd talked to her on Thursday, but there was no reason to believe at that point that this would happen. So I can't regret my choices that night.
What I do take away is this: we're surrounded by hurting people. And we need to love them. And we need to be involved in peoples' lives. And we need to look them in the eye and say "how are you doing?" And we need to realize this isn't a game. And we need to take the chance when we have it, because there may not be a tomorrow. We're not responsible for the actions of other people, but we can at least let them know we care.
If only we can do that, then we're going to make a difference.
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
A Case Study in the Power of Language
Over the weekend, Seattle's Mars Hill Church opened up their newest location, in a former downtown bar. Personally, I think that's kind of cool. There's a huge metaphor here. This bar was notorious for the violence and mayhem it attracted. Many in the community were fed up with all the antics going on there. The Seattle Police Department was regularly called to break up fights among the drunken patrons.
Now, that place of darkness has been transformed into an outpost for the Kingdom of God. The Light has shined in the darkness, and the darkness has fled. This is what the Kingdom is supposed to look like: ground once held by the darkness taken and restored for the Kingdom of Light. I wish we would see more of this happening all over the city, all over the world.
However, that's not the purpose of today's post. I simply wanted to begin with some kudos so you don't think this is another Bash Mars Hill post. You can find those all over the internet, and I don't particularly want to join in. (That's not to say I don't have my own disagreements with the MH way of doing ministry, which I have blogged about in the past; just that I don't want you to think I'm a hater or anything). (By the By - if you have the stomach for it, and want to understand the way many people up here in the NW view MH and Christianity in general, just follow the link to the article, and then read the comments at the end. It's. . .frightening)
Here's what I want to focus on today. Tim Gaydos, the pastor of this particular branch, had this to say about the newest MH edition:
"We're all about Jesus," said Gaydos, a 33-year-old Seattle native. "We're not about religion. Religion sucks. ... And this is not your mom's or grandma's church."
This is a theme you hear quite often from a certain segment of Christianity. People who have decided that the Church has become irrelevant and musty and a little, well, nerdy. People who think we need to reshape and reframe the church in order to reach a new generation for Christ. People who have read Donald Miller and Erwin McManus and Brian McLaren and Rob Bell (note: I don't think any of those men would necessarily be represented by where I am about to go with this blog; they just ask some questions that then allow a second contingent to make less-than-profound statements such as the one above). The last time I picked up Relevant Magazine, I read this statement and many variations on it: "We're the NEW Church! We're Cool! We're Hip! We're Relevant! We're not like that old person's church anymore!"
I think there are at least three reasons why we need to cut this kind of language out of any conversation regarding the Church.
1) This language, and the thought behind it, is stolen directly from the Marketing Machine that drives American Consumerism. And the primary tool of that Marketing Machine is the Divide-and Conquer approach. Divide society up into niche markets, then sell your product to that niche market. And make it painfully obvious that anybody who doesn't identify with that niche is a nerd, a loser, an old person (horrors!), somebody to be laughed at and avoided at all costs. Come Be Like Us! Be Cool! Be Appreciated! Show Everybody How Cool You Are For Buying Our Product! Show Everybody That You Aren't A Loser Like Those Other People!
2) Which makes the next obvious point: the product is always sold over and against something else. We're cool because we're Not Like Them! Or we used to be like them, but now we're cool because we've discovered this new product. I used to be a loser; now I shave with Afta and all the hot girls pay attention to me. I used to be a loser, but then I bought the new Nicky Hilton line of clothing, and now I'm cool. The Church used to be a bunch of losers, but now we've rebranded, dumped that boring religion of all those Old People, and now we're cool. Come check us out!
3) All of which goes against the Biblical Call for the Unity of the Body. You see, one of The Primary biblical messages is that there is one church, and that we only reflect Christ when we live out that Unity in the Church. Jesus said the world would know we are his disciples by the way we love each other. Paul spoke powerfully of Christ tearing down dividing walls to create One New Humanity. Paul blasted Peter when Peter chose to stop dining with Gentiles. The Church is the Bride of Christ, and it is beautiful. Derek Webb attempts to speak for Jesus in singing "And you cannot care for me if you've no regard for her/If you love me, you will love the Church."
