C.S. Lewis Quote #2

The picture I share today is of the pew in Holy Trinity Church in Headington Quarry that C.S. Lewis and his brother Warnie sat in every week for many years.  Once Lewis moved into The Kilns this was the church he attended, this was the church he prayed in Sunday after Sunday. He rarely missed a service here, except when he wasn't home.  This pew allowed Lewis both some privacy (since only 2 or 3 people could sit in it, and it was partially hidden behind the pillar) and yet gave Lewis full view of the pulpit and altar.  Lewis didn't want his attendance at this church to distract from worship - they were there to give God the honor, not to have people fawn over this celebrated author.  When I sat in this pew I had an unexpected range of feelings wash over me, everything from grief to awe - it brought me to tears. It was the most mystical, surprising and powerful moment in my visits to Oxford.

In conjunction with this picture I offer this quote from C.S. Lewis on prayer:

"There are, no doubt, passages in the New Testament which may seem at first sight to promise an invariable granting of our prayers. But that cannot be what they really mean. For in the very heart of the story we meet a glaring instance to the contrary. In Gethsemane the holiest of all petitioners prayed three times that a certain cup might pass from Him. It did not. After that the idea that prayer is recommended to us as a sort of infallible gimmick may be dismissed."

from "The World's Last Night and Other Essays".

The Legacy of Lewis

50 years ago today a great man died, but his passing went unnoticed by most simply because it coincided with the assassination of John F. Kennedy.  The man I am referring to has been on the cover of Time magazine, he has been one of the world’s most popular and best-selling authors (in many genres), he is acknowledged by many as the most significant Christian writer of the English speaking world in the past century.  This man has had some of his books made into successful Hollywood movies, and together with his friend J.R.R. Tolkein he created a resurgence of interest in fantasy literature.  By now many of you reading this entry will recognize that I am referring to Clive Staples Lewis, or C.S. Lewis as he is better known.

I was first introduced to Lewis’ writings by Pastor Dan Berg.  While tagging along with the Berg family on a trip to Kinasao camp at Christopher Lake in Saskatchewan I was able to enjoy the nightly reading sessions when a chapter or two from the Chronicles of Narnia were read out loud to the whole clan.  I remember being captivated by this imaginative world with its unforgettable characters, especially Aslan the lion.

In college I found others who appreciated C.S. Lewis, and we would often talk about what we had read, and how that had opened our minds to new understandings, new perspectives and new questions.  It was at this time that I first read Lewis’ space trilogy, having become a Science Fiction fan in High School, and once again I was drawn into Lewis’ world of layered meaning and Christian significance.

C.S. Lewis was never trained as a theologian, and never claimed to be one, yet his way of discussing matters of theology and spirituality shaped my theological thinking. Thus while Lewis was never referred to in my Seminary training I find that whenever I  attempt to discuss matters of the Christian faith with another person it is significant how often I  will refer to an example, or quote from Lewis.  This is not to say that I always agree with Lewis – there are plenty of points of contention, but these areas of disagreement are only a small percentage of what Lewis has set forth, and most of them are created by a cultural difference that comes from living over half a century apart.

Over the years C.S. Lewis has become so significant to me that when my wife and I travelled to Europe a few years ago, to celebrate our 25 years of marriage, it was important to me to include Oxford in the itinerary.  While in Oxford we took a C.S. Lewis Tour with Ron Brind, who was a childhood friend of Lewis’ step-children. We got to see Magdalen College where Lewis taught, the Eagle and Child pub where Lewis met weekly with a group of friends known as the Inklings, Holy Trinity Church in Headington Quarry where Lewis worshiped every Sunday for most of his adult life, and most significantly The Kilns, the home of C.S. Lewis from 1930 until his death in 1963.

Three years later the whole family went to Europe, and again we made our way to Oxford where I took in a week long course at Wycliffe College and the family took in the sites of Oxford.  Once again I was able to visit these significant sites for C.S. Lewis.  Also on that trip we visited Westminster Abbey in London, and I was surprised to discover that C.S. Lewis was not commemorated in Poet’s Corner – an oversight that is happily being rectified this very day.

