Authentic hypocrisy
15 Jan 2012 Leave a Comment
I feel like every time I write a blog post these days I am starting off thinking “I don’t ever get to write anymore, so here goes some quick thoughts for the mean time”. For this edition of my tip-of-the-hat to blogging (I guess the name of my site is more and more apt), I want to help the world get one thing straight- the definition of hypocrisy. It just gnaws at my soul to hear it continually used incorrectly, and especially when this is done in attacking some aspect of life and ministry that we need to continue to push forward in. Here’s what happens: in striving to live a life that is good, moral, pious, righteous, etc. every single person has to wrestle with the measure of their own failure and weakness in these areas. Common responses can be understood by the popular Kubler-Ross stages of grief (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance). But, the utmost danger is involved by virtue of the temptation and tendency towards, and ease of, despair. It takes a lot of courage not only to continue to be good in any particular area or instance, but also to strive to be good when it is most tempting and difficult not to. Precisely at this moment, it is downright demonic to fall victim to the accusation of hypocrisy when it does not exist. Especially for Christians, for whom such claims are connected with the biblical theology that profoundly condemns hypocrisy as a fundamental point of foundation in the faith, this is quite halting and calls for great care and precision.
So for the sake of all the use and abuse of this word and this concept, I think it full and safe to simply call us back to the english definition of the word via the dictionary. Hypocrisy is being fake. That is all (though not all types of “being fake” count as hypocrisy of course). In the etymology of the word, it means to act or to play a part, emphasizing again the artificiality of it. Now I ask you this- Is a person who continues to laud a holy life and yet fails to live a holy life simply a phony? In many cases, no. Is a person who tells others that they need to do something a certain way, but doesn’t do it that way themselves, simply acting a part? Not necessarily. Is a person who works at living in a way that is moral and to uphold a reputation as someone who, while not perfect, is trying hard to get there, and yet fails miserably at some point, being a fake? Again, this is the wrong accusation altogether. Now, is a person who claims to be very spiritual and yet has no love for others, and in fact attempts to abuse others for their own ”spiritual” gain worthy of the label, “hypocrite”? Absolutely. Why? Because what she claims about hersself is simply not true. She is pretending to be spiritual, but real spirituality will always lead to the challenge in our hearts to love others. Of course, our love for others may be imperfect, fitful, and definitely full of failures, but to be satisfied with no love for others, adn indeed to be intentionally manipulative of them, is to demonstrate that one is not truly a person of spiritual pursuits at all.
Having said that, pleaes remember that it is one thing to see something contradictory in someone’s life and call it out as such. It is another to go beyond this to accusing that person of being a total fraud. Similarly, I think it is possible to have even areas of one’s life in which one runs perilously close to hypocrisy, and in which one needs to be challenged either to give up one’s projected image (to oneself or to others) or to change one’s behavior to better exemplify what one does indeed hold to in one’s heart (btw, gotta love the oneness in this sentence…). And yet, while this is true, it would hardly be fair (or even possible) for someone to know the other person’s heart well enough to level the claim of hypocrisy at them. Still, this happens with frightful frequency, especially in a generation of people who would rather never be told they need to change their ways. Nevermind that it is quintessentially a logical fallacy to respond with “Oh, shut up, you’re just a hypocrite”. It is usually also plainly not true that the one doing the challenging is in fact guilty of the crime of pretense.
Let me say this to conclude: many of us have probably met someone in our lives who we felt was probably a hypocrite when is came to morality/spirituality. But I want to posit that probably most of us were wrong about those people. I suggest that the real ones are a lot easier to see than the subtle ones most of us attempt to judge. They are out there, to be sure. But there are far more out there who are wrongfully accused of it. And that is a great tragedy to me. It’s hard enough to deal with the difficulties of sin and suffering in the world without the muddied waters of this mistake. So help me out, will you? Before you use the word, think, “do I mean to say that the person is a faker? a poser?” If yes, proceed (with caution) to use the word. If not, say (to yourself) what you really mean, like “that person has a double-standard” or “that person is not perfect” or “that person doesn’t follow their own advise”. or “that person doesn’t is unable/unwilling to do what they know is right”. This will make me very happy. Thank you.
God and circumstances and Godliness
29 Dec 2011 Leave a Comment
A couple months ago( I wrote this then but never published it, ha) I had an experience at Church that was one of the most moving I’ve had in a long time. No single factor deserves the credit, except for God’s Spirit I suppose. But don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying I had one of those “moments” where I “felt” the Holy Spirit in a special way and that I really liked it. Instead it was the form and content of all that was said and done that was formative and transformational for me where I was at. My weekend was on a downward trend of anxiety and frustration over a whole range of issues. One of the readings that morning was about when the people of Israel complained in the desert. It was convicting. A follow up reading was done antiphonally with the congregation repeating the second part of each poetic phrase of a selection from Psalm 78 where the people sang out the praises of how God provided for and led our ancestors in the faith. It was so wonderful to remind myself of God’s faithfulness in this very biblical fashion. I was ashamed at how much I had forgotten the goodness of God in my own life as well.