Therefore, it is wrong bordering on sinful to define ourselves over and against other churches, especially against the saints that have gone on before us. It is a cheap shot to make ourselves more attractive by demeaning our "mom's or grandma's" church. This kind of statement is demeaning, divisive, and the exact WRONG way to attract people into the Kingdom. In fact, we should be doing all we can to portray to the world that we are lovers, that we cherish our ancestors, that we honor those who have gone before; if anything, we honor all outposts of the Kingdom of God, regardless if they are "cool" or not. Sara Miles, in her "Take This Bread," states that one of the tougher things about becoming a Christian was realizing she had to be in the same family as a bunch of people she vehemently disagrees with. Yet, she says, it's God's family, so she'll do her part to get along and honor those who, outside of the Body, she would never have befriended. In other words, because we are all One in Christ, we respect one another, even if we don't particularly like, say, the music somebody else listens to.
I should say that I do admire the missional aspect of MH; I understand the crowd they are trying to reach and I love that they reach people my church probably never will. I applaud them for taking the Kingdom of God out onto the Highways and Byways, and that they get into the broken, stained, sinful lives of hurting people. They have faced a lot of opposition, and continue to thrive. May they continue to do so.
But it is time we all recognize that we dare not market the Church, nor even speak about the Body, in the divisive and destructive terms laid down by Madison Avenue. The strongest message we can send to the world is We're not like you - in fact, the message we bring is a lot better than anything you'll get out there. All that stuff being sold to you will only leave you empty. But here, life is different. We get along with people who aren't like us. Old people are actually kind of popular around here. And so are young people. But God loves us all, so we pretty much all love each other. And isn't that better than the empty loneliness you're trying to fill with aftershave?
Now, that place of darkness has been transformed into an outpost for the Kingdom of God. The Light has shined in the darkness, and the darkness has fled. This is what the Kingdom is supposed to look like: ground once held by the darkness taken and restored for the Kingdom of Light. I wish we would see more of this happening all over the city, all over the world.
However, that's not the purpose of today's post. I simply wanted to begin with some kudos so you don't think this is another Bash Mars Hill post. You can find those all over the internet, and I don't particularly want to join in. (That's not to say I don't have my own disagreements with the MH way of doing ministry, which I have blogged about in the past; just that I don't want you to think I'm a hater or anything). (By the By - if you have the stomach for it, and want to understand the way many people up here in the NW view MH and Christianity in general, just follow the link to the article, and then read the comments at the end. It's. . .frightening)
Here's what I want to focus on today. Tim Gaydos, the pastor of this particular branch, had this to say about the newest MH edition:
"We're all about Jesus," said Gaydos, a 33-year-old Seattle native. "We're not about religion. Religion sucks. ... And this is not your mom's or grandma's church."
This is a theme you hear quite often from a certain segment of Christianity. People who have decided that the Church has become irrelevant and musty and a little, well, nerdy. People who think we need to reshape and reframe the church in order to reach a new generation for Christ. People who have read Donald Miller and Erwin McManus and Brian McLaren and Rob Bell (note: I don't think any of those men would necessarily be represented by where I am about to go with this blog; they just ask some questions that then allow a second contingent to make less-than-profound statements such as the one above). The last time I picked up Relevant Magazine, I read this statement and many variations on it: "We're the NEW Church! We're Cool! We're Hip! We're Relevant! We're not like that old person's church anymore!"
I think there are at least three reasons why we need to cut this kind of language out of any conversation regarding the Church.
1) This language, and the thought behind it, is stolen directly from the Marketing Machine that drives American Consumerism. And the primary tool of that Marketing Machine is the Divide-and Conquer approach. Divide society up into niche markets, then sell your product to that niche market. And make it painfully obvious that anybody who doesn't identify with that niche is a nerd, a loser, an old person (horrors!), somebody to be laughed at and avoided at all costs. Come Be Like Us! Be Cool! Be Appreciated! Show Everybody How Cool You Are For Buying Our Product! Show Everybody That You Aren't A Loser Like Those Other People!
2) Which makes the next obvious point: the product is always sold over and against something else. We're cool because we're Not Like Them! Or we used to be like them, but now we're cool because we've discovered this new product. I used to be a loser; now I shave with Afta and all the hot girls pay attention to me. I used to be a loser, but then I bought the new Nicky Hilton line of clothing, and now I'm cool. The Church used to be a bunch of losers, but now we've rebranded, dumped that boring religion of all those Old People, and now we're cool. Come check us out!