Thus today, 50 years after his death, in honor of Lewis’ memorial being dedicated in Poet’s Corner in Westminster Abbey, and in my small way to help Lewis’ significance not get totally lost in all the hype and nostalgia around J.F. Kennedy’s assassination (conspiracy theories et al.) I intend to daily post a quote from C.S. Lewis, along with a picture from Oxford related to Lewis’ history for the remainder of this year.  I thought it appropriate today to post a picture of Lewis’ grave along with this quote from Mere Christianity:

There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make the Christian hope of “Heaven” ridiculous by saying they do not want “to spend eternity playing harps.” The answer to such people is that if they cannot understand books written for grown-ups, they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible.  … People who take these symbols literally might as well think that when Christ told us to be like doves, He meant that we were to lay eggs.

Thank you C.S. Lewis for your wit and wisdom, your imagination and insight – may your legacy continue to flourish for fifty more years and beyond.

[Both And] – Non-dualistic Thinking and the Church’s Mission

Last June I spoke at a conference called [both and].  This conference was the brainchild of Pastor Anne Anderson who is one of the pastors at Trinity Lutheran Church in scenic New Hamburg, Ontario.  The subtitle of the conference was: Reimagining Church in a Lutheran Context.  As I prepared for this conference I had a lot of dots connect between things I have been thinking about and books I have been reading lately.  Even more connections were made in conversation at the conference – in this post I would like to try to share some of these connections with you.

I begin with the concept of non-dualistic thinking.  Dualistic thinking is how we most often make sense of our world - we compare and contrast, separate and differentiate, we order our understanding of reality using this way of thinking.  Without even thinking about it we label things with dualistic thinking – something is fast or slow, easy or difficult, old or new, and the ultimate duality, right or wrong.  Dualistic thinking in and of itself is not a problem, however there are circumstances when it can lead to judgmentalism and exclusivity. It is at this point that our Christian faith gives us another way of thinking – a non-dualistic approach – in other words [both and]. Non-dualistic thinking is being able to move beyond ‘either or’ thinking to something that is comfortable with paradox, with mystery, with inclusivity rather than exclusivity.

Jesus was someone who often functioned in a [both and] manner, often to the surprise of his disciples.  Jesus did not get locked into an ‘either or’ dualistic mode, this he demonstrated by his actions, and taught with his words.  For example, Jesus faithfully worshipped in the traditional Jewish manner, participating in synagogue regularly – however he also reinterpreted religious traditions in radical ways, for example the Sabbath law of which he said “The sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the sabbath.” (Mark 2:27 NRSV)  This did not sit well with the religiously traditional Jews – it did not seem ‘right’.

More clearly we see Jesus’ non-dualistic approach when he is willing to move beyond traditional divisions of people - he ate with both Pharisees and Tax Collectors, he conversed both with Jewish men and Samaritan women, he healed both descendants of Abraham and Sarah and non-Jewish people like the servant of a Roman centurion.  He taught his followers to pray for both their own needs (“give us this day our daily bread” Matt. 6:11) and for their enemies (“pray for those who persecute you”  Matt. 5:44).  Richard Rohr suggests that Jesus was the first non-dual teacher in the West, and he quotes Jesus in the next verse in Matthew as evidence: “for [God] makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous.” (Matt. 5:45)  In a culture that understood blessing being given to ‘good’ people, and suffering to the ‘evil’ people, this statement must have been difficult to hear.

There are many ways in which to consider the place of non-dualistic thinking in the mission of the church, but let me explain a few.  For too long churches have thought of the way they function as the ‘right’ way, and that other churches were doing things ‘wrong’.  This is the primary reason the Christian faith has fractured into 30,000 denominations.  Church bodies split because one group identified another group that understood things, or practiced things differently to be ‘wrong’ (rather than simply being different).  In a dualistic way of thinking one can only be right or wrong, other possibilities are not considered and all too easily we slip into judgmentalism, condemning others who think or act differently from us.  This is one way we feel good about ourselves, we convince ourselves that we are ‘right’ which makes others who are different ‘wrong’.  This was exactly the problem with the Pharisees in Jesus’ day – they allowed dualistic thinking to function fully in their thinking, thus resulting in judgmental attitudes so often criticized by Jesus.  If people weren’t thinking and following the laws as the Pharisees understood to be the right way then they were sinners and unrighteous and not to be considered as belonging to the ‘good’ people.

