One of my favorite authors/pastors is John Ortberg. John is the Sr. Pastor of the Menlo Park Prersbyterian Church in Menlo Park, CA, a bay area church near San Francisco.
I was intrigued by this article. I think he has a lot of good and important things for the Church to hear today as we seek to be faithful to Christ in the 21st Century.
Read on....please :-)
DO THEY KNOW US BY OUR LOVE?
The first casualty of the culture wars is not truth.
by John Ortberg
In the culture wars of the first century, there was a group of activists who came down on the right side of all the values questions. They rejected relativism and secularism. They were unwavering adherents of ethical absolutism. They were committed to the Judaeo-Christian values of monogamy in marriage and chastity outside it. They promoted monotheism against polytheistic Roman paganism. Clearly, the Pharisees were considered the Religious Right of Israel.
But it is interesting that the people who held the "right" values were the ones least responsive to Jesus' message and most likely to receive his reprimands. His message was received with the greatest eagerness by those who came down on the wrong side of all the values issues—the prostitutes, the tax collectors, the religious half-breeds.
To be sure, Jesus frequently occupied the Pharisees' circles as a dinner guest and intellectual companion, and there were even those within the group who embraced him. Nonetheless, most Pharisees could not accept Jesus' radical claims and actions in light of their reading of the Holy Scriptures.
The ironic result of their "rightness" in belief and practice was that they became unable to love—did not want the sick healed on the Sabbath, did not want an adulterous woman to be forgiven, did not want sinners to share fellowship with the righteous. They came to see people they were called to love as "the enemy."
But they are not the only ones. The Inquisition, the Crusades, slavery—all these were entered into by people who believed in ethical absolutism and even defended their actions with the Bible.
This is a common temptation for all of us who take faith seriously. I regularly get fundraising letters from Christian organizations that paint society in conspiratorial "us" versus "them" colors. Although I usually agree with their moral positions, I rarely sense from them a caveat—let alone a consistent tone—acknowledging that love must be the ultimate aim even in disagreement.
It is a dangerous thing on questions of truth and significance to be wrong. But there may be a more dangerous thing: being right and knowing it.
Dallas Willard said once that it is very hard to be right and not hurt anybody with it. Look at schoolchildren—their pleasure in being right is boosted by knowing somebody else is wrong. Indeed, if nobody was wrong, being right would not be so special.
It is possible to be so caught up in the joy of being right, in the thrilling sense of being morally superior to those who are "not right," that you become more wrong than your most degraded opponent. This is why certain Pharisees—who were so careful not to commit adultery or steal or murder—were so deeply offended when Jesus said they were further from the kingdom of God than, say, Hugh Hefner or Madonna.
Occasionally those on the front lines of the culture wars will acknowledge they could be more loving. Usually the unspoken subtext, however, reads: "The main thing is I'm on the right side."
But what if it is at least as important to love as to be right? What if Jesus really meant it when he said the heart of the law is to love God with your entire being and to love your neighbor as yourself? What if Paul really meant it when he said that even if he had all knowledge, even if he got everything right, he was nothing if he didn't have love?
An old saying suggests that the first casualty of war is truth. This is not quite true. The first casualty of war is love. And so it is in emotion-charged culture wars.
The primary task of the church is not to make a powerful apologetic for Christian values in society. It is to participate in, and witness to, the gospel. And the gospel Jesus proclaimed is an invitation to life in the presence and under the reign of God: "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" (Mark 1:15).
Loving Our Cultural Enemies
Although the cultural warriors who opposed Jesus saw themselves as the defenders of values, Jesus' charge was that their list of values was arbitrary and lacking. They valued, for instance, a rigid adherence to circumcision over the gracious inclusion of Gentiles. They tended to emphasize not those values that were most important, but those values that most readily distinguished themselves from their opponents.
I think this is a failing among many who debate cultural values. In the church where I grew up, for example, I heard many messages on the family and sexual purity. Yet I don't remember hearing a single one on racism or the civil-rights movement that was having an impact on the society of that day. Were those issues less important?
One phrase often used in the culture wars is traditional values. It conveys our deep concern that classic moral values such as marital commitment, stability of the home, and common human courtesy are rapidly eroding. These concerns need to be articulated carefully and thoughtfully, but when we call for a return to "traditional values," we must ask to what tradition we want to return.
I have never heard an African-American Christian use this phrase—and for good reason. The "traditions" of the midtwentieth century included Jim Crow-style segregation and the denial of equal access to housing and education based on race. As a young man, my own grandfather had among his jobs the task of telling any persons of color who came through town that they were not welcome to spend the night there.
Thankfully, part of being a Christian, and in particular a Protestant, is the conviction that all traditions constantly need reform. The gospel is about eschatology, not nostalgia. The values to which we are called are not the values of any past tradition, but the eternal values taught and lived by Jesus and expressed authoritatively in the Bible, which stand over and above every party platform and political agenda.
Beyond Ideology
I am not advocating silence or neutrality on the controversial issues of today. But I do fear that with the current culture wars comes the devaluing of one of the church's primary tasks: discipleship. The reduction of Christianity to an ideology allows people to evade the task of true discipleship. It does not come through holding a certain set of values but by living a certain kind of life. It is far easier to promote values than to live them.
"All men will know that you are my disciples," Jesus said, not "if you promote my agenda" but "if you love one another." A watching world will be persuaded not when our values are promoted but when they are incarnated.
As the wars rage on and the church enters the fray, may we remember that Christ's call is not an invitation to be on the right side; it is an invitation to become the right person
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Self-Care Covenant
Do you have a personal self-care covenant? Optimal health includes mind, body, and spiritual health. I am of the opinion that we need a personal health covenant to help us achieve the optimum level health that we desire.
1. Vacation
1. Vacation
2. Physical Activity -
3. Sleep
4. Mental/emotional health: stress
5. Spiritual health
For each of these, you ask the following questions:
- What? When? How often? Where?
- Benefits of this behavior?
- Barriers of this behavior?
- Action step(s) to deal with these barriers?
- Supports that will help me be accountable?
Think about these things....and remember....
we must have VIM
Vision -- what is the end goal and what does that look like?
Intention -- have you made a decision to live a different life? Have you enacted the will to make for a better life?
Means -- the ways to achieve the goal. i.e. exercise, nutrition, etc.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Young Adults and the Church
Bishop William Willimon is a very prolific writer and, in my opinion, a keen thinker of how to be a faithful follower of Jesus in the 21st Century. I really liked what he had to say about reaching young adults today!
At Chapel Hill, we are trying to figure out how to be more intentional with the 18-30 age group.
We have many from this age group in worship each week. Our challenge is...what do we do to nurture and grow this group.
Here's Bishop Willimon....
The Church and the Conversion of Emerging Adults
One of our Conference priorities is to reach a new generation of Christians. Our focus is upon the 18-30 age group, those who are being called “emerging adults.” If we are to reach this age group—the age group that we have sadly neglected and therefore find absence from our churches—we are going to have to understand them. Fortunately, a number of new books are helpful in that regard.
A major defining characteristic of this age group is their postponement of marriage. In just a couple of decades the average age for women to marry moved from 20-25 years old, and then the average age rose from 22 to 27 years old. Interestingly, this change in marriage began in 1970—about the same year that our church started losing membership and we began losing touch with the next generation.
Studies of the emerging generation seem to agree that the ages of 18-30, that is the threshold of adulthood, has become more complex, disjointed and confusing than in past decades. In his book Emerging Adulthood, Jeffrey J. Arnett (Oxford University Press, 2004) notes that young adults today put a high premium on finding their identity in an uncertain world. They are impressed with economic and political instability and live their lives accordingly. They focus much more on the self and less upon groups, and they tend to be overwhelmed by their sense of possibilities.
This summer I also read James L. Heft’s Passing on the Faith: Transforming Traditions for the Next Generation of Jews, Christians, and Muslims (Fordam University Press, 2006). Adults, who grew up in the church retain very little of what the church taught them, says Heft. Our churches have not passed on the faith to our children. (The chances that someone who grew up in the United Methodist Church will still be United Methodist by age 30 are something like 1-6. For Episcopalians, Presbyterians and many others, the rate of attrition is even worse.) Jeffrey Arnett agrees with Heft’s gloomy analysis of those who happen to have grown up in the church. Arnett says, “The most interesting and surprising feature of emerging adults’ religious beliefs is how little relationship there is between the religious training they received throughout childhood and the religious beliefs they hold at the time they reach emerging adulthood….” A recent survey showed that today’s young adults attend church less, pray less, are less lik ely to believe in authority of the Bible, more likely to identify themselves as non-religious, and tend to be extremely suspicious of institutions and organized religion.
Not too long ago the church could count on a return to church by young adults when they had their first children. That appears not to be a pattern for today’s young adults. Because they are postponing marriage, the church can expect at least a 20 year gap between young adults leaving the church and returning. In her book, Generation Me: Why Today’s Young American’s are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled, and More Miserable than Ever Before, Janet Twenge(Free Press, 2006) depicts this generation of young adults as extraordinarily self-absorbed and narcissistic. Twenge thinks that we parents made a mistake in fostering in our children an aura of self-esteem, but did not give them realistic assessments of how challenging the adult world would be.
Today’s young adults are documented as having a great love of God, but less commitment to a particular religious tradition. When it comes to religion many of them are “dabblers and deferrers.” I believe that this is not only one of the most important challenges facing the church with this age group, but also one of our most difficult challenges as United Methodists.