3) All of which goes against the Biblical Call for the Unity of the Body. You see, one of The Primary biblical messages is that there is one church, and that we only reflect Christ when we live out that Unity in the Church. Jesus said the world would know we are his disciples by the way we love each other. Paul spoke powerfully of Christ tearing down dividing walls to create One New Humanity. Paul blasted Peter when Peter chose to stop dining with Gentiles. The Church is the Bride of Christ, and it is beautiful. Derek Webb attempts to speak for Jesus in singing "And you cannot care for me if you've no regard for her/If you love me, you will love the Church."
Therefore, it is wrong bordering on sinful to define ourselves over and against other churches, especially against the saints that have gone on before us. It is a cheap shot to make ourselves more attractive by demeaning our "mom's or grandma's" church. This kind of statement is demeaning, divisive, and the exact WRONG way to attract people into the Kingdom. In fact, we should be doing all we can to portray to the world that we are lovers, that we cherish our ancestors, that we honor those who have gone before; if anything, we honor all outposts of the Kingdom of God, regardless if they are "cool" or not. Sara Miles, in her "Take This Bread," states that one of the tougher things about becoming a Christian was realizing she had to be in the same family as a bunch of people she vehemently disagrees with. Yet, she says, it's God's family, so she'll do her part to get along and honor those who, outside of the Body, she would never have befriended. In other words, because we are all One in Christ, we respect one another, even if we don't particularly like, say, the music somebody else listens to.
I should say that I do admire the missional aspect of MH; I understand the crowd they are trying to reach and I love that they reach people my church probably never will. I applaud them for taking the Kingdom of God out onto the Highways and Byways, and that they get into the broken, stained, sinful lives of hurting people. They have faced a lot of opposition, and continue to thrive. May they continue to do so.
But it is time we all recognize that we dare not market the Church, nor even speak about the Body, in the divisive and destructive terms laid down by Madison Avenue. The strongest message we can send to the world is We're not like you - in fact, the message we bring is a lot better than anything you'll get out there. All that stuff being sold to you will only leave you empty. But here, life is different. We get along with people who aren't like us. Old people are actually kind of popular around here. And so are young people. But God loves us all, so we pretty much all love each other. And isn't that better than the empty loneliness you're trying to fill with aftershave?
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Hildi Johnson Memorial
A memorial service for Hildi Johnson, 25, of Lakebay, Washington, will be held Friday, March 7, 11:00 a.m. at Lakebay Community Church. Stuart Curry, Director of Camp Woodworth, will preside. A meal and time of fellowship will follow the service.
Peace to her memory.
Peace to her memory.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Book report
One of the benefits of long plane rides is all the spare time for reading. So it was that, on the way to Chicago, I finally finished Scot McKnight's A Community Called Atonement.
This issue of Atonement (the theology, not the movie - although I read that book coming home from Chicago 5 years ago or so. . .) has been rumbling around in my head ever since taking the Theological Understandings of Jesus class at the Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary. Mark Baker, class professor, had written (with Joel Green) Recovering the Scandal of the Cross, which attempts to push back against the overwhelming single narrative of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Green and Baker argue that there are a number of biblical metaphors for atonement, and that the church should do well to claim them all. In fact, they suggest, it's time to write some new metaphors to carry the message of atonement into a world that has left the idea of guilt and sin behind.
(side note: The folks at Emergent are working on a contest, in which people will be able to submit new atonement metaphors that would speak to a post-modern culture. Judges will include MESSAGE DELETED TO PROTECT ANONYMITY OF JUDGES)
To cut this down - I was challenged by the book and Baker's teaching; I ended up submitting a chapter that was included in Recovering's sequal, Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross. Following last Easter I preached a series on "what did the cross actually do?" The message I preached on shame was one of the most powerful experiences of my preaching career.
And, of course, last year Scot McKnight weighed into the discussion with the above-mentioned book. McKnight's premise, somewhat akin to Baker and Green's, is that there are any number iof biblical images that speak about atonement, and that they are all important. While each is metaphor in its own right, each offers a slightly different shade as to the extent of the work of the cross. McKnight's genius is in likening all this to a golf bag - in your bag, you need a number of different clubs, because different clubs fit different situations better than others. So too with atonement metaphors. One will speak to one issue, in one situation, one will speak better in another.