Furthermore, I began to scrawl out notes about three of the most significant events in the Gospel: The Transfiguration, the Cross, and the Resurrection. I quickly thought of it like this. The Transfiguration revealed God’s glory beyond circumstances. It was as if the curtain of this world’s darkness was pulled back for a moment allowing the full weight of truth to become visible (and terrifyingly good). The Cross revealed God’s love in circumstances. In this image, we see the full weight of trouble and sin and yet God’s powerful enduring love in it. How intimate and strong! In the Resurrection appearances, we see God’s victory over circumstances. All of this infused my heart with immeasurable hope and courage. Additionally I began to feel like I really could go forward and continue to profoundly love the unlovely (like myself) with unconditional value and respect, and also with courageous confrontation when necessary. If God is glorious beyond, victorious over, and loving in the midst of the darkest accumulation of the world’s wicked circumstances, then I could, by Him living in me, have no reason to faint under any complexity.
Sometimes, for me, I really do get zeroed in on circumstances in life. It’s not because I am forgetful of God, but rather, for the very sake of the kingdom of God, I view every aspect of life as an opportunity to manifest and witness His kingdom’s dominion- and this intense task orientation sometimes means I lose sight of the forest for the trees. But I have to admit that recently I’ve gotten dizzy and overwhelmed to the point of feeling like this was a battle with an uncertain conclusion. God gives more than a good hope. He gives beauty and happiness beyond the fight, strength and perspective in it, and the eternal victor’s prize beforehand! I felt more free to confess my faults than ever before and more peaceful and empowered afterward. It is His work beyond me, in and through me, and unto His own secure dominion. I will praise Him and give my all to accept and follow and learn. Just thought I’d share that.
Friend of sinners
14 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
I have a number of pet peeves when it comes to some of the popular misconceptions of the scriptures. My strongest ones come from times when people not only have dramatically misinterpreted them, but also then turn around and use their misguided thinking to imagine they are thereby following some radical and elite spirituality, possibly even rebuking others as missing the boat when it comes to following Jesus. One of the most classic ones has to do with the understanding of Jesus “hanging out with sinners”. If he spent most of his time chilling with the prostitutes, why are we so concerned with being all holy and separate and whatnot? Give me a break! This buzz-line of an argument has been constantly used to justify low moral standards at worst, watered down worship and ministry at best, and all around compromise in life. It goes without saying that we should love people and should desire to reach them with the gospel truth. But it does not automatically follow that we should try to “reach” people by any means possible. To put it to the extreme, should we have a pedophile over as an overnight guest or go on a drive by with some gangsters?! I think (I pray, I hope) that most of us realize that Jesus never meant for us to abandon healthy boundaries.
The fact is that he never did this himself, either. People only think this way because they fail to realize that his “hanging out” was not like we think and the “sinners” in such references were not what we think. The type of people in question (prostitutes, tax collectors, etc.) were definitely coming from groups that were dark and corrupt (though sometimes they were merely non-Jewsish), but the contexts whereby we see Jesus with them are all contexts where they were either coming to Jesus to learn from Him or else Jesus was a fellow guest of someone who was doing so, or else it was just normal day-to-day life (i.e. the woman at the well). This is not at all the same as Jesus just kickin’ back with bad people in their badness. They were overtly pursuing to some degree who Jesus was and what He was teaching. On the whole, His three short years on record were an intensive teaching and reaching journey. There was no time for any normal life of “hanging out” with any group of people except as side visits on a travelling ministry trip (which largely included synagogues… Jewish churches).
Even then, the “sinners” in question were only really called such to reference the life they came from. He is never seen “rubbing elbows” with people set in their evil ways, only with people who were dramatically coming out of it. The scriptures highlight their particular status as “sinners” as a contrast to the self-righteous and unloving Pharisees (the understanding of which is also one of my pet peeves) who are not judged or criticized for staying away from the lifestyles of evil men, but for rejecting an honestly repentant person (or even the possibility of their repentance and God’s forgiveness) out of an hypocritical (i.e. false front) rhetoric regarding ceremonial cleanliness. Technically, such people were considered “unclean” according to Jewish custom and thereby, to even be in the same house as them, especially to share a meal, without them going through a process of cleansing (going to the temple and making an offering, etc.) was to make oneself unclean as well. It wasn’t a matter of being more willing to associate with evil people “where they are”, but with never being so self-absorbed and self-satisfied that we lose sight of disinterested love and openness for all people to come to God in their need. The Pharisees’ understanding and application of this custom had cut off such possibilities of love and outreach. Yes, Jesus did reach out- way out. But he never spent any free time just shooting the breeze down in the brothels, not even as a sort of “maybe they’ll eventually wanna know why I’m different and ask me” endeavor.
I have a friend who runs an outreach center for troubled Somali youth in Minnesota (word up, Molly!). It’s awesome. These kids need some place to go that’s good clean fun and recreation, keeping them out of trouble. At the center, they do indeed just kick it with these “sinners”. But, again, the youth are coming to their center, which has special rules on behavior and leadership that infuses healthy conflict resolution, positive encouragement, and just plain gospel truth into all they do. I hope that people can see the humongous difference between this and others who, in the name of the false interpretation I’m addressing, continue to spend their time with people (“friends”) who are involved in violence, drugs, and sexual immorality. Not only do we need to separate for the sake of our own health and growth, but also so that there can truly be something for people to come to (and I don’t just mean a Church service, though they too are being drastically watered down in the name of “seeker sensitivity”) when they finally decide to leave such evil ways. The proverb cited by Paul himself (the most inclusive of missionaries) is forever true. “Bad company corrupts good morals”. But if we will continue to be a light on a hill, and not lose our saltiness, the world will be impacted for good instead!