Fortunately, we Wesleyans believe in conversion. We need to know more about what young adults need to be converted from and to. We also must set higher priorities on reaching today’s young adults. Young Christians are not a priority for us until every pastor spends as much time with this generation as with older generations, until each congregation shows in its staff, its budget, and its energies that it is really taking seriously our mandate to reach this generation for Christ. With God’s help, we can.
William H. Willimon
At Chapel Hill, we are trying to figure out how to be more intentional with the 18-30 age group.
We have many from this age group in worship each week. Our challenge is...what do we do to nurture and grow this group.
Here's Bishop Willimon....
The Church and the Conversion of Emerging Adults
One of our Conference priorities is to reach a new generation of Christians. Our focus is upon the 18-30 age group, those who are being called “emerging adults.” If we are to reach this age group—the age group that we have sadly neglected and therefore find absence from our churches—we are going to have to understand them. Fortunately, a number of new books are helpful in that regard.
A major defining characteristic of this age group is their postponement of marriage. In just a couple of decades the average age for women to marry moved from 20-25 years old, and then the average age rose from 22 to 27 years old. Interestingly, this change in marriage began in 1970—about the same year that our church started losing membership and we began losing touch with the next generation.
Studies of the emerging generation seem to agree that the ages of 18-30, that is the threshold of adulthood, has become more complex, disjointed and confusing than in past decades. In his book Emerging Adulthood, Jeffrey J. Arnett (Oxford University Press, 2004) notes that young adults today put a high premium on finding their identity in an uncertain world. They are impressed with economic and political instability and live their lives accordingly. They focus much more on the self and less upon groups, and they tend to be overwhelmed by their sense of possibilities.
This summer I also read James L. Heft’s Passing on the Faith: Transforming Traditions for the Next Generation of Jews, Christians, and Muslims (Fordam University Press, 2006). Adults, who grew up in the church retain very little of what the church taught them, says Heft. Our churches have not passed on the faith to our children. (The chances that someone who grew up in the United Methodist Church will still be United Methodist by age 30 are something like 1-6. For Episcopalians, Presbyterians and many others, the rate of attrition is even worse.) Jeffrey Arnett agrees with Heft’s gloomy analysis of those who happen to have grown up in the church. Arnett says, “The most interesting and surprising feature of emerging adults’ religious beliefs is how little relationship there is between the religious training they received throughout childhood and the religious beliefs they hold at the time they reach emerging adulthood….” A recent survey showed that today’s young adults attend church less, pray less, are less lik ely to believe in authority of the Bible, more likely to identify themselves as non-religious, and tend to be extremely suspicious of institutions and organized religion.
Not too long ago the church could count on a return to church by young adults when they had their first children. That appears not to be a pattern for today’s young adults. Because they are postponing marriage, the church can expect at least a 20 year gap between young adults leaving the church and returning. In her book, Generation Me: Why Today’s Young American’s are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled, and More Miserable than Ever Before, Janet Twenge(Free Press, 2006) depicts this generation of young adults as extraordinarily self-absorbed and narcissistic. Twenge thinks that we parents made a mistake in fostering in our children an aura of self-esteem, but did not give them realistic assessments of how challenging the adult world would be.
Today’s young adults are documented as having a great love of God, but less commitment to a particular religious tradition. When it comes to religion many of them are “dabblers and deferrers.” I believe that this is not only one of the most important challenges facing the church with this age group, but also one of our most difficult challenges as United Methodists.
Fortunately, we Wesleyans believe in conversion. We need to know more about what young adults need to be converted from and to. We also must set higher priorities on reaching today’s young adults. Young Christians are not a priority for us until every pastor spends as much time with this generation as with older generations, until each congregation shows in its staff, its budget, and its energies that it is really taking seriously our mandate to reach this generation for Christ. With God’s help, we can.
William H. Willimon
Monday, October 6, 2008
What is your image of God?
I am convinced that the "bottom line" for one's spirituality is....what is your image of God? How do you view God?
According to a 2006 Baylor University survey, Americans tend to have one of our four images of God.
1. An authoritarian God angry at us for our sins.
2. A benevolent God who primarily forgives.
3. A critical God who views us disapprovingly but nevertheless does not intervene
4. A distant God who "launched the world" but is "detached from and uninvolved in daily events."
Our view of God determines just about everyting. i.e. our politics, our behavior, our disposition, our attitudes, our theology, even our religion!
Which of the most do you most readily identify with? Why? How did you get to where you are?
If you need to work on your image of God, I recommend Good Goats by Dennis and Matthew Linn and Sheila Fabricant. It is a great beginning to healing your image of God.
According to a 2006 Baylor University survey, Americans tend to have one of our four images of God.
1. An authoritarian God angry at us for our sins.
2. A benevolent God who primarily forgives.
3. A critical God who views us disapprovingly but nevertheless does not intervene
4. A distant God who "launched the world" but is "detached from and uninvolved in daily events."
Our view of God determines just about everyting. i.e. our politics, our behavior, our disposition, our attitudes, our theology, even our religion!
Which of the most do you most readily identify with? Why? How did you get to where you are?
If you need to work on your image of God, I recommend Good Goats by Dennis and Matthew Linn and Sheila Fabricant. It is a great beginning to healing your image of God.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Christians and Environmentalism
In the Roman Catholic tradition, the Jesuits are the intellectual leaders. To be a Jesuit, you are required to have a Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy) is some field. It used to be that you had to have 3 doctorates to be a Jesuit. Even the Jesuits are lowering the bar, thank the Lord! :-)
Patrick McCormick, professor of Christian ethics at the Jesuit run Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington, (a place I visited twice in one week this summer...the campus is extremely beautiful) has written an article titled, "Message in a bottle...while poor nations are struggling with scarce water supplies, Americans are spending billions a year on something that is plentiful and practically free."
He wrote this article in response to a book titled, "BottlemaniaL How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It," by Elizabeth Royte. She says that in the 1970's marketers for Perrier began to persuade Americans that bottled water was classier and tastier than plain old tap water, leading millions of upscale consumers to shop for a private brand of drinking water. By 1987 the average American was drinking more than 5 gallons of bottled water a year, and by 2006 the number had jumped to more than 25 gallons.
Today, Royte says, in a country where more than 89% of tap water meets or exceeds federal health and safety regulations, regularly wins in blind taste tests against name brand waters and costs 240 to 10,000 times less than bottled water, customers buy about 1 billion bottles of water each week. Americans spend more on bottled water than on milk, beer, or coffee. Believe it or not!
This is an obvious problem for many reasons:
1. Bottled water is no cleaner or safer than tap water. More than 40% of bottled water brands are drawn from municipal reservoirs or taps.
2. It takes 17 million barrels of oil a year to produce all of the plastic bottles. This does not include the oil needed to fuel the trucks for delivery.
3. The environmental impact of discarded plastic bottles that are not recycled!
There are more issues around bottled water...I'll get into those next week.
But for now, does Christianity have anything to say about the current reality of bottled water?
The Scripture says, "The earth is the Lord's and all that is within it." (Psalm 24:1)
Is there a place of intersection between the current reality of our bottled water industry and the current reality of Sacred Scripture?
Oh, by the way, I am going back to the tap....I hope you will too.
Blessings,
Jeff
Patrick McCormick, professor of Christian ethics at the Jesuit run Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington, (a place I visited twice in one week this summer...the campus is extremely beautiful) has written an article titled, "Message in a bottle...while poor nations are struggling with scarce water supplies, Americans are spending billions a year on something that is plentiful and practically free."
He wrote this article in response to a book titled, "BottlemaniaL How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It," by Elizabeth Royte. She says that in the 1970's marketers for Perrier began to persuade Americans that bottled water was classier and tastier than plain old tap water, leading millions of upscale consumers to shop for a private brand of drinking water. By 1987 the average American was drinking more than 5 gallons of bottled water a year, and by 2006 the number had jumped to more than 25 gallons.
Today, Royte says, in a country where more than 89% of tap water meets or exceeds federal health and safety regulations, regularly wins in blind taste tests against name brand waters and costs 240 to 10,000 times less than bottled water, customers buy about 1 billion bottles of water each week. Americans spend more on bottled water than on milk, beer, or coffee. Believe it or not!
This is an obvious problem for many reasons:
1. Bottled water is no cleaner or safer than tap water. More than 40% of bottled water brands are drawn from municipal reservoirs or taps.
2. It takes 17 million barrels of oil a year to produce all of the plastic bottles. This does not include the oil needed to fuel the trucks for delivery.
3. The environmental impact of discarded plastic bottles that are not recycled!
There are more issues around bottled water...I'll get into those next week.
But for now, does Christianity have anything to say about the current reality of bottled water?
The Scripture says, "The earth is the Lord's and all that is within it." (Psalm 24:1)
Is there a place of intersection between the current reality of our bottled water industry and the current reality of Sacred Scripture?
Oh, by the way, I am going back to the tap....I hope you will too.
Blessings,
Jeff
Thursday, September 18, 2008
The Mystery of Suffering and Pain
Some of you know that I really like the writings of Ron Rohlheiser, who is president of a seminary, in San Antonio. Tell me what you think.