As we seek to participate in God’s mission in the 21^st Century we need to begin by recognizing the truth of Jesus’ statement “Whoever is not against us is for us.” (Mark 9:40)  Rather than criticize and ignore other churches and Christian groups who do things differently, or understand things differently than we do, we need to see them as belonging to the same mission. God’s mission is [both and], not either or. Regardless of what anyone thinks, one denomination does not have a claim on exclusive relationship with God, nor does one group or another within a denomination.  Out in the Eastern Synod of the ELCIC there are many congregations that worship in a more liturgically rigid and traditional manner.  Some of these churches, and the pastors who lead them, would say “This is the right way to worship” and would simply ignore or criticize others who worship differently.  That dualistic and judgmental thinking has no place in the future of God’s missional church.  We need to be able to develop fresh expressions of church community and worship, while maintaining tradition for those who find such meaningful.  This is what I was asked to speak on at the conference in New Hamburg.

Leaders in the Church of England are using the term mixed economy to describe the need for both traditional churches and fresh expressions of church.  This mixed economy of churches is a way of being [both and].  The congregation I serve already practices a mixed economy of ministries – we have our regular worship on Sunday mornings (which leans towards the traditional), but we also have Sunday Night Light, Country Gospel Service, and Mysterium.  Mysterium is a worship gathering modelled on the emerging worship groups, and fresh expressions of church found in North America and the United Kingdom.  My congregation is so used to living [both and] we don’t realize how many churches have nothing like this experience (either because they lack resources, or more significantly they lack the willingness to be [both and].)  My task at the [both and] conference in Ontario was to give encouragement for churches to consider the need to be [both and], to be creative in their thinking about the mission of God in their context, and to try new and different things – not to the exclusion of the tradition and heritage that we are grounded in, but for the expansion of the means of ministry in our current context.  I believe this [both and] approach is what is needed in the church for the foreseeable future.

Reflection #23: End Times for a Long Time

Given that some have predicted the end of the world for December 21, 2012, I thought it a particularly perfect time to post this reflection.  From my perspective, it has been the End Times for a long time.

When I was a teenager the newly developing Christian Rock scene was saturated with an ‘end times’ emphasis - from Larry Norman's classic song I Wish We'd All Been Ready, to Daniel Amos' lesser known Revelation Suite.  Even my favourite Canadian singer/songwriter reflected this theme in his song Can I Go With You.  I am still struck by the beauty of Bruce Cockburn’s lyrics and imagery in this song – even if I am no longer caught up in any end times fervor (and to be fair, nor is Cockburn himself).

When you ride out of the shining sky
To claim the ones who love you
Can I go with you?
Can I go with you?

When the angel shouts from the heart of the sun
And the living water flows down
Can I go with you?
Can I go with you?

When the earth and stars melt like ice in the spring
And a million voices sing praise
Can I go with you?
Can I go with you?    

Back in the early 1970’s author Hal Lindsay was making a big splash with his book Late Great Planet Earth (and subsequent titles), and films like Thief in the Night were being shown in churches around North America (frightening countless impressionable teenagers in the process).  I remember one evening when my parents did not return from a trip to Calgary quite when I expected them to - I got myself all worked up because I was beginning to worry that the rapture had happened and I'd been left behind!  (I knew I had done some bad things and perhaps I hadn’t been sorry enough for my sins - and I hadn't quite gotten the concepts of repentance or grace yet!)

At the end of Randy Stonehill’s landmark recording Welcome to Paradise the closing song on the album, Good News, fades out on a conversation in the studio caught on tape – Randy is talking about the imminent return of Christ and he speculates on how many years are left before the rapture “Maybe four, maybe five?” Stonehill’s cheerful voice ponders.  That was certainly the sense of things in the late 70’s – we were living in the very end of times.  That produced a paradoxical effect, we were both excited and frightened – big things were about to happen!

Hal Lindsey, and others like him, saw the re-establishment of the nation of Israel as a significant sign that the countdown to Armageddon had begun.  Armageddon is the site of the great battle at the end of the world that is referenced in Revelation 16:16.  Lindsay, like others after him, took the obscure symbolism of apocalyptic literature like the Book of Revelation, or certain parts of the Book of Daniel, and made it line up with current events in a way that convinced a lot of people that this was legitimate Biblical interpretation. 