Kids these days…
09 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
Old man rant time! I’ve been working with youth since the time I became an adult (cough, twelve years ago, cough). I went seamlessly (well, not really seamlessly so much as dramatically through a conversion experience that radically changed my life) from being a youth to leading youth. My own youth was spent in deep depravity and rebellion. My work with youth has mostly been in religious contexts. These facts have colored my perspective in a couple of ways that I know of. First, they force me to accept that, even to the extent that I may think that things have gotten worse (and no, this isn’t a post all about how downhill things have gone since I was a kid, though it includes some of that), sin in youth is nothing new and in fact should be expected. Second, for as much as we recognize that all are sinners, over the years I have become more and more deeply convinced that we should permit no room for accepting this as ok, especially in the Lord, especially when working with youth in a formative situation. God wants to sanctify His people in order to truly make them a light to the world (which is way darker than even I am regularly exposed to). Third, I have tremendous hope and aspiration for the possibilities and potential that living a righteous life from youth can afford.
My main observation about youth today (and I’ll throw in here that, of course, I’m not talking about every single person, but the general trend) is that, more than ever before, their problems and issues are direct manifestations of the popular culture. This is true because of our new era of entertainment and communication, which has blossomed with the explosion of television and been crowned with the internet, has made possible instant and constant access, with a residual movement toward turning all of reality into nothing but an entertainment program with each of us as her or his own producer (at worst co-producer, at best celebrity star of the show). This has multiple ramifications that are a big big deal for those of us who raise or otherwise minister to them. For one thing, it means realizing that, above and beyond the normal youth vs adult or human vs authority temptation for rebellion (which I do also posit has special impetus in our time) there is a new, and in my opinion stronger, force to reckon with in the battle for each person to buck off any interruption to their own desired programming for their life. In short, you have to hijack their show, maybe their whole station, in order to shape their being for good.
This is true even when their parents give you the right, and even when the student is religious, for even general Christianity today tends to present itself as self-help rather than demanding self-surrender, and especially where it pertains to submitting to another human being. But, I digress. This means shattering their delicate voyeuristic fantasies over and over in a way that never had to be done with kids of the past. And generally speaking, the older the kid (and the more cool gadgets they have and freedoms they have from parents), the harder the hammer has to be to shatter it (again we’re not talking about the good kids so much, though what we call good doesn ot exempt them from having the same need that I’m discussing here). The great news is that, on the other side, the child can find that reality isn’t something they need to hide or escape from, and that it can in fact be a great adventure and a loving kingdom, more wonderful than any of their own machinations! It may even be true that such “broken in” students are more open and pliable to truth than previous generations because they haven’t spent all their time getting calloused since they’ve not really been engaging in it (though there is definitely a lot more confusion to correct along the way).
Another major ramification is that it is far more difficult to do anything with youth that does not meet their sense of instant entertainment gratification. It is commonly observed that we all used to create our own fun and enthusiasm in various ways (some pin it down to “imagination” though I don’t accuse our youth of lacking that per se). Youth today just seem increasingly unable to do this. Motivation for engaging real life must often be provided (like a director to an actor) by someone else or else by the overwhelming nature of the activity at hand being very inherently entertaining or special. Since life is not at all like that all the time (nor even most of the time), there is a frustrating rub here. Students must be challenged to do more than they think is fun and adults must constantly consider the nature of life’s motivations for doing things in order to transfer healthy values.
According to my evaluation, the worst effect in all of this is that any and all of the terrible ways of our secular society are that much more assimilated and practiced by our youth from earlier and earlier ages, to the point that our 3rd and 4th graders are joking about sex! So many “isms” are not only underlying the stuff kids ingest through media (relativism, nihilism, hedonism, narcissism, etc.) in heavier doses than ever before, but these also are natural derivatives of living for entertainment in the first place. In a time when Christianity is being proffered as a “personal experience” I suggest we return to a more fundamentalist approach of hard core, absolute reality check. Either Christ is Lord of all or He isn’t. Either we need to revere Him or we don’t. Either love is right and righteous, or it isn’t. And on and on the list could go. We can’t begin to think we are competing with the multi-billion dollar industries that have their attention. Our truth needs to be so solid that everything else becomes starkly hollow by contrast. Our proclamations shouldn’t be like commercials for a product we’re selling, but rather like declarations of war on all lies to the contrary, with an army of arguments to back them up. Youth today will not be truly changed until they are truly challenged. Will we be bold enough?