How can there be an all-loving and an all-powerful God if there is so much suffering and evil in our world? Perhaps that is the most difficult religious question of all time. Why does God not act in the face of suffering? Why do bad things happen with seemingly no response from God? In a famous book, After Auschwitz, Richard Rubenstein asks how it is even possible for a Jew to believe in God after the holocaust. How can we believe in God in the face of God's seeming inaction in the face of suffering and evil?There have been countless attempts to answer this question, not least inside the tortured experience of those who are suffering. There have also been many attempts at offering some kind of acceptable theoretical explanation.For example, Harold Kushner (When Bad Things Happen to Good People), writing as a Jewish rabbi, tries to answer the question by defending God's love and goodness at the expense of his power. Essentially, God would help us if He could, Kushner believes, but God isn't all-powerful. Innocent suffering exists not because God cannot stop it. Inside of Christian theology, Peter Kreeft, C.S. Lewis, and Teilhard de Chardin, among others, have written insightful books on this question. Christians believe that what is ultimately at stake is human freedom and God's respect for it. God gives us freedom and (unlike most everyone else) refuses to violate it, even when it would seem beneficial to do so. That leaves us in a lot of pain at times, but, as Jesus reveals, God is not so much a rescuing God as a redeeming one. God does not protect us from pain, but instead enters it and ultimately redeems it. That might sound simplistic in the face of real death and evil, but it is not. We see a powerful illustration of this in Jesus' reaction to the death of Lazarus. In essence, this is how the Gospels tell that story: The sisters of Lazarus, Martha and Mary, send a message to Jesus telling him that "the man you love" is gravely ill. Curiously though Jesus does not immediately rush off to see Lazarus. Instead he stays where he is for two more days, until Lazarus is dead, and then sets off to see him. When he arrives near the house, he is met by Martha who says to him: "If you had been here, my brother would not have died!" Basically her question is: "Where were you? Why didn't you come and heal him?" Jesus does not answer her question but instead assures her that Lazarus will live in some deeper way. Martha then goes and calls her sister, Mary. When Mary arrives she repeats the identical words to Jesus that Martha had spoken: "If you had been here my brother would not have died!" However, coming out of Mary's mouth, these words mean something else, something deeper. Mary is asking the universal, timeless question about suffering and God's seeming absence. Her query ("Where were you when my brother died?") asks that question for everyone: Where is God when innocent people suffer? Where was God during the holocaust? Where is God when anyone's brother dies?But, curiously, Jesus does not engage the question in theory; instead he becomes distressed and asks: "Where have you put him?" And when they offer to show him, he begins to weep. His answer to suffering: He enters into peoples' helplessness and pain. Afterwards, he raises Lazarus from the dead.And what we see here will occur in the same way between Jesus and his Father. The Father does not save Jesus from death on the cross even when he is jeered and mocked there. Instead the Father allows him to die on the cross and then raises him up afterwards.The lesson in both these deaths and raisings might be put this way: The God we believe in doesn't necessarily intervene and rescue us from suffering and death (although we are invited to pray for that). Instead he redeems our suffering afterwards. God's seeming indifference to suffering is not so much a mystery that leaves the mind befuddled as a mystery that makes sense only if you give yourself over in a certain level of trust. Forgiveness and faith work the same. You have to roll the dice in trust. Nothing else can give you an answer.And I do not say this glibly. I know too many people who have been hurt, brutally and unfairly, in ways that make it difficult for them to accept that there is an all-powerful God who cares. But sometimes the only answer to the question of suffering and evil is the one Jesus gave to Mary and Martha - shared helplessness, shared distress, and shared tears, with no attempt to try to explain God's seeming absence, but rather a trusting that, because God is all-loving and all-powerful, in the end all will be well and our pain will someday be redeemed in God's embrace.
Blessings of grace and peace to you,
Jeff
How can there be an all-loving and an all-powerful God if there is so much suffering and evil in our world? Perhaps that is the most difficult religious question of all time. Why does God not act in the face of suffering? Why do bad things happen with seemingly no response from God? In a famous book, After Auschwitz, Richard Rubenstein asks how it is even possible for a Jew to believe in God after the holocaust. How can we believe in God in the face of God's seeming inaction in the face of suffering and evil?There have been countless attempts to answer this question, not least inside the tortured experience of those who are suffering. There have also been many attempts at offering some kind of acceptable theoretical explanation.For example, Harold Kushner (When Bad Things Happen to Good People), writing as a Jewish rabbi, tries to answer the question by defending God's love and goodness at the expense of his power. Essentially, God would help us if He could, Kushner believes, but God isn't all-powerful. Innocent suffering exists not because God cannot stop it. Inside of Christian theology, Peter Kreeft, C.S. Lewis, and Teilhard de Chardin, among others, have written insightful books on this question. Christians believe that what is ultimately at stake is human freedom and God's respect for it. God gives us freedom and (unlike most everyone else) refuses to violate it, even when it would seem beneficial to do so. That leaves us in a lot of pain at times, but, as Jesus reveals, God is not so much a rescuing God as a redeeming one. God does not protect us from pain, but instead enters it and ultimately redeems it. That might sound simplistic in the face of real death and evil, but it is not. We see a powerful illustration of this in Jesus' reaction to the death of Lazarus. In essence, this is how the Gospels tell that story: The sisters of Lazarus, Martha and Mary, send a message to Jesus telling him that "the man you love" is gravely ill. Curiously though Jesus does not immediately rush off to see Lazarus. Instead he stays where he is for two more days, until Lazarus is dead, and then sets off to see him. When he arrives near the house, he is met by Martha who says to him: "If you had been here, my brother would not have died!" Basically her question is: "Where were you? Why didn't you come and heal him?" Jesus does not answer her question but instead assures her that Lazarus will live in some deeper way. Martha then goes and calls her sister, Mary. When Mary arrives she repeats the identical words to Jesus that Martha had spoken: "If you had been here my brother would not have died!" However, coming out of Mary's mouth, these words mean something else, something deeper. Mary is asking the universal, timeless question about suffering and God's seeming absence. Her query ("Where were you when my brother died?") asks that question for everyone: Where is God when innocent people suffer? Where was God during the holocaust? Where is God when anyone's brother dies?But, curiously, Jesus does not engage the question in theory; instead he becomes distressed and asks: "Where have you put him?" And when they offer to show him, he begins to weep. His answer to suffering: He enters into peoples' helplessness and pain. Afterwards, he raises Lazarus from the dead.And what we see here will occur in the same way between Jesus and his Father. The Father does not save Jesus from death on the cross even when he is jeered and mocked there. Instead the Father allows him to die on the cross and then raises him up afterwards.The lesson in both these deaths and raisings might be put this way: The God we believe in doesn't necessarily intervene and rescue us from suffering and death (although we are invited to pray for that). Instead he redeems our suffering afterwards. God's seeming indifference to suffering is not so much a mystery that leaves the mind befuddled as a mystery that makes sense only if you give yourself over in a certain level of trust. Forgiveness and faith work the same. You have to roll the dice in trust. Nothing else can give you an answer.And I do not say this glibly. I know too many people who have been hurt, brutally and unfairly, in ways that make it difficult for them to accept that there is an all-powerful God who cares. But sometimes the only answer to the question of suffering and evil is the one Jesus gave to Mary and Martha - shared helplessness, shared distress, and shared tears, with no attempt to try to explain God's seeming absence, but rather a trusting that, because God is all-loving and all-powerful, in the end all will be well and our pain will someday be redeemed in God's embrace.
Blessings of grace and peace to you,
Jeff
Monday, September 8, 2008
Bishop Willimon's Blog
Finally, I am blogging again! :-)
I read a lot of different blogs. I receive this blog from Bishop Willimon every Monday.
What are your thoughts about his blog?
Do you agree or not?
TEACHING CHURCH
Early Methodism was organized by Wesley and Asbury on the basis of a series of questions. Wesley believed that the leader led by putting two questions to the church, and the church lived by responding to the leader’s questions.
Don’t you find it significant that the key questions with which Methodism’s first conferences opened were these three: 1. What to teach? 2. How to teach; and 3. What to do; that is how to regulate our doctrine, discipline and practice (Doctrine and Disciplines, 1798, Pg. 18). Notice the very first question – What to teach? Wesley was convinced that Christians must be intellectual equipped to follow Jesus. The demands of discipleship are too great not to have the whole person engaged by the claims of Christ including a person’s intellect. Wesley believed that preachers were primarily guardians of doctrine. They not only preached in such a way that won people to Christ, but to make sure they were winning people to Christ!
This past year I have had a number of experiences as bishop that have confirmed my sense that Wesley was right. The day we spent at ClearBranch pondering the Methodist Christian way of believing, including the follow-up sessions in numerous churches, the Conference-wide discussions on War and the War in Iraq, as well as the teaching experiences I have had in dozens of Alabama churches, have all convinced me that Methodist people want to be taught. They long to grow in their faith. They expect their church to offer meetings whereby they grow as disciples.
The Wesley movement was distinguished principally by its determination not only to win people for Christ but also to grow people into Christ. Notice that our Conference mission statement explicitly states our intention to “Grow More Disciples” for Jesus Christ. A primary way we grow in our faith is by continuing to be informed about our faith, to explore the richness of Christian believing and to learn more about Jesus and his way.
I am therefore impressed that any growing must also be a teaching congregation, where the chief teacher is the pastor. In congregations that are successful in reaching new disciples, the need for teaching and Christian formation is even greater. We not only want to reach people for Christ we want to teach people for Christ. Every pastor ought to be able to identify a setting, other than the pulpit, in which that pastor is teaching people for Christ.
Woe to any pastor or congregation that gets preoccupied with merely caring for the congregation, managing and maintaining the organizational machinery of the congregation and neglect the duty to teach the faith.