I remember reading a comic book as a teenager that was based on Hal Lindsey’s writing, it captured my young, and fearful, imagination.  Most vividly I remember a drawing of a military helicopter (Vietnam War era) which was connected with some verses from the ninth chapter of Revelation chapter 9.  These verses described the plague of locusts, saying they “had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. They have tails like scorpions, with stingers…” Lindsay said these verses predicted military helicopters with their armour plating, noisy rotating blades and machine guns in their tails - and to my young mind, filled with news footage of helicopters in combat, this sort of made sense.  Due to people such as Hal Lindsay and their apparent ability to unveil secret predictions in this biblical material, many were drawn to the conclusion that the end of the world as we know it was just around the corner.

One other reason many thought the world was near the end in the 70's and 80's is because of the never ending string of reports about nuclear arms build up between the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R.  We were told that the Doomsday Clock was just minutes before midnight, and seeing how it was Atomic Scientists who were telling us this, the warning was ominous.  Living through that era resulted in bizarre bits of information being burned into my brain - like hearing that at the height of the nuclear arms build up there were enough weapons to destroy the earth many times over.  (I have since learned this was not exactly accurate).  I read books like A Canticle for Leibowitz and watched movies like Planet of the Apes (the original) – all which fed my fears and fascination with the end of the world.  Combined with the apocalyptic interpretations of best-selling Christian writers, this was a potent stew.

However this stew began to smell funny when I began to learn the original purpose of apocalyptic writing.  When I took a course on the Book of Revelation at seminary my thinking took a serious shift (thank you Dr. Erwin Buck!)  One of my seminary roommates has become notable for his understanding of this apocalyptic material, and has written a well regarded book called Apocalypse Recalled (a shout out to Dr. Harry Maier).  Through the wisdom of such teachers, and other authors like Eugene Peterson (Reversed Thunder) and Barbara Rossing (The Rapture Exposed) I began to see more clearly how such an end times fixation mis-represented the intention of the original material, and was distracting us from the destruction of God’s good earth in the present.

More than 3 decades have passed since that time.  The conversation on the end of Stonehill’s album – “maybe four, maybe five” - seems quaint, if not silly, in retrospect. (Someone else must have thought so too, the digital versions of this recording fade the song out earlier, before these spoken words have a chance to be heard.) The end did not arrive when expected, and many have grown tired of those who cry “wolf!” I have a friend whose family was convinced Harold Camping was absolutely right when he predicted the end of the world, and that was the first time Camping made a false prediction - back in September 1994.  Jesus didn’t return then, nor did the rapture happen in May 2011 – the revised date Camping convinced many people was the gospel truth. At least after this more recent failed prediction Camping apologized for his mistake afterwards, but words of regret didn’t really help all those folks who used up their life savings to spread the word of an imminent end.

This fixation on the end times has not served the message of Jesus well, we have been distracted about what might be, rather than being concerned about what is. This emphasis on the imminent second coming of Christ has misled many a sincere Christian.  I watched as my own grandfather got totally sucked in by the Bible quoting televangelist Jack Van Impe, even sending significant amounts of money to that ‘ministry’ over the years.  Jack takes news reports from current events and interprets them as signs and proof of the closeness of the second coming of Christ – but he’s been doing this for decades now! Apparently Jack Van Impe believes in the Mayan prophecy about December 21, 2012, even though it has no connection to the Bible he maintains is the basis of his pronouncements. (Nor was there a Mayan prophecy, just an ignorant conclusion about the end of the Mayan calendar made by people with limited or non-existent understanding of Mayan time-keeping). We now know how that so-called "prophecy" played out. Wrong again Jack!