The will of God
31 Jul 2011 Leave a Comment
This summer has been crazy. From wondering what I would do for work, to Carrie finishing her degree, to one of our car’s going to its grave, it feels like a stream of “brain teasers” have hit me regarding God’s will for my family’s life. Some would question whether it is even fitting to refer to matters of God’s will as brain-related so much as an application of another kind of paradigm that a short list of theological emphases affords. I was struck with one of those moments where I am aware of a variety of approaches, all with some good and valid insight. In such times I usually take to making lists, and, when the content is not too esoteric, sharing them like I am now (do I have the spiritual gift of secretary-ism?):
1. God’s perfect will vs His permissive will: This is the most immediate, the most obvious, and the most popular distinction that is made. Surely a good God (and God is perfectly good after all) doesn’t ever want any evil to happen, but it definitely happens. So as long as we are accepting that He is in fact God (and good), we have to articulate a category like this to account for the “allowances” that we experience. This means we can both encounter evil through the tension of this mystery and also maintain a deep rooting in God’s righteous law. It also brings great joy and comfort to know that no evil can replace or overtake God, but that His immanence is truly and unendingly universal. No, God doesn’t make all things happen for a reason. But He does make all things work together for good for those who love Him (Romans 8:28).
2. God’s intention vs His plan: Wonderfully, there is even more revealed to us behind the thick curtain of God’s permission of suffering. One great and glorious truth that so many have found to be fundamental to the faith in these uncertain times we live in is that, while the fullness of God’s good intentions may not be met in any given era, they will be met eventually according to the delightful knowledge that He has a plan underway (and has from the beginning). This is far more than simple allowance. It is taking the world by the horns and riding out its wild bucking rampage until it is tamed into its pen (with varying degrees of force applied, but characteristically deferential). It is so very reassuring to remember this element. We can thus begin to work out God’s will in total peace.
3. God’s general will vs His specific will: And this is where people immediately surrender that peace in confusion. If we are simply shooting for His perfect will and realizing that we are falling short, but also realizing that He will continue to work a plan in it all for good according to His overall intentions, then we need not worry and fret about particular plans and decisions the way that so many of us do. We should just “give our best, and let God do the rest”. But, if we are deeply relying on the fact of God having a “plan”, we can easily begin to think in this third pattern where it is broken down into general (ex. salvation) and specific (ex. where to park the car). The dilemma comes when we realize that this specific will is not publicly revealed anywhere. Yet, various aspects of the scriptures and of our faith lead us to believe we can and maybe even should be getting direct ”leading” from God in this area. Many interesting stories come to us, for instance, about how this or that “feeling” or otherwise inexplicable decision led to a “divine appointment”. This is fuel on the fire which leads us into some dangerous flames if we’re not careful and wise in it.
For instance, I think most of us have made peace somehow with the fact that such specifics are not always revealed, to say nothing of the fact that they may not even always exist (most would agree that He probably doesn’t have a parking spot picked for us, though that’s not to say He doesn’t care, or that it might not have huge implications, or that He might not have one picked out occasionally). Likewise, it is healthy to accept that such leading may not always be definite or immediate (i.e. a strong, clear sense of what to do in our “gut”), and may in fact require a lot of investigation, prayer, and counsel, with the end result still feeling more like 75/25 than certainty. And of course we must add that, even with a direct leading, we need corporate discernment and accountability to be sure it is not clearly leading us in the wrong direction. There is much that could be said and is being said to help us hone this process. But let us also address some fundamental criticisms of the whole notion.
4. God’s script vs His relationship: The deepest error in getting caught up in such a feed-me-my-line type of living is that it is hollow. While it is keen to note that the methods of receiving God’s specific will essentially demand a constant communal and spiritual existence from us, this by no means guarantees an actual loving relationship with others or God. To the contrary, it fosters a mindset that sees all else in the world (even God) as a means to a personal end- getting God’s specific will right for my life. Even if the ulterior motive for this is for God’s glory or the benefit of others, it still bottlenecks at this point and the self becomes the ultimate center upon which everything depends. The bottom line is that this is incompatible with God’s intentions. It is clear that He seeks relationships, full, robust, honest, free, creative, loving relationships. How wooden of us to be zeroed in on following some kind of heavenly “script”. It is wonderfully edifying to open ourselves back up to the terrifying freedom of God’s agenda. In other words, too much emphasis on the specifics leaves us myopically sacrificing the generals. My coach used to call it tunnel vision, and those who had it usually ended up costing us the game.
5. God’s steps vs His goal: Now, I hope you don’t take me as suggesting that God has no such specifics for us in our life. I believe He does indeed and that remaining open to Him in this way is a key component of Christianity. It’s about following a real person- Jesus- in a concrete way- His Church- through the power of the Holy Spirit. If we reduced it even to something like “loving relationship with God and others”, we have made it a project at our bidding and have lost touch with Christ. Sure love for God and neighbor is the greatest commandment, and we should be about it. But our faith is more than this. And God’s will is for more as well. This is why He not only “works in mysterious ways” in the sense that we sometimes don’t understand. but that His perfect will actually requires Him to call our attention out of the “wind and the waves” of any particular agenda of our own and unto His face. We are not meant to be preoccupied with making sure our every decision fits the pre-ordained details of God’s “specific will”. Rather, we should be spending our energy worshipping the living Christ and letting Him lead us into the fullness of life. Yes, He inspires vision, and projects, and ministries, and particular actions; He calls us to community and commands us to structure it right; He walks with us into and out of our families. But what’s more is that He sanctifies us. He teaches us and forms us and empowers us and challenges us to become kingdom people, not just act like them. This doesn’t mean learning how to be a better puppet at His command, but how to be a better person with greater love and wisdom. We should always be open and submissive to His specific will in any given, and everything that He does He does through making disciples of us, but His perfect will, along with His permissive will, intentions, and plan, even the specifics themselves are shaped according to the purpose of what many Christians refer to as theosis- making us more and more like God himself. In order to do this, I think it would, at least occasionally, require that He back off and let us drive a little, the way parents do with kids learning to ride a bike (or even the car). This would mean intentionally not disclosing the answer key to life or the road map to the goal. Indeed, such a revelation of the exact steps leading to the goal would paradoxically be counter-productive to ever getting there!