One of the most appealing aspects of the younger generation that we are trying to reach is that they appear to have a wonderfully “teachable spirit.” They realize that they have not been well informed about the faith, and they appear to be grateful to, and attracted to a church that takes the teaching office seriously.
What to teach – the substance of the Christian faith, its most important convictions – how to teach – how to let the Holy Spirit energize a new generation of disciples – note that this comes before any of our righteous work, our regulative responsibilities and our organizational forms.
Someone has said that the primary work of leadership is asking the right questions. It is up to the leader to ask good questions; and it up to the congregation to give appropriate answers. Thank you Wesley and Asbury for teaching us to ask the right questions!
William H. Willimon
Jeff's response....Bishop Willimon is a profound writer. He makes me think. He stretches me in a lot of ways. I am grateful for that. But, as important as the content of his blog is for the living of our days, at the end of the day, I am not saved by what I know. I am saved because I am known. I am not saved because my doctrine is exactly right. I am saved because God's grace is greater than all my sin. Bishop Willimon seems to be focused on institutional preservation. I have very little interest in preserving the institution for the sake of job security for bishops or clergy. I am not motivated to serve the institution. I wake up with joy and excitement because of the privilege of serving the people of God and trust that the Spirit of the Living God will lead me to the right people at the right time in the right way to serve in the right spirit and right relationship with God and with all of God's people is all that matters as far as I am concerned. Amazingly, the people to whom I am led really don't care how much I know...they want to know how much I care!
One final thought...since I am on a roll :-).... some of the people that are closest to God are not intellectually able to articulate anything about God or the revelation of God in and through the person of Jesus Christ. I rejoice that I am known by God in Christ. I don't lean on my own understanding about the Christian faith very much at all...On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand! Pax, Jeff
I read a lot of different blogs. I receive this blog from Bishop Willimon every Monday.
What are your thoughts about his blog?
Do you agree or not?
TEACHING CHURCH
Early Methodism was organized by Wesley and Asbury on the basis of a series of questions. Wesley believed that the leader led by putting two questions to the church, and the church lived by responding to the leader’s questions.
Don’t you find it significant that the key questions with which Methodism’s first conferences opened were these three: 1. What to teach? 2. How to teach; and 3. What to do; that is how to regulate our doctrine, discipline and practice (Doctrine and Disciplines, 1798, Pg. 18). Notice the very first question – What to teach? Wesley was convinced that Christians must be intellectual equipped to follow Jesus. The demands of discipleship are too great not to have the whole person engaged by the claims of Christ including a person’s intellect. Wesley believed that preachers were primarily guardians of doctrine. They not only preached in such a way that won people to Christ, but to make sure they were winning people to Christ!
This past year I have had a number of experiences as bishop that have confirmed my sense that Wesley was right. The day we spent at ClearBranch pondering the Methodist Christian way of believing, including the follow-up sessions in numerous churches, the Conference-wide discussions on War and the War in Iraq, as well as the teaching experiences I have had in dozens of Alabama churches, have all convinced me that Methodist people want to be taught. They long to grow in their faith. They expect their church to offer meetings whereby they grow as disciples.
The Wesley movement was distinguished principally by its determination not only to win people for Christ but also to grow people into Christ. Notice that our Conference mission statement explicitly states our intention to “Grow More Disciples” for Jesus Christ. A primary way we grow in our faith is by continuing to be informed about our faith, to explore the richness of Christian believing and to learn more about Jesus and his way.
I am therefore impressed that any growing must also be a teaching congregation, where the chief teacher is the pastor. In congregations that are successful in reaching new disciples, the need for teaching and Christian formation is even greater. We not only want to reach people for Christ we want to teach people for Christ. Every pastor ought to be able to identify a setting, other than the pulpit, in which that pastor is teaching people for Christ.
Woe to any pastor or congregation that gets preoccupied with merely caring for the congregation, managing and maintaining the organizational machinery of the congregation and neglect the duty to teach the faith.
One of the most appealing aspects of the younger generation that we are trying to reach is that they appear to have a wonderfully “teachable spirit.” They realize that they have not been well informed about the faith, and they appear to be grateful to, and attracted to a church that takes the teaching office seriously.
What to teach – the substance of the Christian faith, its most important convictions – how to teach – how to let the Holy Spirit energize a new generation of disciples – note that this comes before any of our righteous work, our regulative responsibilities and our organizational forms.
Someone has said that the primary work of leadership is asking the right questions. It is up to the leader to ask good questions; and it up to the congregation to give appropriate answers. Thank you Wesley and Asbury for teaching us to ask the right questions!
William H. Willimon
Jeff's response....Bishop Willimon is a profound writer. He makes me think. He stretches me in a lot of ways. I am grateful for that. But, as important as the content of his blog is for the living of our days, at the end of the day, I am not saved by what I know. I am saved because I am known. I am not saved because my doctrine is exactly right. I am saved because God's grace is greater than all my sin. Bishop Willimon seems to be focused on institutional preservation. I have very little interest in preserving the institution for the sake of job security for bishops or clergy. I am not motivated to serve the institution. I wake up with joy and excitement because of the privilege of serving the people of God and trust that the Spirit of the Living God will lead me to the right people at the right time in the right way to serve in the right spirit and right relationship with God and with all of God's people is all that matters as far as I am concerned. Amazingly, the people to whom I am led really don't care how much I know...they want to know how much I care!
One final thought...since I am on a roll :-).... some of the people that are closest to God are not intellectually able to articulate anything about God or the revelation of God in and through the person of Jesus Christ. I rejoice that I am known by God in Christ. I don't lean on my own understanding about the Christian faith very much at all...On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand! Pax, Jeff
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Still Learning from the Quakers
Well folks...I am back to blogging. I want to continue to share what I have been learning about the Quakers....I have been quoting from the Friends Journal. In my opinion, an excellent publication.
From before...21 Tips on Personal Peacemaking....
Let me give you the complete list....
From before...21 Tips on Personal Peacemaking....
Let me give you the complete list....
- Nothing is gained in trying to decide whose version of what happened is true.
- Blame is not a helpful concept.
- Instead of saying, "It is his fault," "It is her fault," it is more helpful simply to say, "It Is."
- Running away from conflict does not solve it.
- When people are very, very upset they get flooded by adrenaline.
- Timing of efforts to address a conflict is a two-party affair.
- When in conflict with another person, it is not helpful to keep going over in our mind or with another person how bad the other person is, or how bad his/her actions were, how upset he or she makes us or how much we hate this person.
- What is helpful is to focus on the good points of the person.
- Making fun of the preson you are in conflict with, or engaging in sarcasm or ridicult, is poison.
- Each person has something to teach us.
- Judging a person or deciding "who is wrong and who is right" is just another form of blaming.
- People do not cause other people's feelings.
- When someone else is disappointed or angry with us, this does not mean that we are bad or unworthy.
- Dragging other people in by trying to convince them of our point of view or trying to get others to choose sides just makes the conflict bigger and worse.
- When we direct all of our actions towards trying to prevent another person from feeling a certain way (angry, hurt, disappointed), we find ourselves caught in co-dependent emotional caretaking.
- When speaking to another person about our upsets, it is best to use "I" statements of our experience and reactions as our own, rather than blaming others or making them responsible for our feelings.
- The use of alcohol and other drugs during a conflict, or during the attempt to fix it, will make the conflict worse.
- People who are very much alike often have a great deal of conflict.
- We are responsible at all times for choosing behavior that meets our highest moral/ethical standards.
- Culture does not impact conflict.
- When we have made a mistake, it is best to apologize immediately.
The Quakers are known for being peacemakers. That does not mean they shove conflict under the carpet, so to speak. It simply means speaking the truth, in love, in the love of the One in whose image we are created and redeemed.
I learned something from the Quakers....have you? :-)
Thursday, August 7, 2008
21 Steps to Personal Peacemaking
Some of you know that I read a lot --- especially magazines that are written by persons from various bodies within the Body of Christ - the universal Church. For example, I read America, written by the Jesuits of the Roman Catholic Church; Christian Century - written primarily by progressives within the mainstream Christian tradition; Christianity Today - written by the evangelical wing of the church; Friends Journal - Quaker Thought and Life Today - written by those who still keep to the ancient practice of open worship - totally open to the movement of God's Spirit - punctuated by silence and the list goes on.
This blog I want us to learn from the Quakers about how to practice peacemaking -- one of their most important and distinctive contributions to the Body of Christ and to the world.
Lynn Fitz-Hugh, a Quaker from Bellevue, Washington, and a member of the Washington State Alternatives to Violence project. She shares 21 things about conflict that she has learned in nearly 50 years.
Before we hear from Ms. Fitz-Hugh, may I share my own personal musings -- conflict is normal and to be expected when two or more persons are in any kind of consistent communication and connection. Conflict is often viewed as "bad" within the Christian community primarily, I believe, because we have been taught that the presence of conflict indicates the absence of God. You may have heard me say it before but I believe this to be true -- biblically speaking, conflict is normal because relationships are the norm of how we practice Christian community. But, strife is not normal and is very destructive. There is a critical difference. I will interact with Ms. Fitz-Hugh's thoughts over the next several weeks.
This blog I want us to learn from the Quakers about how to practice peacemaking -- one of their most important and distinctive contributions to the Body of Christ and to the world.
Lynn Fitz-Hugh, a Quaker from Bellevue, Washington, and a member of the Washington State Alternatives to Violence project. She shares 21 things about conflict that she has learned in nearly 50 years.