This is not to say that we shouldn’t ever reflect on our end, I do think that we need to constantly consider that every day could be our last – that is, I think we should always be prepared to "meet our maker" as the saying goes.  We shouldn’t need the fear of a future timeline prediction to motivate us into living the way God intends us to live in the present time.  The fragility of human life - as evidenced by accident, illness and natural disaster – should be enough to convince us of the shortness of our span on earth.  When I look at how the end times emphasis has been used in the North American church I see a very one-sided approach – it was used to propel people into evangelism, that is, to get as many people to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior before the rapture.  But that’s not what Jesus said was the way we prepare for the return of the Christ the judge – rather we should have been putting energy into loving our neighbours through feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, tending to the sick, visiting those in prison and so forth (Matthew 25:31-46).  Ironically, over these past decades I saw much less emphasis on these things directly mentioned by Jesus than on efforts of mis-guided evangelism which bore little resemblance to Jesus’ ministry or words.

I also need to be clear that I do actually believe we are closer to the end of the world than ever before, but I say this not because of some elaborate interpretation of obscure symbols and writings in the Bible – rather I say this because of our own human behaviour. It is human sinfulness that has allowed us to build up weapons of mass destruction – and the current arsenal of nuclear and biological weapons, if unleashed on earth, would certainly end life as we know it.  It is human self-centeredness that has allowed us to strip the earth of its natural resources, replacing them with pollutants and climate changing gases – this too, if unchecked, will lead to the end of the world as we know it.  It is human arrogance that has allowed us to mess with the building blocks of nature, genetically modifying all kinds of organisms without truly knowing what the long-term result of such biological and chemical manipulation will be – this too has the potential to end the world as we know it.  The end is coming, and we are bringing it closer.

What should be our response be to the predictions of the world’s demise?  From my perspective it is to simply continue living as much life as we have left grounded in love – striving to leave our mark on the world, not a mark of conquest and destruction, but rather a mark of service and love.  In the end there is no greater power in the universe, and there is nothing, not even the end of the world, that can separate us from the love of God (Romans 8:38-39).  Whatever the future brings I believe there is a God who loves us and will never let us go.

Whoever Is Not Against Us

I begin with a reading from the Gospel of Mark, Chapter 9, verses 38-50 (N.R.S.V.)

John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” But Jesus said, “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.  For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.

     “If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea.   If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.  And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell.,   And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell, where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.

     “For everyone will be salted with fire.  Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it?  Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.”

When I was a young boy I used to enjoy making “forts”.  A fort could be as simple as a big cardboard box with some holes cut in it for windows and doors, or it could be a place of sanctuary high in a tree put together with scrap boards and a few nails. There were forts were made with straw bales at my uncle’s farm, or forts created by a small clearing in the bush that only my buddies and I knew about.  And that seemed to be the most important part of a fort – only certain people knew about it, or only certain people were allowed in it.  The stereotypical sign for a boy’s fort in those days was “No girls allowed”.  We knew who was part of the inner circle and anyone else simply wasn’t allowed in.

It’s one thing to see children at play be so exclusive, that can be excused as simple lack of maturity and understanding.  It’s quite another to see grown adults engaged in a process of protecting the inner circle by excluding all others.  Our gospel reading today begins with that very scenario.

In the Gospel reading I began with the disciples announce to Jesus that they tried to stop someone who was casting out demons in his name.  The fact that he was throwing demons out of people didn’t seem to be their main concern, rather it is latter part of the verse 38 that  reveals the real issue: the disciples complain “because he wasn’t following us.”

Perhaps there was some jealousy at work here.  Earlier in the 9th Chapter of Mark the disciples were not able to cast out a demon that was causing a boy to throw himself in the fire.  Then they come across a person who is not part of their inner circle who is having success casting out demons in Jesus’ name.  He is doing what the disciples could not.  That probably made them frustrated and angry – so they tried to stop him.  This unknown exorcist was not part of the club and thus, in their minds, he had no right to be throwing out demons in Jesus’ name.  They tried to stop something that, to all onlookers, would have been seen as a positive thing.  Why couldn’t the disciples see that someone who was able to relieve people of the evil forces that oppressed and harmed them was a good work?  Why didn’t they encourage this unknown minister working in Jesus’ name?  Is it because they were so wrapped up in self-worth derived from being part of the inner circle of Jesus that they simply couldn’t let anyone else close to that place of honor?