So, let’s seek after and follow Jesus, wherever He leads, and become the kind of people He wants us to become, doing our best to be open to His “specific will” while also being at peace knowing that nothing is going to knock Him off His throne and that we can’t do better than our best shot at doing right, nor can we do any better than allowing the Lord to sanctify us, filling us with knowledge and wisdom and insight and discernment as we remain faithful to Him, trusting that He will always have a plan for working good from whatever we’re able to offer.
The human web
22 Jul 2011 Leave a Comment
No, not the internet! But I will give a quick nod to say that it certainly has intensified (inflamed?) the web that I want to discuss. But what I’m referring to is the rudimentary interconnectedness of all humans on the planet. For now, I am only referring to the living, though the connection with the dead merits investigation and acknowledgement from a Christian point of view. I am certainly not referring to the nebulous, new-age “energy” connection, though there is some small amount of science to explore in the matter for those who feel like it (and no, it won’t provide any scientific support of telekinesis, or discover any “unused” portion of the brain, etc.). And I am open to the idea of realizing an existential principle of openness that is much like what the new age energy proponents urge, except it has to do with the merits of our disposition rather than any actual energy “flow”, but that’s another story, too. What I really want to discuss are the often unnoticed or underappreciated ways in which our interconnectedness affects life.
For starters there’s what is commonly known as the “butterfly effect”. While the movie by that title was a bit disturbing, the overarching concept was solid- that each act has repercussions that eventual alter all of life, so that “a butterfly that flaps its wings in one part of the world causes a hurricane in another part”. It is even better (more clean, less Ashton) portrayed in the video “God is a DJ“. I think this is a generally well-received realization, that is, when people finally do realize it. In habit, I don’t think enough people realize what stands behind every little detail of life- a complicated web of actions and interactions that changes everything if tweaked just a tiny bit! In application, it starts to raise our appreciation of God’s interventive acts (and anybody’s acts for that matter) as truly eternal. This means there can be an upward spiral to every good act and a downward spiral to evil- something that should cause us to consider carefully how we act. It also brings humility to imagine how it is that God achieves anything at all of His panoramic and detailed intentions in such a chaotic system! It certainly puts a pause in my criticisms of what I think He has or has not done.
Rooted in this understanding, there is the less popular understanding of how we affect one another through our connection to God. Working with the notion that God has chosen to leave room for human will in His saving/sanctifying the human race, we must realize that every time someone resists His fullness in their lives it also closes a doorway for His blessing to flow through them as much and thus also not as much into the whole human race as God attempts to work with us all simultaneously. Each act has enough ramifications by itself. If you throw in the will of people trying to resist things, it gets crazy complicated, and the end result is less good than if there were less sin. Now someone might want to point out that God “works all things together for good” or site the OT examples of God using evil rulers for His purposes. I simply assert that life is always better when the ruler God uses is good rather than evil. If he could do as much as He has with evil to work with, imagine what He can do with goodness (consider what He accomplished with just one sinless human- Jesus!). In the end, any sin anywhere, no matter how small or “personal” reduces the possibilities for heaven on earth everywhere! How grievous then is our sin, and how wonderful when God can find a “a head He can lift…”?!
This all brings a whole new light to the value of solidarity. When we take actions that have no other end but to intentionally express this connectedness that I’m discussing, it does more than just help us remember the fact. It is an act in which the actor is forming herself according to the precise nature of our existence, as opposed to the twisted and contorted ways in which we futilely try to live to the contrary. It could be likened to a ship which (finally) opens its sails square to the wind. Similarly, this begs us to re-visit the theological articulations of vicarious suffering. If one man were to live perfectly, he could not, according to our inescapable connectedness, do so without bearing the weight of the fullness of human sin which opposes his perfection. As if this isn’t enough to make the head spin, what if God intentionally also takes advantage of any righteousness He finds to direct more of His precious efforts (again, limited by the sins of others according to God’s own decision to work with human will rather than overwrite it) to others rather than to us…? This is quite mysterious!
Lastly (it’s all I can handle right now without my brain exploding) there’s the question of limitations in revelation due to the contrast between God’s holiness and our humanity’s sinfulness. In other words, perhaps there lies a reasonable explanation here to the common complaint that God seems not to speak freely and audibly to each of us as we might want or expect. Rather, perhaps our entanglements make is necessary for Him to bracket such speech in a holy context (like His plan of salvation in history through the nation of Israel, fulfilled in Christ, blossomed and carried to fruition in the Church). In the prayer of the St John Chrysostom, he promises, “for I will not speak of thy Mystery to thine enemies”. While a born and bred “evangelical” like myself may balk at such words at first, they now echo this insight- that God’s revelation to us absolutely must maintain its context or else it becomes precisely what some people see it as (and this the result of so much unfaithfulness by those who call themselves Christians)- a scrambled mess. If mankind is permanently linked as a unity, then the special circumstances of God getting in the mix, and of the Church becoming a special sphere for such interactions, are of necessity also communal in nature. It almost needs not be said then that individualism is not only unhealthy in its extremes, and not only foreign to the truth, but also a dangerous machination. Lord, have mercy.