Before we hear from Ms. Fitz-Hugh, may I share my own personal musings -- conflict is normal and to be expected when two or more persons are in any kind of consistent communication and connection. Conflict is often viewed as "bad" within the Christian community primarily, I believe, because we have been taught that the presence of conflict indicates the absence of God. You may have heard me say it before but I believe this to be true -- biblically speaking, conflict is normal because relationships are the norm of how we practice Christian community. But, strife is not normal and is very destructive. There is a critical difference. I will interact with Ms. Fitz-Hugh's thoughts over the next several weeks.
- Nothing is to be gained in trying to decide whose version of what happened it true. "It does not matter in the end. What matters is that each person truly experienced it the way he or she reports it."
- Blame is not a helpful concept. "When we blame, it increases the other person's defensiveness and blocks his or her willingness to listen to us." The problem we face when we point at others is that at least three fingers are pointing back at us!
- Instead of saying, "It is his fault," "It is her fault," or "It is my fault," it is more helpful to say, "It is." Related to #2, some of us blame others too quickly and some of us blame ourselves too quickly and the truth is always somewhere in the middle. By saying, "It is..." does not mean that emotions are not involved - they typically are - but saying, "It is," takes out the poison of blame and judgment and helps us move forward.
- Running away from conflict does not solve it. Obviously, abuse is the exception, but more often than not, we run away from conflict because of fear. And when fear is present, love cannot, because love is the opposite of fear. And fear, given enough time, will result in some form of hate. That is why hate groups are, at root, full of fear.
What do you think? Do you agree? Disagree?
Monday, July 28, 2008
Choices
Again, I am bringing Fr. Ron Rolheiser to you. I so appreciate the gift of communication that God has given him.
When I read Fr. Ron I am reminded of something I once heard, "Jesus, through the Sacred Word, brings comfort to the afflicted and brings affliction to the comfortable." I get both, one way or another, in and through the writings of Fr. Ron. Enjoy -- be comforted and be challenged.
The Pearl of Great Price and its Cost
2008-07-27
A woman I know tells this story: She married a man she loved but, early on in the marriage, was too immature to responsibly carry her part of the relationship. One night she went to a party with her husband, drank too much, and left the party with another man. Eventually she sobered up and repentantly found her way home, fully expecting the marital skies to be ripped asunder with anger. But her husband though hurt and shaken by what had happened was calm, philosophical, direct. When she walked sheepishly into the room he demanded neither an explanation nor an apology. Ultimately, what is there to say? He simply said to her: "I'm going away for a few days so that you can be alone because you need to decide who you are: Are you a married woman or are you something else?" He took a three-day sabbatical from her, she cried, sorted out the question he had put to her, and now, years beyond this painful incident, she is inside a solid marriage and infinitely more aware that the pearl of great price comes precisely at a price.
Every choice is a renunciation. Thomas Aquinas said that and it helps explain why we struggle so painfully to make clear choices. We want the right things, but we want other things too.Every choice is a series of renunciations: If I marry one person, I cannot marry anyone else; if I live in one place, I cannot live anywhere else; if I choose a certain career, that excludes many other careers; if I have this, then I cannot have that. The list could go on indefinitely. To choose one thing is to renounce others. That's the nature of choice.
In most areas of our lives we do not feel this so painfully. We choose and there isn't a lot of sting to the loss. But the area of love is more sensitive. Here we feel the sting of loss more strongly and here we often find it hard to accept the real limits of life. What are those limits? They are the limits that come with being an infinite spirit in a finite world.We are fired into this world with a madness that comes from the gods and has us believe that we are destined to embrace the cosmos itself. We don't want something, we want everything. That's a simple way, though a good one, of saying something that Christianity has always said, namely, that in body and soul we are meant to embrace everyone and we already hunger for that. Perhaps we experience it most clearly in our sexuality, but the hunger is everywhere present in us. Our yearning is wide, our longing is infinite, our urge to embrace is promiscuous. We are infinite in yearning, but, in this life, only get to meet the finite. That's what makes love difficult. We are over-charged for our own lives. We have divine fire inside us, want everything, yearn for the whole world, and yet, at a point, have to commit to one particular person, at one particular place, and in one very particular life, with all the limits that imposes. Infinite desire limited by a finite choice, such is the nature of real life and love. Life and love, beyond the abstract and beyond the grandiosity of our own daydreams, involve hard, painful renunciation. But it is precisely that very renunciation that helps us grow up and makes our lives real in a way that our daydreams don't.
In trying to explain some of the deeper secrets of life, Jesus gives us this parable: The Kingdom of God is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, when he finds a single one of great value, he goes and sells all that he owns and buys that pearl. That, the pearl of great price, the value of love and its cost, is in essence the challenge that young husband put to his wife when he told her to sort out the question: "Are you a married woman or are you something else?" For what are you willing to renounce other things?What is our own pearl of great price? Are we willing to give up everything in exchange for it? Are we willing to live with its limits? Until we are clear on these questions there is forever the danger that, like the wife who left the party without her husband, we will act out in dangerous and hurtful ways.Thoreau once said: "The youth gets together materials to build a bridge to the moon or perhaps a palace or a temple ... at length the middle-aged man concludes to build a woodshed with them." So too in love and life: The child sets out make love to the whole world and the adult eventually concludes to marry a single person, in essence, to build a woodshed. But it's only in that woodshed where life and love are real in this world.
When I read Fr. Ron I am reminded of something I once heard, "Jesus, through the Sacred Word, brings comfort to the afflicted and brings affliction to the comfortable." I get both, one way or another, in and through the writings of Fr. Ron. Enjoy -- be comforted and be challenged.
The Pearl of Great Price and its Cost
2008-07-27
A woman I know tells this story: She married a man she loved but, early on in the marriage, was too immature to responsibly carry her part of the relationship. One night she went to a party with her husband, drank too much, and left the party with another man. Eventually she sobered up and repentantly found her way home, fully expecting the marital skies to be ripped asunder with anger. But her husband though hurt and shaken by what had happened was calm, philosophical, direct. When she walked sheepishly into the room he demanded neither an explanation nor an apology. Ultimately, what is there to say? He simply said to her: "I'm going away for a few days so that you can be alone because you need to decide who you are: Are you a married woman or are you something else?" He took a three-day sabbatical from her, she cried, sorted out the question he had put to her, and now, years beyond this painful incident, she is inside a solid marriage and infinitely more aware that the pearl of great price comes precisely at a price.
Every choice is a renunciation. Thomas Aquinas said that and it helps explain why we struggle so painfully to make clear choices. We want the right things, but we want other things too.Every choice is a series of renunciations: If I marry one person, I cannot marry anyone else; if I live in one place, I cannot live anywhere else; if I choose a certain career, that excludes many other careers; if I have this, then I cannot have that. The list could go on indefinitely. To choose one thing is to renounce others. That's the nature of choice.
In most areas of our lives we do not feel this so painfully. We choose and there isn't a lot of sting to the loss. But the area of love is more sensitive. Here we feel the sting of loss more strongly and here we often find it hard to accept the real limits of life. What are those limits? They are the limits that come with being an infinite spirit in a finite world.We are fired into this world with a madness that comes from the gods and has us believe that we are destined to embrace the cosmos itself. We don't want something, we want everything. That's a simple way, though a good one, of saying something that Christianity has always said, namely, that in body and soul we are meant to embrace everyone and we already hunger for that. Perhaps we experience it most clearly in our sexuality, but the hunger is everywhere present in us. Our yearning is wide, our longing is infinite, our urge to embrace is promiscuous. We are infinite in yearning, but, in this life, only get to meet the finite. That's what makes love difficult. We are over-charged for our own lives. We have divine fire inside us, want everything, yearn for the whole world, and yet, at a point, have to commit to one particular person, at one particular place, and in one very particular life, with all the limits that imposes. Infinite desire limited by a finite choice, such is the nature of real life and love. Life and love, beyond the abstract and beyond the grandiosity of our own daydreams, involve hard, painful renunciation. But it is precisely that very renunciation that helps us grow up and makes our lives real in a way that our daydreams don't.
In trying to explain some of the deeper secrets of life, Jesus gives us this parable: The Kingdom of God is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, when he finds a single one of great value, he goes and sells all that he owns and buys that pearl. That, the pearl of great price, the value of love and its cost, is in essence the challenge that young husband put to his wife when he told her to sort out the question: "Are you a married woman or are you something else?" For what are you willing to renounce other things?What is our own pearl of great price? Are we willing to give up everything in exchange for it? Are we willing to live with its limits? Until we are clear on these questions there is forever the danger that, like the wife who left the party without her husband, we will act out in dangerous and hurtful ways.Thoreau once said: "The youth gets together materials to build a bridge to the moon or perhaps a palace or a temple ... at length the middle-aged man concludes to build a woodshed with them." So too in love and life: The child sets out make love to the whole world and the adult eventually concludes to marry a single person, in essence, to build a woodshed. But it's only in that woodshed where life and love are real in this world.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Suicide
There is a Roman Catholic priest, Fr. Ron Rohlheiser, seminary president in Texas, who is extremely profound in his writings. Everything he writes, I read.
I have found Fr. Ron to be extremely helpful when it comes to the issue of suicide. Generally, I think there is a lot of ignorance about suicide. Because I cannot say it as well as Fr. Ron...here are his thoughts....I would appreciate knowing your thoughts in response.