McKnight begins by discussing the problem itself - what problem was atonement meant to solve? Because where you begin ends up defining where you end. And the basic problem, according to McKnight, is this - we were made in the Image of God, to live in relationship to God, to others, to creation, and to ourselves. Sin cracked that Image, and distorted all four directions of relationship. Therefore, atonement must be big enough to restore that Image, and to restore relationships in all four directions.
He then moves on to discussing the various atonement moments and metaphors. I appreciate the fact that he pushes atonement further out than simply the cross, or the cross and resurrection. To McKnight (with whom I wholeheartedly agree), the whole life of Christ was an atoning work. Thus, the incarnation, the cross, the resurrection - these all are part of the bigger atonement picture.
McKnight briefly sketches a few of the historical developments related to atonement, and then sums them up with this thought: The bag that holds all the atonement images is defined as this - Atonement is identification for incorporation. Jesus came to earth to identify with humans. His life, Passion, and resurrection are all about identifying with humans, with living the human life in all its fullness. And Jesus did this that we might be incorporated into his death and resurrection, that we may be restored to God, self, others, and creation through his redemptive work. Jesus died for us, instead of us, and with us. "God sends his Son into this world, the Fourth Gospel tells us, to set in motion the earthly missio Dei, the mission of God to bring the world to its consummation, to restore cracked Eikons [humans made in the image of God], to heal humans in all four relational directions. . .Everything good happens to the Christian by virtue of union with Christ."
Finally, McKnight challenges us to recognize this fact - the primary work of God is to create an atoned community who will carry out the work of atonement in the World. This is not an individualistic "Jesus saved me!" thing; when we are incorporated into Christ, we are given the mandate of joining with the people of God to live out atonement for the world around us. Therefore, the Church is to be about the work of the missio Dei, fighting for the oppressed and loving the hurting and feeding the hungry and standing up to injustice and proclaiming the Good News that Jesus Christ is Lord. When the church gathers for fellowship, when the Church fights for justice for all, when the church goes to work in carrying out God's mission to the world, when the Church lives out the Lord's Supper and Baptism, then the Church is reflecting it's nature as God's atoned people.
Now, I must admit this. I love theology, I also love practicality. And I found myself at the end of the book saying "and how do we do this?" But this is more of a theological, setting-the-stage kind of book, than it is a "how-to" book. Perhaps sometimes I expect too much, or I'm looking for the easy answers. Either way, McKnight's book throws out the gauntlet - are we going to be the people God called us to be? Are we going to be living atonement in our midst? Are we going to be living out the Mission of God in our communities? Are we going to expand atonement until we realize it is about the restoration of all of Creation, and not just the salvation of a few? And are we going to be the Christians we're supposed to be, carrying on God's work into our communities?
Or are we going to settle in, knowing that "It's all good between Jesus and me. Now pass the chips. . ."
This issue of Atonement (the theology, not the movie - although I read that book coming home from Chicago 5 years ago or so. . .) has been rumbling around in my head ever since taking the Theological Understandings of Jesus class at the Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary. Mark Baker, class professor, had written (with Joel Green) Recovering the Scandal of the Cross, which attempts to push back against the overwhelming single narrative of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Green and Baker argue that there are a number of biblical metaphors for atonement, and that the church should do well to claim them all. In fact, they suggest, it's time to write some new metaphors to carry the message of atonement into a world that has left the idea of guilt and sin behind.
(side note: The folks at Emergent are working on a contest, in which people will be able to submit new atonement metaphors that would speak to a post-modern culture. Judges will include MESSAGE DELETED TO PROTECT ANONYMITY OF JUDGES)
To cut this down - I was challenged by the book and Baker's teaching; I ended up submitting a chapter that was included in Recovering's sequal, Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross. Following last Easter I preached a series on "what did the cross actually do?" The message I preached on shame was one of the most powerful experiences of my preaching career.
And, of course, last year Scot McKnight weighed into the discussion with the above-mentioned book. McKnight's premise, somewhat akin to Baker and Green's, is that there are any number iof biblical images that speak about atonement, and that they are all important. While each is metaphor in its own right, each offers a slightly different shade as to the extent of the work of the cross. McKnight's genius is in likening all this to a golf bag - in your bag, you need a number of different clubs, because different clubs fit different situations better than others. So too with atonement metaphors. One will speak to one issue, in one situation, one will speak better in another.