Nature vs nurture
24 Jun 2011 Leave a Comment
An age-old question. A ponderance approached from many vantage points for many purposes over many years by many people (learned or otherwise). A dialogue with insights and conclusions holding universal import and a plethora of particular applications. A matter for theological scrutiny and also inevitably for philosophical abstraction. I chime in today on the issue in order to clarify one main important aspect. No serious thinker/scholar of any discipline can continue to hold to an either-or position as the final umbrella answer, as if there were no such thing as a biological influence to our being, or as if our biology alone determined our lives. On a side note I find it quite peculiar (and dangerous) that we live in a society that errs in both ways together. On the one hand, the “nuts and bolts” approach to human existence supports a total and rampant hedonism. “You and me baby ain’t nothin but mammals” is an anthem of American society. And with the next breath we excuse any and every fault (if there even is such a thing as a “fault” anymore in public discourse) as simply the product of a bad society. Even the first couple on Earth engaged in such finger-pointing when put on the spot. This combination of saying we are all nature in make-up and all nurture in morality is a deadly foundation for a society, not to mention wrong. In addition to this, with the rise of research and general popularity of genetic science, there is a strong shot in the arm given to the notion that we are nothing but the fatalistic outcome of our DNA. Yet, with so much work poured into both the sociological argument (i.e. nurture) and the biological one (i.e. nature) simultaneously, it should be quite settled by now we are dealing with both at all times. One of my favorite lectures in Psychology was when I got to share with students the flow chart on nature vs nurture which showed clearly the complexity of the interplay from conception forward. Yet, I am dismayed at how often one or the other extreme case is made as a philosophical basis for viewing or justifying various behaviors.
And this is where I want to “chime” the loudest. Certainly there are some aspects of human life that are far more heavily influenced by nature than nurture (ex. height) and others that are the reverse (ex. clothing preference). Just as certainly, there is much confusion about which issue falls where. And there is much more grievous deception and folly when it all boils down to the area of behavior. You see, the distinction must always be held between one’s general inclinations (which may themselves be influenced by any number of biological aspect, from chromosomes to hunger, with the latter type being surprisingly more difficult to resist at times and yet curiously given far less allowance in our society than the former) and one’s actions based on those preferences. Discussions about personality provide a great example of this. While there is good reason to believe that many of our deepest traits of how we tend to see, process, respond, and present ourselves to the world are grounded in strong biological dispositions, we cannot for one moment think that this could trump the demands of character development, which may end up changing us in these areas. And anyone, like myself, who has taken (and given) multiple personality assessments over time, realizes that at the very least some amount of genuine change in person is quite normal.
Another example of the matter comes from Gardner’s theory on intelligence. In my opinion, it is rooted in good science on brain function (though I fundamentally disagree with the way that the theory attempts to identify people as one type or another- a part of it that flatly contradicts the science of everyone having all to some extent). But, when it is applied to argue that we should simple cater to the strengths (as if they are unchangeable) rather than try to have everyone develop a certain level of proficiency in some basic areas regardless of the fact that some people are naturally stronger than others in that area when they come to us, it has lost its basis in science and been marshalled according to the false philosophy that our classroom behavior and learning abilities are all nature, abdicating the nurture element (and often, unfortunately, similar types of intellectual negligence are made in the process of assessing such abilities to begin with).
Both of these examples reveal ways in which many have subtly bowed down to the shrine of humanism, worshipping the almighty and immutable brain and staring mystified at the physical body which we are not sure how to either tame or claim. The remedy will ultimately come from looking beyond the question altogether up to the horizon of God’s dynamic call to a life of repentance and transformation (and the fact that the immaterial/spiritual component is quite ignored is a whole other problem to be corrected). This doesn’t mean we neglect the fullness of our created existence nor that we deny the powerful role it plays in our lives. Rather, our physical selves must be taken up as well and offered unto God for healing, blessing, and commission. After all, it is as physical beings that we were created and it will be as physical beings that we will be redeemed and live eternally. So there is no allowance made for a bare behaviorist approach to our existence (or our faith), nor for an abstract “mental” approach alone. We must take it all and give it all, opening ourselves to the transfiguration of it all in the kingdom.
What I remember
29 May 2011 Leave a Comment
For the past few years, Memorial day has been a time when I get quiet and polite trying to be respectful to those who remember their dead. While I have been an absolute pacifist when it comes to taking a life or fighting a war, I have not wanted to use this day to hurt people’s feelings. Interestingly, this memorial day has especially found me surrounded with the challenge to love my enemy (Bin Laden) and pray for the fool (Camping). Now, as we turn to remember those who died trying to kill the enemies of America, I want to express something to their credit that is new in my heart. As I wrote about in a different post, my pacifism been cracked open a bit by some reflection on the Genesis account. Since then, as I’ve wrestled through some tough attempts at trying to apply this newfound principle in today’s world, I have come to a new appreciation of the blurriness of the issue. That blurriness is no more blurry than in the situations Americans have faced in the Revolutionary War and WWII. The end result is that I am able today (in a way I have not been in years) to attribute honor to those who lost their lives by rushing the fires of evil out of a noble heart that was set on loving and serving God (according to how they understood his commands regarding taking a human life). It is no small thing they have done, and I am moved by their strength.