Our Misconceptions about Suicide
2008-07-20
Sometimes things need to be said, and said, and said, until they don't need to be said any more. Margaret Atwood wrote that and its truth is the reason why, each year, I write a column on suicide. We still have too many misconceptions about suicide.I won’t try to be original in this column, but will simply try to re-state, as clearly as possible, what needs to be said over and over again:What are our misconceptions about suicide?First, that suicide is an act of despair. Too common still is the belief that suicide is the ultimate act of despair - culpable and unforgivable. To commit suicide, it is too commonly believed, puts one under the judgement once pronounced on Judas Iscariot: Better to not have been born. Until recently, victims of suicide were often not even buried in church cemeteries. What is more true is that the propensity for suicide is, in most cases, an illness. We are made up of body and soul. Either can snap. We can die of cancer, high blood pressure, heart attacks, aneurysms. These are physical sicknesses. But we can suffer these as well in the soul. There are malignancies and aneurysms too of the heart, deadly wounds from which the soul cannot recover. In most cases, suicide, like any terminal illness, takes a person out of life against his or her will. The death is not freely chosen, but is an illness, far from an act of free will. In most instances, suicide is a desperate attempt to end unendurable pain, much like a man who throws himself through a window because his clothing is on fire. That's a tragedy, not an act of despair. Given the truth of this, we need to give up the notion that suicide puts a person outside the mercy of God. God's mercy is equal even to suicide. After the resurrection, we see how Christ, more than once, goes through locked doors and breathes forgiveness, love, and peace into hearts that are unable to open themselves because of fear and hurt. God's mercy and peace can go through walls that we can't. And, as we know, this side of heaven, sometimes all the love, stretched-out hands, and professional help in the world can no longer reach through to a heart paralysed by fear and illness. But when we are helpless, God is not. God’s love can descend into hell itself (as we profess in our creed) and breathe peace and reconciliation inside wound, anger, and fear. God's hands are gentler than ours, God's compassion is wider than ours, and God's understanding infinitely surpasses our own. Our wounded loved ones who fall victim to suicide are safe in God's hands, safer by far than they are in the judgements that issue from our own limited understanding. God is not stymied by locked doors like we are. In most cases, suicide is an illness and when its victims wake on the other side, they are met by a gentle Christ who stands right inside of their huddled fear and says: "Peace be with you!" As we see in the gospels, God can go through locked doors, breathe out peace in places where we cannot get in, and write straight with even the most crooked of lines. Finally too there is a misunderstanding about suicide that expresses itself in second-guessing: If only I had done more! If only I had been more attentive this could have been prevented. Rarely is this the case. Most of the time, we weren't there when our loved one died for the very reason that this person didn't want us to be there. He or she picked the time and place precisely with our absence in mind. Suicide is a disease that picks its victim precisely in such a way so as to exclude others and their attentiveness. That's part of the anatomy of the disease. This, of course, may never be an excuse for insensitivity to those around us who are suffering from depression, but it's a healthy check against false guilt and anxious second-guessing. Many of us have stood at the bedside of someone who is dying and experienced a frustrating helplessness because there was nothing we could do to prevent our loved one from dying. That person died, despite our attentiveness, prayers, and efforts to be helpful. So too, at least generally, with those who die of suicide. Our love, attentiveness, and presence could not stop them from dying, despite our will and effort to the contrary. The Christian response to suicide should not be horror, fear for the person's eternal salvation, and anxious self-examination about we did or didn't do. Suicide is indeed a terrible way to die, but we must understand it for what it is, a sickness, and stop being anxious about both the person's eternal salvation and our less-than-perfect response to his or her illness. God redeems everything and, in the end, all manner of being will be well, beyond even suicide.
I have found Fr. Ron to be extremely helpful when it comes to the issue of suicide. Generally, I think there is a lot of ignorance about suicide. Because I cannot say it as well as Fr. Ron...here are his thoughts....I would appreciate knowing your thoughts in response.
Our Misconceptions about Suicide
2008-07-20
Sometimes things need to be said, and said, and said, until they don't need to be said any more. Margaret Atwood wrote that and its truth is the reason why, each year, I write a column on suicide. We still have too many misconceptions about suicide.I won’t try to be original in this column, but will simply try to re-state, as clearly as possible, what needs to be said over and over again:What are our misconceptions about suicide?First, that suicide is an act of despair. Too common still is the belief that suicide is the ultimate act of despair - culpable and unforgivable. To commit suicide, it is too commonly believed, puts one under the judgement once pronounced on Judas Iscariot: Better to not have been born. Until recently, victims of suicide were often not even buried in church cemeteries. What is more true is that the propensity for suicide is, in most cases, an illness. We are made up of body and soul. Either can snap. We can die of cancer, high blood pressure, heart attacks, aneurysms. These are physical sicknesses. But we can suffer these as well in the soul. There are malignancies and aneurysms too of the heart, deadly wounds from which the soul cannot recover. In most cases, suicide, like any terminal illness, takes a person out of life against his or her will. The death is not freely chosen, but is an illness, far from an act of free will. In most instances, suicide is a desperate attempt to end unendurable pain, much like a man who throws himself through a window because his clothing is on fire. That's a tragedy, not an act of despair. Given the truth of this, we need to give up the notion that suicide puts a person outside the mercy of God. God's mercy is equal even to suicide. After the resurrection, we see how Christ, more than once, goes through locked doors and breathes forgiveness, love, and peace into hearts that are unable to open themselves because of fear and hurt. God's mercy and peace can go through walls that we can't. And, as we know, this side of heaven, sometimes all the love, stretched-out hands, and professional help in the world can no longer reach through to a heart paralysed by fear and illness. But when we are helpless, God is not. God’s love can descend into hell itself (as we profess in our creed) and breathe peace and reconciliation inside wound, anger, and fear. God's hands are gentler than ours, God's compassion is wider than ours, and God's understanding infinitely surpasses our own. Our wounded loved ones who fall victim to suicide are safe in God's hands, safer by far than they are in the judgements that issue from our own limited understanding. God is not stymied by locked doors like we are. In most cases, suicide is an illness and when its victims wake on the other side, they are met by a gentle Christ who stands right inside of their huddled fear and says: "Peace be with you!" As we see in the gospels, God can go through locked doors, breathe out peace in places where we cannot get in, and write straight with even the most crooked of lines. Finally too there is a misunderstanding about suicide that expresses itself in second-guessing: If only I had done more! If only I had been more attentive this could have been prevented. Rarely is this the case. Most of the time, we weren't there when our loved one died for the very reason that this person didn't want us to be there. He or she picked the time and place precisely with our absence in mind. Suicide is a disease that picks its victim precisely in such a way so as to exclude others and their attentiveness. That's part of the anatomy of the disease. This, of course, may never be an excuse for insensitivity to those around us who are suffering from depression, but it's a healthy check against false guilt and anxious second-guessing. Many of us have stood at the bedside of someone who is dying and experienced a frustrating helplessness because there was nothing we could do to prevent our loved one from dying. That person died, despite our attentiveness, prayers, and efforts to be helpful. So too, at least generally, with those who die of suicide. Our love, attentiveness, and presence could not stop them from dying, despite our will and effort to the contrary. The Christian response to suicide should not be horror, fear for the person's eternal salvation, and anxious self-examination about we did or didn't do. Suicide is indeed a terrible way to die, but we must understand it for what it is, a sickness, and stop being anxious about both the person's eternal salvation and our less-than-perfect response to his or her illness. God redeems everything and, in the end, all manner of being will be well, beyond even suicide.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Supporting one of our own
I have been told that a blog is personal and that I am not, in any way, speaking in behalf of the congregation or the United Methodist Church. Therefore, I am sharing a personal opinion and conviction with you.
One of our own, Mr. Jeff Van Zandt, is running for District Judge in Sedgwick County. Anyone is Sedgwick County is eligible for vote for a judge in District 28. My goal is not to tell persons how to vote. I am simply wanting you to know that one of our own is running your political office and brings a wealth of credentials and credibility to the task.
Adrienne, Jeff's wife, wrote a great letter that I will gladly add my signature to.
Dear Friends:
In the past few years we have seen many instances of judicial rulings that have impacted our society. Many of these decisions have been contrary to our enacted law and statutes but are still made due to judges who feel the need or desire to enact law from the bench not taking into account the actual wishes of the electorate. Nationwide, rulings are handed down almost daily, which the average citizen finds totally shocking and unbelievable. These decisions are impacting the lives of our children, spouses, friends and fellow citizens. We are now seeing many judicial rulings being handed down from the courts, which are adversely affecting our economy and our way of life. That is why I am writing this letter to you today.
There is an attorney in our church family who has entered his name in the Sedgwick County Judicial race. His name is Jeff VanZandt and he is running for District Judge in District 28.
Jeff's legal background and experience are quite impressive. He has been practicing law for over 23 years. His years of practice have given him a comprehensive and diverse background in business, real estate, banking, consumer and family law. He also has a vast experience and record in civil and commercial litigation. His professional accomplishments are many and as stated earlier, very impressive.
This; however, is not why I have taken the time to contact you and write this letter. I am supporting Jeff and urging your support for Mr. VanZandt for his character and ethics. I can promise you that if you choose to support and elect Jeff for your District Judge, you will see only strict enforcement and application of the law as it stands.