McKnight begins by discussing the problem itself - what problem was atonement meant to solve? Because where you begin ends up defining where you end. And the basic problem, according to McKnight, is this - we were made in the Image of God, to live in relationship to God, to others, to creation, and to ourselves. Sin cracked that Image, and distorted all four directions of relationship. Therefore, atonement must be big enough to restore that Image, and to restore relationships in all four directions.
He then moves on to discussing the various atonement moments and metaphors. I appreciate the fact that he pushes atonement further out than simply the cross, or the cross and resurrection. To McKnight (with whom I wholeheartedly agree), the whole life of Christ was an atoning work. Thus, the incarnation, the cross, the resurrection - these all are part of the bigger atonement picture.
McKnight briefly sketches a few of the historical developments related to atonement, and then sums them up with this thought: The bag that holds all the atonement images is defined as this - Atonement is identification for incorporation. Jesus came to earth to identify with humans. His life, Passion, and resurrection are all about identifying with humans, with living the human life in all its fullness. And Jesus did this that we might be incorporated into his death and resurrection, that we may be restored to God, self, others, and creation through his redemptive work. Jesus died for us, instead of us, and with us. "God sends his Son into this world, the Fourth Gospel tells us, to set in motion the earthly missio Dei, the mission of God to bring the world to its consummation, to restore cracked Eikons [humans made in the image of God], to heal humans in all four relational directions. . .Everything good happens to the Christian by virtue of union with Christ."
Finally, McKnight challenges us to recognize this fact - the primary work of God is to create an atoned community who will carry out the work of atonement in the World. This is not an individualistic "Jesus saved me!" thing; when we are incorporated into Christ, we are given the mandate of joining with the people of God to live out atonement for the world around us. Therefore, the Church is to be about the work of the missio Dei, fighting for the oppressed and loving the hurting and feeding the hungry and standing up to injustice and proclaiming the Good News that Jesus Christ is Lord. When the church gathers for fellowship, when the Church fights for justice for all, when the church goes to work in carrying out God's mission to the world, when the Church lives out the Lord's Supper and Baptism, then the Church is reflecting it's nature as God's atoned people.
Now, I must admit this. I love theology, I also love practicality. And I found myself at the end of the book saying "and how do we do this?" But this is more of a theological, setting-the-stage kind of book, than it is a "how-to" book. Perhaps sometimes I expect too much, or I'm looking for the easy answers. Either way, McKnight's book throws out the gauntlet - are we going to be the people God called us to be? Are we going to be living atonement in our midst? Are we going to be living out the Mission of God in our communities? Are we going to expand atonement until we realize it is about the restoration of all of Creation, and not just the salvation of a few? And are we going to be the Christians we're supposed to be, carrying on God's work into our communities?
Or are we going to settle in, knowing that "It's all good between Jesus and me. Now pass the chips. . ."
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Way Early Promo
I had lunch today with a couple other pastors from the Key Peninsula. We've been meeting for the last year or so, and have decided to form the "Key Peninsula Ministerial Association." Which basically means we have lunch once a month and we have a name.
It looks like we're going to combine forces next March and do a series of Community-Wide services for Holy Week, rather than each church doing their own thing. So we'll have a Community Maundy Thursday service, hosted by the KP Lutheran Church. And a Community Good Friday prayer vigil facilitated by the Longbranch Community Church. And a Community Easter Sunrise Service at Penrose Point State Park, hosted by Lakebay Community Church (that's us. . .).
I'm excited about the opportunity to worship together with all the fine folks from the various churches, as well as the chance to send the message to the community that we're really all the same church; we just meet in different buildings.
Look for a flyer soon. Well, after Christmas and Epiphany, anyway.
It looks like we're going to combine forces next March and do a series of Community-Wide services for Holy Week, rather than each church doing their own thing. So we'll have a Community Maundy Thursday service, hosted by the KP Lutheran Church. And a Community Good Friday prayer vigil facilitated by the Longbranch Community Church. And a Community Easter Sunrise Service at Penrose Point State Park, hosted by Lakebay Community Church (that's us. . .).
I'm excited about the opportunity to worship together with all the fine folks from the various churches, as well as the chance to send the message to the community that we're really all the same church; we just meet in different buildings.
Look for a flyer soon. Well, after Christmas and Epiphany, anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)