However (you knew this was coming), this is a far cry from glorifying the motive of patriotism in these bloody and awful endeavors. The whole notion of killing and dying “to protect the Constitution” is hogwash from a Christian perspective (the Constitution being a completely Godless framework for a country). Killing to protect one’s family is also not what I am praising. Nor am I praising killing for “freedom” in general. None of these are adequate motives in the taking of a human life (though certainly they are good for the giving of one’s life). The only honor to be found in such disgusting mires of human evil is in the fact that one is serving God faithfully, despite the messiness of the affair. It all comes down to how and why and where and when and in what way God condones/commands the just taking of life. And, like I said, since I now appreciate better that it is not perfectly obvious what to do in every context and circumstance, I am revisiting the amazing and inspiring stories of sacrifice and valour in a new light (i.e. a positive one).
In doing so, I am also feeling like it’s worth holding these brave women and men up as examples today of bravery itself! I think we live in a time of scared, self-indulgent, sissies. Who will stand for what they believe in, regardless of the inevitable and eventual cost? Who will give up their luxuries to help in a desperate cause (of which there are many today in our nation)? Who will say what needs to be said in a world of deception and darkness? Who will call sin sin and God God? Who will do what it takes to build a holy life, a happy marriage, a healthy family? Who will break the social ice and address the ills of America head on (sure it’s a great country as long as you’re not one of the quarter of births that are aborted!). Who will surrender their pride and return to serving the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords? Let’s enjoy a day off tomorrow and celebrate the good things in life. Let’s also remember that a good thing is worth fighting for. I’m not talking about killing and warring (unless God says to), but rather the simple virtue of courage. Rise up Americans! Rise up Christians! (maybe after sleeping in first, but you know…when you rise, Rise!)
Straight talk about the gay agenda
25 May 2011 Leave a Comment
Last week, the local community college held a board meeting in which is discussed the issue of revoking a contract for a “Christian” event called “The 99″ which has been using their parking lot. The reason for such a move (backed by a swarm of people from the community calling for this action) was two-fold. First, it was argued that the counsellors in the event were not professionals but unlicensed volunteers. Second was the complaint that the group did not allow any of its staff or counsellors to be gay. Whether the first issue is worthy of such a revocation I leave to a different discussion (I will tell you I think it is not sufficient cause). I want to turn to the matter of “the gay agenda” as I call it. Having attended this college and been a member of its student government, I can say with good surety that there is certainly such an agenda afoot in the ranks. The agenda has everything to do with assuring an environment where homosexuality is accepted and affirmed (even praised) as normal and healthy by everyone and never spoken against, challenged, put down, or rejected by anyone in any way. It’s a pink triangle propaganda parade worked through as many avenues of authority as possible. I don’t think such an agenda is unique to that college, either. I believe it is the gay agenda in our nation.
In political terms, I believe the gay community will not rest until their sense of protection under the 14th amendment is thoroughly worked through the minds and hearts of the country at every level and facet. The best way I can put it is that they want to be seen as if their cause was little different from that of the African-Americans who fought for desegregation and non-discrimination. What’s interesting about this is that people fail to realize that, as opposed to public businesses like hotels, theaters, etc., private organizations (generally speaking, and in most states) have every right to discriminate on any basis they want (consider the boy scouts who were backed by the supreme court in denying gay leaders). Now, since nobody tends to discriminate based on race (it being an issue that is completely amoral and avolitional), this is quite forgotten, especially in the mind of those who have swallowed the propaganda of ”gay is ok”. Not only is homosexuality not amoral and not avolitional (the suggestion that they are is simply propaganda propped up with poorly applied scientific arguments), it also deserves no legal right to immunity of criticism or freedom from negative evaluation the way that race does (and it certainly does not deserve the accommodation of an automatic broadening of basic definitions such as “marriage”). Alcoholism, for instance, has genetic correlation stats, but we have no qualms about speaking of it as a problem that needs to be helped. We don’t deny the rights of alcoholics, of course, but neither do they have political and legal ”untouchable” status, and being an alcoholic can have certain negative repercussions in one’s social life (as should especially be true of homosexuality when it comes to private organizations at the very least).
If someone wants to argue that homosexuality does in fact deserve such a status, I suppose we could engage in that debate (I believe that, ever since homosexuality was removed from the DSM, there followed a wave of assumption about the issue that first needs to be addressed). But what is most frustrating to me, I think, is that the agenda is streamrolling on, having bypassed any such public acceptance (except via the passivity of those who know better and the active official positions of various organizations, regardless of strong and valid dissent existing.). I suppose I am referring to law here, and it makes me wonder what may have transpired in this respect while I was not paying attention to the issue. Either way, it is all happening now as a matter of presumption, treating it as a foregone conclusion!