Jeff is a family man and devoted Christian who is committed to serving his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, his wife and two teenage sons, Chapel Hill, and his community. Additionally, Jeff has a genuine concern for our state and nation and the future it will provide to succeeding generations. Fellow citizens, our country and state laws have served our nation well, with fairness, equality and impartiality. We do not need activist judges with hidden agendas sitting in our courts. We certainly do not need one in this district. We need someone with Jeff’s courage and convictions to rule fairly, impartially and not try to make decisions to change our societal principles.
I can only tell you that due to my concern for and the sake of my children, my wife, my friends and my community, I will do everything I can to help elect Jeff for District Judge this year and will be voting for him in the August 5th primary. I urge you to not waste this precious vote because this year, for this office, you have a choice that truly will make a difference for your futures.
Vote VanZandt for District Judge on August 5th. Jeff possesses Honesty, Integrity and Common Sense.
Thank you for your kind consideration!
For additional information or contributions, please contact:
Vote VanZandt, PO Box 781140, Wichita, KS 67207,
Paul Dahlke, Treasurer
One of our own, Mr. Jeff Van Zandt, is running for District Judge in Sedgwick County. Anyone is Sedgwick County is eligible for vote for a judge in District 28. My goal is not to tell persons how to vote. I am simply wanting you to know that one of our own is running your political office and brings a wealth of credentials and credibility to the task.
Adrienne, Jeff's wife, wrote a great letter that I will gladly add my signature to.
Dear Friends:
In the past few years we have seen many instances of judicial rulings that have impacted our society. Many of these decisions have been contrary to our enacted law and statutes but are still made due to judges who feel the need or desire to enact law from the bench not taking into account the actual wishes of the electorate. Nationwide, rulings are handed down almost daily, which the average citizen finds totally shocking and unbelievable. These decisions are impacting the lives of our children, spouses, friends and fellow citizens. We are now seeing many judicial rulings being handed down from the courts, which are adversely affecting our economy and our way of life. That is why I am writing this letter to you today.
There is an attorney in our church family who has entered his name in the Sedgwick County Judicial race. His name is Jeff VanZandt and he is running for District Judge in District 28.
Jeff's legal background and experience are quite impressive. He has been practicing law for over 23 years. His years of practice have given him a comprehensive and diverse background in business, real estate, banking, consumer and family law. He also has a vast experience and record in civil and commercial litigation. His professional accomplishments are many and as stated earlier, very impressive.
This; however, is not why I have taken the time to contact you and write this letter. I am supporting Jeff and urging your support for Mr. VanZandt for his character and ethics. I can promise you that if you choose to support and elect Jeff for your District Judge, you will see only strict enforcement and application of the law as it stands.
Jeff is a family man and devoted Christian who is committed to serving his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, his wife and two teenage sons, Chapel Hill, and his community. Additionally, Jeff has a genuine concern for our state and nation and the future it will provide to succeeding generations. Fellow citizens, our country and state laws have served our nation well, with fairness, equality and impartiality. We do not need activist judges with hidden agendas sitting in our courts. We certainly do not need one in this district. We need someone with Jeff’s courage and convictions to rule fairly, impartially and not try to make decisions to change our societal principles.
I can only tell you that due to my concern for and the sake of my children, my wife, my friends and my community, I will do everything I can to help elect Jeff for District Judge this year and will be voting for him in the August 5th primary. I urge you to not waste this precious vote because this year, for this office, you have a choice that truly will make a difference for your futures.
Vote VanZandt for District Judge on August 5th. Jeff possesses Honesty, Integrity and Common Sense.
Thank you for your kind consideration!
For additional information or contributions, please contact:
Vote VanZandt, PO Box 781140, Wichita, KS 67207,
Paul Dahlke, Treasurer
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
True Patriotism
As we approach the 4th of July, celebrating our Independence and all that it stands for, many have asked me what I thought about church sponsored patriotic programs.
I was reminded that Meredith and I spent a week at two Mennonite Churches in Beatrice, Nebraska. I was teaching in the mornings and evenings and then I preached at both churches on Sunday morning. It was a great time in a lot of ways.
A week before going to Beatrice, my hostess called me and said, "you need to know that last week the church board voted to remove the flags from the sanctuary. It was a tied vote and my husband, as chair, had to break the tie. He voted to remove the flags from the sanctuary."
Needless to say...I was glad that I was prepared for the potential conflict that I would encounter and was pondering my own views about faith and flag. I was asking myself questions like, "what about having flags in the sanctuary....is that appropriate? Is it appropriate to celebrate the 4th of July in the church? Etcetera and etcetera.
So....what do you think?
After I hear from you....I will share some more thoughts.
Jeff
I was reminded that Meredith and I spent a week at two Mennonite Churches in Beatrice, Nebraska. I was teaching in the mornings and evenings and then I preached at both churches on Sunday morning. It was a great time in a lot of ways.
A week before going to Beatrice, my hostess called me and said, "you need to know that last week the church board voted to remove the flags from the sanctuary. It was a tied vote and my husband, as chair, had to break the tie. He voted to remove the flags from the sanctuary."
Needless to say...I was glad that I was prepared for the potential conflict that I would encounter and was pondering my own views about faith and flag. I was asking myself questions like, "what about having flags in the sanctuary....is that appropriate? Is it appropriate to celebrate the 4th of July in the church? Etcetera and etcetera.
So....what do you think?
After I hear from you....I will share some more thoughts.
Jeff
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Tiger Woods and Focus
Op-Ed Columnist: The Frozen Gaze
First, I want to encourage you to read this article.
Secondly, I would like to reflect on the comparisons between life in Christ and Tiger's ability to focus. I find G.K. Chesterton's quote to be challenging...."Christianity has not so much been tried and found wanting as it has been tried and found difficult." What would happen if we, by the power of God's grace, could bring the intensity and focus to our walk with God through Christ that Tiger brings to the game of golf? Just what might happen? As I shared with the Epiclesis service folk on Saturday night....being a disciple, an apprentice of Jesus, a follower of Jesus is extremely difficult on our own strength and power....this is a co-operative journey -- between the God who loves us in Christ and ourselves.
My question for the week is this...how does one learn to become as focused on one's spiritual journey as Tiger is on golf? What does that look like? How do we do it?
What are your thoughts?
First, I want to encourage you to read this article.
Secondly, I would like to reflect on the comparisons between life in Christ and Tiger's ability to focus. I find G.K. Chesterton's quote to be challenging...."Christianity has not so much been tried and found wanting as it has been tried and found difficult." What would happen if we, by the power of God's grace, could bring the intensity and focus to our walk with God through Christ that Tiger brings to the game of golf? Just what might happen? As I shared with the Epiclesis service folk on Saturday night....being a disciple, an apprentice of Jesus, a follower of Jesus is extremely difficult on our own strength and power....this is a co-operative journey -- between the God who loves us in Christ and ourselves.
My question for the week is this...how does one learn to become as focused on one's spiritual journey as Tiger is on golf? What does that look like? How do we do it?
What are your thoughts?
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
guns in church
Did you happen to see the article in the Wichita Eagle about the dilemma that local churches will face regarding the concealed weapon law in Kansas? According to the article, now that the law allows concealed weapons, the only way that churches are exempt is if they place the commonly seen sticker of a gun with a red slash through it on the entry doors.
What do you think? Do you think it is appropriate for churches to have visibly conspicuous stickers on the front doors?
I am reminded of an experience I had in McPherson when I was an associate pastor. I was to give the children's sermon and I decided that I would honor and recognize law enforcement personnel through my children's sermon. I invited a man who was a State Trooper with the Kansas Highway Patrol, a member of the congregation, to join in the front for the children's sermon. I read from the Living Bible a passage from Romans..."if you do what is right...you do not have to fear the police."
The State Trooper came dressed in his uniform and had his gun on his holster. When the service was over, (this was before email), I had several persons who were very upset with me for having the State Trooper as a participant in the service. As I asked more questions about "why," I quickly discovered, that every single complaint registered, was focused on the fact that the Trooper was wearing his gun.
To this day, I have to confess to you, I would never expect a police officer to be present in uniform, anywhere, including a church, without his/her gun. Primarily, for their own safety as a peace officer and for the protection of those who are near them. I know FBI and DEA agents who speak of the need, at all times and places, to never be without protection. People do seek revenge!
So, what if Chapel Hill Charlie or Chapel Hill Casandra show up on a Sunday morning with a concealed weapon? Do we let them in or do we make it clear that guns are not welcome?
My personal opinion is....we should never post signs barring weapons....perhaps we ask, through more gentle means (bulletin, Spark, blog, etc.) to encourage persons, unless law enforcement personnel, to leave their guns at home.
From where I stand.....when we gather in the name of the Prince of Peace, all persons are welcome, and his message of love is stronger than the power of any weapon.
What do you think?
What do you think? Do you think it is appropriate for churches to have visibly conspicuous stickers on the front doors?
I am reminded of an experience I had in McPherson when I was an associate pastor. I was to give the children's sermon and I decided that I would honor and recognize law enforcement personnel through my children's sermon. I invited a man who was a State Trooper with the Kansas Highway Patrol, a member of the congregation, to join in the front for the children's sermon. I read from the Living Bible a passage from Romans..."if you do what is right...you do not have to fear the police."
The State Trooper came dressed in his uniform and had his gun on his holster. When the service was over, (this was before email), I had several persons who were very upset with me for having the State Trooper as a participant in the service. As I asked more questions about "why," I quickly discovered, that every single complaint registered, was focused on the fact that the Trooper was wearing his gun.