This is the same group of disciples that Jesus just chastised because they were arguing amongst themselves about who was the greatest.  This is the same group of disciples that would soon try to prevent children from coming to Jesus.  This is the same group of disciples that wanted to call down fire from heaven on the Samaritan village that didn’t welcome them. There is great irony in that scene – the disciples, who were not always good at welcoming those they saw as outsiders, wanted revenge on a village that was simply acting the way the disciples themselves did – being non-welcoming.

Jesus is concerned with not limiting anyone’s access to the good news he brings to the world.  Jesus teaches his followers that “Whoever is not against us is for us.”  That opens the door pretty wide for disciples who were interested in keeping the fort for themselves only.  Jesus once again shows a desire to be inclusive rather than exclusive.  Jesus wants to welcome all into the abundant life he is offering.  Excluding others has been a problem in the church ever since the earliest days of the Christian faith.  The Apostle Paul had to struggle to get Gentiles accepted as full members of the Christian church.  Many in the early church centered in Jerusalem wanted to keep the Church for “Jewish people only.”  Throughout the centuries the church has too often been guilty of saying only for certain people could belong.  Sometimes the exclusivity was expressed indirectly, such as when the language used in worship could only be understood by some. Other times the exclusivity was more direct as when some churches in the United States posted signs that stated “Whites Only”. 

Whenever we act in such a manner we are repeating the mistakes of the disciples who tried to stop the un-named exorcist from his Jesus empowered healing ministry.  We are too often blind to the workings of the Holy Spirit throughout the world, believing that God can only work through our particular group.

After the correcting the disciples in their attempt to shut down an outsider from ministry, Jesus continues with a strong warning “If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea.”   The word in this passage that is translated in English as “stumbling block” is the Greek word scandala.  This Greek word is the orgin of our English word scandal. It can mean to stumble, but it can also mean “to cause offense”.   Jesus is telling his followers that if they do anything that causes someone to lose their faith, or to restricts a person’s access to the Saviour, then it would be better if they were given cement boots and tossed overboard (to put it in more modern terms).  Notice that Jesus is not referring to others, to outsiders, he is speaking directly to his followers, his disciples, using the pronoun “you”.  Given that this warning follows so quickly after the story of the un-named exorcist, and just before the disciples attempt to prevent the children from coming to Jesus, this is a strong criticism of their behaviour.

Jesus uses harsh language to say “Wake up!  Pay attention!  Don’t you see what you are doing?  By your actions you are trying to restrict the work of the Holy Spirit, you are trying to limit where and with whom God can work.  You are trying to limit how God works, excluding others you don’t consider as rightfully belonging. This restriction of the expansion of God’s realm is one of the worst things you can do.  Better if you just removed yourself from the picture rather than be found to be in opposition to God’s will.”

Then to drive the point home Jesus uses the same term scandala to talk about the trouble our eyes, hands and feet can cause.   Again speaking in hyperbole Jesus says it would be better if you removed the offending part, whether that be one’s eye or hand or foot.  Many people have assumed that Jesus’ reference to sin in these verses is about breaking the commandments – thus if your hand causes you to steal, or your eye causes you to covet, or your foot causes you to murder – then better to cut these body parts off.  But considering the context in which the gospel writer Mark puts these verses, I think Jesus is referring to any form of attitude or action that cause someone else to lose their faith, or to not come to Jesus in the first place – these are things that must be guarded against.

We need to ask ourselves “What are some of the stumbling blocks Christians today are guilty of setting in front of others?”  Are we ready to take a good hard look at the ways we have caused others to lose their faith in God, or to have no desire to come to Christ in the first place?  Are we prepared to ask ourselves hard questions like “Do I behave in such a way as to hinder others from seeing the love of Jesus?”

I have learned that one of the biggest reasons people today are not interested in the Christian faith is because of the hypocrisy they see in our actions and attitudes.  Like the disciples in our gospel reading today, we still want to designate who’s in and who’s out. Most people today know that Christians are supposed to “Love others as we love ourselves.”  We talk a lot about love, but then we too easily slip into expressions of judgment.  We say that Jesus welcomes all people into his fold, but then we shun those who are not like us.  Such hypocrisy is a stumbling block, causing many to turn away from the message of Jesus.  Too often we have become like the Jesus’ disciples who tried to prevent the children from coming to him because they felt that was not appropriate.  We have set ourselves up as the judges of what is appropriate and what isn’t appropriate, and like the disciples of 2000 years ago we too can interrupt the ministry of others because we can’t understand how God would ever work in people like that!