All in all, it’s one thing to defend the right of a homosexual to exist; to have life, liberty, and property. It’s another thing to cut into and cut down the liberty of another group which denies that gay is ok. In the case in question, the school should not be a “pro-gay” institution, much less an “anti-anti-gay” institution. There is no grounds for either in public affairs. It does not and should not, then, have any real dilemma in this situation regarding the matter of homosexuality. A group that denies straight people the ability to join should be allowed its free speech and a group that does the opposite should be allowed the same. It is upsetting to see how completely convoluted this has become.
The “what if”s of judgement day
21 May 2011 1 Comment
As I was pulling a billion weeds in the side yard on this wonderful spring day (one day I’ll remember to wear gloves and not get a blister on every sensitive spot of my girlishly soft hands), my thoughts strayed to the hubub about today being judgement day as per Harold Camping and followers (man that guy’s getting a lot of press). I really had no thought whatsoever about his prediction (which will shortly be referred to definitively as false prophecy) being true. I know better than to put any stake in anything he says about anything, especially the “end times”. But I was realizing a lot of good “what if”s that surround this situation. Without ado (well here’s some ado- for good reference and reflection on any of these points, consider reading Matthew 24 today as a whole):
What if the day of judgement were knowable? Allow me to quickly assert that the bible gives the following perspective on eschatology: know that He’s coming back, don’t get caught up worrying about when exactly, it is imminent (it can happen today!), it’s gonna be great (and terrible), follow Jesus (with other more nitty-gritty details here and there). But what if we could calculate it all out. What would you do? Anything different? On the one hand, I do think it would be quite reasonable to sell everything, ignore your chores as the time approached, and devote 100% of the day to sharing the gospel. But what about the two years before? The five years before? The ten? The twenty? Would you live differently then? I think there still would be good reason to be less concerned about investments in this world and more consumed by investments in the next, being assured that one does not need to consider the earthly welfare of one’s progeny for instance. But it does beg the question about whether, in being faithful to our children and grandchildren now, we are being as faithful as we could be to the kingdom coming and the family of God (which does include the here and now and also, prayerfully, our own children). I am reminded of the quote I’ve heard on a number of occasions,
“Once while St. Francis of Assisi was hoeing his garden, he was asked, ‘What would you do if you were suddenly to learn that you were to die at sunset today?’ He replied, ‘I would finish hoeing my garden.’”- (can’t find a definite author to this quote…)
At first glance it sounds like he’s saying it doesn’t really make a difference (whereas I think there’s a big difference introduced when one knows verses when one doesn’t), but to me it points out that, if he had felt God would have him doing anything else at that moment, he already would have obediently been doing that other thing. In other words, he already was being obedient to God (which includes our daily chores and cares as the kingdom is not anti-nature or anti-responsibility, though it certainly has some elements which are more “critical” than others if we were forced to pick and choose). Can we say the same for ourselves?
What if Christ were to return today? Are you ready? So many whom I’ve heard making jokes about this day are people whom I doubt have personally prepared their hearts to meet Jesus face to face. I doubt if I myself am truly “ready”. It scares me some, to be honest, but ultimately I do have perfect assurance of his forgiveness and acceptance, knowledge that I am his. Today’s a good day to stop, pray, repent, and give one’s heart back to the One who made it and wants to save it from its dilapidated condition in order to enjoy an eternity of joy with Him.
What if this were judgement day? What even happens on judgement day? Does the sky fall? It is a real problem to me that so many Christians can’t begin to answer this. I’ve heard a few remarks this last month that reflect this shortcoming. Of course there are many differences of opinion on how to reconcile the handful of texts addressing this question, but I’m talking about people whose imagination of the event doesn’t have things like the appearance of Jesus on the radar (mostly people think about movies with fire balls crushing cars and stuff). Maybe we’ve been a little too unconcerned about a very real and coming event and let hollywood run away with our ignorance. No wonder people fall for Camping’s machinations.
What if you believed something that everyone needed to know, but would surely bring you rejection if you shared it? Would you have the courage to make such a sacrifice? Would you hold a sign on the street corner? Would you pay for a billboard? Would you pray for those who reject your message? Would you talk to your friends and family about it? If you’re a Christian, there are some things you need to be standing for that will bring you plenty of scorn in our society and maybe even demand you to give up some comfort to go out of your way and help reach people or make a difference. Are you afraid to be seen as an “extremist”? Are you more concerned with looking quite cool and elite or are you ready to be a fool for Christ? I guess it all depends on how much you actually believe what you say you do. If you’re kinda unsure, I could see hesitating.
What if God raised you up in power and influence? Would you end up an isolated heretic making a public mockery of the cause of Christ? That’s a little bit of a strong punch, but I was thinking about how Harold Camping started off as just a pretty decent bible answer guy. You could call his show and he would help answer difficult questions. But as he gained hold of the massive “Family Radio” international enterprise, and as he continued to live puffed up by his own knowledge and influence, without openness to correction or accountability to the Church, he became what he is now- the leader of a ministry which is a cancer on the body of Christ. I was personally praying about this today because I tend to wish God would put me in a position to influence and teach to a greater audience with greater resources. I wonder if I wouldn’t become something similar unless I make sure now to submit to appropriate Christian authority and practice true humility until it is a solid foundation to every word and deed.
So, anyway, a lot of good “what if”s to ponder as (another of) Harold Camping’s predictions fade past us (hopefully for good this time, but we’ll see what he says now). Enjoy. I’m gonna go let my blisters heal 