To this day, I have to confess to you, I would never expect a police officer to be present in uniform, anywhere, including a church, without his/her gun. Primarily, for their own safety as a peace officer and for the protection of those who are near them. I know FBI and DEA agents who speak of the need, at all times and places, to never be without protection. People do seek revenge!
So, what if Chapel Hill Charlie or Chapel Hill Casandra show up on a Sunday morning with a concealed weapon? Do we let them in or do we make it clear that guns are not welcome?
My personal opinion is....we should never post signs barring weapons....perhaps we ask, through more gentle means (bulletin, Spark, blog, etc.) to encourage persons, unless law enforcement personnel, to leave their guns at home.
From where I stand.....when we gather in the name of the Prince of Peace, all persons are welcome, and his message of love is stronger than the power of any weapon.
What do you think?
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
baptism and infants
Good day to you, sisters and brothers in Christ....
My computer is now out of the shop and I am grateful! I feel as though I have had my right arm reattached. So, I am committed to blogging on a regular basis. I am creating a new habit. They say it takes 21 days to learn a new habit. Thanks for your patience!! :-)
When I preached on baptism recently, like always, I left out a lot of information....I intend to use my blog to cover what I don't get covered in my Sunday sermon....I thought I would name my blog....TBC....to be continued.....what do you think?
When I gave my sermon on baptism, I did not make very clear, something that is extremely important. The question was asked....what happens to infants that are not baptized? I quoted Bishop Willimon who talks about promiscuous baptism. That is, baptism that is done without thought of why this is really a sacred event. From my perspective, I am less concerned about promiscuous baptism because I believe God's grace is at work whether we're serious or not, whether we get it or not, whether we whatever or not. God is God and God is faithful to do God's work and to be active in the life of the person we have entrusted to Divine care. Bishop Willimon, for me, treads on making baptism formulaic and mostly under our control.
Back to the topic at hand. I love wild rabbit chases. You see some great scenery in the process! :-) I am more concerned about superstitious baptisms. What do I mean? I have had people say to me, "Jeff, I must get my baby baptized before he/she leaves the hospital because I am afraid that something might happen and my child will go to hell." Because I am a pastor, pastoral concerns at hand become my highest priority. I will go to the hospital and baptize if the parent or parents request. But, I am also quick to say....your child is in the care of God always. God is faithful to take care of the little ones. Baptized or not. Simply because they belong to God, they are in the loving care of a loving God.
Some of you may be thinking that I don't really think baptism matters all that much. I absolutely do. But not as an act of superstition. Only as an act of grace! It is a naming, a claiming of what God already believes about every infant or child. They are precious, they are persons created in the image of God, have within them, sacred worth. Baptism is our way, as Christians, to celebrate that, and to invite God's Spirit to do in and through their lives what God desires to do.
So...to the point....if a baby or infant is not baptized...and dies...what happens...they enjoy the presence of the One who said..."Let the little children come unto me...for to such as these....belongs the Kingdom of God."
You are a blessing!!
My computer is now out of the shop and I am grateful! I feel as though I have had my right arm reattached. So, I am committed to blogging on a regular basis. I am creating a new habit. They say it takes 21 days to learn a new habit. Thanks for your patience!! :-)
When I preached on baptism recently, like always, I left out a lot of information....I intend to use my blog to cover what I don't get covered in my Sunday sermon....I thought I would name my blog....TBC....to be continued.....what do you think?
When I gave my sermon on baptism, I did not make very clear, something that is extremely important. The question was asked....what happens to infants that are not baptized? I quoted Bishop Willimon who talks about promiscuous baptism. That is, baptism that is done without thought of why this is really a sacred event. From my perspective, I am less concerned about promiscuous baptism because I believe God's grace is at work whether we're serious or not, whether we get it or not, whether we whatever or not. God is God and God is faithful to do God's work and to be active in the life of the person we have entrusted to Divine care. Bishop Willimon, for me, treads on making baptism formulaic and mostly under our control.
Back to the topic at hand. I love wild rabbit chases. You see some great scenery in the process! :-) I am more concerned about superstitious baptisms. What do I mean? I have had people say to me, "Jeff, I must get my baby baptized before he/she leaves the hospital because I am afraid that something might happen and my child will go to hell." Because I am a pastor, pastoral concerns at hand become my highest priority. I will go to the hospital and baptize if the parent or parents request. But, I am also quick to say....your child is in the care of God always. God is faithful to take care of the little ones. Baptized or not. Simply because they belong to God, they are in the loving care of a loving God.
Some of you may be thinking that I don't really think baptism matters all that much. I absolutely do. But not as an act of superstition. Only as an act of grace! It is a naming, a claiming of what God already believes about every infant or child. They are precious, they are persons created in the image of God, have within them, sacred worth. Baptism is our way, as Christians, to celebrate that, and to invite God's Spirit to do in and through their lives what God desires to do.
So...to the point....if a baby or infant is not baptized...and dies...what happens...they enjoy the presence of the One who said..."Let the little children come unto me...for to such as these....belongs the Kingdom of God."
You are a blessing!!
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Forgive me...I'm back!
Well...I am finally back. I will be blogging on a regular basis now. So, thanks for your patience, my friends. I wanted to share an email I received recently....
I recently saw you on television asking for the bond issue and would like some one to tell me why the solution is to throw more money at the school issues we have.Kids are not being educated.period.They can't tell who the secratary of state,or education is,don't know how many stripes are on the flag,what they stand for,or why they are the color they are.They don't know the difference between the circumference and the diameter of a circle,are being taught eveloution as fact,and are not taught about right and wrong or good and evil.why should a christian family spend even more money on a failed system that kicked God out in ' 62 and won't even let Christ's name be mentioned.they don't let us have any input,but do want our money.this is not at all right.
This email came from a friend of mine who had a dramatic conversion experience and now has a very different perspective, than me, on the value of public education. I wanted all of you to know that I am passionate about the value of public education. Please do not misunderstand. I do not think "less" of parents who send their children to parochial or private schools. I believe in freedom of choice. I think that one of the values of being an American is the value of choice. So, I am not framing this argument as....public education over/against private/parochial education. From where I stand, it is a both/and not an either/or. The primary reason that I, as a leader in the faith community, believe so strongly in supportiving public schools is that it serves the common good. It is about serving the greatest number of persons, whether one's own children are being served or not. In my opinion, I have a Christian duty to pay taxes to serve the common good in a variety of realms. i.e. police, fire, EMS, etc.
So, please hear me. I am not telling anyone how to vote on the bond issue. Obviously, I am going to vote yes and I am going to work to get other clergy involved in helping to support the bond issue come November. I simply ask that we allow our Christian faith to inform our politics rather than our politics informing our Christian faith. There is a critical difference and I have concern that we have more of the latter going on than the former.
As I close...my friend makes many good points. Many of thsoe who disagree with my perspective on the bond issue want to immediately attack the amount of money being spent on fine arts facilities and athletic venues. From where I stand...academics and activities go together. Education is enhanced because of both. If spending money on the activities side of the equation is going to keep kids in school who would otherwise be walking the streets, I am all for it!
What are your thoughts? From where I stand....having a strong education system -- public and private -- is essential to our well-being as a Country and as a people who seek to be faithful to the God of all creation.
I recently saw you on television asking for the bond issue and would like some one to tell me why the solution is to throw more money at the school issues we have.Kids are not being educated.period.They can't tell who the secratary of state,or education is,don't know how many stripes are on the flag,what they stand for,or why they are the color they are.They don't know the difference between the circumference and the diameter of a circle,are being taught eveloution as fact,and are not taught about right and wrong or good and evil.why should a christian family spend even more money on a failed system that kicked God out in ' 62 and won't even let Christ's name be mentioned.they don't let us have any input,but do want our money.this is not at all right.
This email came from a friend of mine who had a dramatic conversion experience and now has a very different perspective, than me, on the value of public education. I wanted all of you to know that I am passionate about the value of public education. Please do not misunderstand. I do not think "less" of parents who send their children to parochial or private schools. I believe in freedom of choice. I think that one of the values of being an American is the value of choice. So, I am not framing this argument as....public education over/against private/parochial education. From where I stand, it is a both/and not an either/or. The primary reason that I, as a leader in the faith community, believe so strongly in supportiving public schools is that it serves the common good. It is about serving the greatest number of persons, whether one's own children are being served or not. In my opinion, I have a Christian duty to pay taxes to serve the common good in a variety of realms. i.e. police, fire, EMS, etc.
So, please hear me. I am not telling anyone how to vote on the bond issue. Obviously, I am going to vote yes and I am going to work to get other clergy involved in helping to support the bond issue come November. I simply ask that we allow our Christian faith to inform our politics rather than our politics informing our Christian faith. There is a critical difference and I have concern that we have more of the latter going on than the former.
As I close...my friend makes many good points. Many of thsoe who disagree with my perspective on the bond issue want to immediately attack the amount of money being spent on fine arts facilities and athletic venues. From where I stand...academics and activities go together. Education is enhanced because of both. If spending money on the activities side of the equation is going to keep kids in school who would otherwise be walking the streets, I am all for it!
What are your thoughts? From where I stand....having a strong education system -- public and private -- is essential to our well-being as a Country and as a people who seek to be faithful to the God of all creation.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Starting Blogging
I have decided to enter the 21st Century! I am going to begin a blog. The blog is an opportunity to dialogue about various issues that I think are relevant to the practice of the Christian faith and to how that finds particular expression in and through the ministry of Chapel Hill. I will keep you posted on the progress. Keith Rowley is helping to make this possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