I am reminded of a song by Noel Paul Stookey, of Peter, Paul and Mary fame.  A number of years ago he wrote a song called “Peace in the Valley”  The last verse of that song goes like this:

So if you meet a man in a pastel suit

With an alligator Bible to match his boots

You might not like his style too much

But if he could reach a soul you could never touch

You gotta say...

Peace in the Valley

Peace on the mountain too

Before you tell a man he's got a splinter in his eye

You better pull the log out of you.

It is too easy for me to look down at Christians from other denominations and faith traditions, to think that God really works best through Lutherans, but such arrogance is exactly what the disciples were exhibiting in today’s gospel reading.  I need to be reminded, again and again, “Whoever is not against us is for us.”    I need to rejoice when I see evidence of God’s Spirit working through the efforts of other people, even if they are people quite different from me, even if they are people I don’t agree with on some issues, even if they are people I would hesitate to call Christian.  There is so much evil in the world, we should, as disciples of the Prince of Peace, be glad whenever there are actions and attitudes of love and acceptance, forgiveness and healing – regardless of who is performing those actions.  We need to be more concerned with our own failures in following Christ rather than in the perceived failures in others.

Jesus calls us to follow him, but then he also calls us to “get out of the way” if we are hindering others from experiencing the healing and transforming grace of God, if we are restricting access to the one who calls us to be agents of peace rather than gatekeepers of the fort.  The gospel reading for today ends with this important command of Jesus “be at peace with one another.”  May we strive to be peace makers, especially with those we have understood to be outside our group.  And may our peace making become the attitude that we are known for, that we might draw all people to the Prince of Peace.

Attach / Send

This past summer I was asked to give one of the keynote presentations at the Canadian Lutheran Anglican Youth Gathering (CLAY 2012).  The gathering was called HyperLink, and the title given to the last Large Group Gathering for which I spoke, was Attach / Send.  Some day I may rework that presentation into a written form that can be posted on this blog.  For now I am posted a link to a webpage that has an audio recording of that last talk.  A word of warning - it is about 50 minutes long, so settle in before you start to listen.

Click here to listen to my keynote presentation.

There are a few spots in my presentation where visuals were important.  All the relevant images are included in this post below.  As you listen to the presentation you can look at these images at the appropriate time.

A short while after the Kuriakos Song I talk about a picture of a cross from Iona.  This is the picture:

Then I refer to the Celtic Cross design, at which point this graphic is put on the screen:

Later in the presentation I am talk about being present to another.  I one point I ask "Which might be more comforting?" showing this image on the screen:

 Then this one:

Towards the end of my presentation I ask "What would church be like if we weren't really present to one another?"  Then some music plays for a few minutes.  During the music the drama troupe came on stage and sat down, not looking at each other, but instead focused on their cell phones.  On the screen the following played out.  I call this segment The Church of Text (there are 26 images that follow each other sequentially):

Comments on a Hiatus

It has been a long time since my last post, this is primarily because all of my time and attention were focused on other things - most notably the European vacation I took with my family, and preparing for HyperLink - the Canadian Lutheran Anglican Youth Gathering, held this past week in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

The experiences I have had these past few months have been great, but now things are beginning to settle back into a "normal" routine - if there is really anything that can be called normal.  It is my intention to write more entries on this blog in the coming weeks.  I plan to finished off the 25 Reflections on 25 Years in Ministry, I think I might try to put my presentation at HyperLink into a readable form, and I have some ideas springing from my experiences in Europe.  So there is lots to write about, now comes the disciple of the actual writing.

In the meanwhile, people who are interested can check out the family's blog on our trip to Europe at this site: Our European Family Adventure

Those interested in the Canadian Lutheran Anglican Youth Gathering can check out the CLAY facebook page here: HyperLink - CLAY 2012

As for this blog, I hope to have some new entries before the end of this month.  Only time will tell.

Here I am making 2 points (or giving the peace sign) at HyperLink - the Canadian Lutheran Anglican Youth Gathering held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, August 16th to 19th, 2012.  The picture was taken by my daughter Anna.