A Weblog Dedicated to the Discussion of the Christian Faith and 21st Century Life

A Weblog Dedicated to the Discussion of the Christian Faith and 21st Century Life

This blog is a place for the discussion of all things significant and not so important as well. If you read something you disagree with, don't get angry; post a comment and join the discussion.

Passionate and lively debate is encouraged in the context of civility. Comments that include name calling and profanity will be deleted.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Washington DC to the American People: "We Control Everything" and "You're On Your Own"

The latest editorial from Peggy Noonan is quite insightful and worth consideration (which doesn't necessarily mean that she is right).

In her article Noonan argues that there is something legitimate to the growing alienation that a large segment of the American population feel toward the federal government. She writes,

None of this happened overnight. It is, most recently, the result of two wars that were supposed to be cakewalks, Katrina, the crash, and the phenomenon of a federal government that seemed less and less competent attempting to do more and more by passing bigger and bigger laws.

Add to this states on the verge of bankruptcy, the looming debt crisis of the federal government, and the likelihood of ever-rising taxes. Shake it all together, and you have the makings of the big alienation. Alienation is often followed by full-blown antagonism, and antagonism by breakage.

...Arizona is moving forward because the government in Washington has completely abdicated its responsibility. For 10 years—at least—through two administrations, Washington deliberately did nothing to ease the crisis on the borders because politicians calculated that an air of mounting crisis would spur mounting support for what Washington thought was appropriate reform—i.e., reform that would help the Democratic and Republican parties.

But while the Democrats worry about the prospects of the Democrats and the Republicans about the well-being of the Republicans, who worries about America?

What do you think? Is Noonan right? Is she wrong? A little bit of both?

I welcome all to comment. Please read the entire editorial first. Feel free to make your point passionately, but in civility... and no ad hominem arguments... substance only please.

I invite all to join the discussion. These matters are important.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Friday 4.30.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL email your post to me at umweeklyroundup(at)yahoo(dot)com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be listed in the MBDL more than once in a week.

Today's offerings from the Methoblogosphere:

Nathan Mattox reminds us that the trees of the field shall clap their hands.

Graham Peacock reflects on being powered by tea.

Richard Heyduck posts on the books he is currently reading.

The Jesus I Never Knew and the Kingdom of God according to Ken Hagler.

Will Deuel loves the United Methodist Church.

Blake Huggins publishes his fifth post on Incarnation Eschatology.

Bruce Alderman has published his last post on his blog and is considering future options.

Allen McGraw posts his answer to ordination question #11.

The power of community and connection-- a post from Cindy Watson.

"Shaking the Worship House to Become the Unshakable Kingdom"-- a sermon by Kathy Randall.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Miracles Aren't Always Helpful


The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Thursday 4.29.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your post to me at umweeklyroundup(at)yahoo(dot)com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be listed in the MBDL more than once in a week.

Your links for today from the Methoblogosphere:

Dave Nichols comments on the Book of Revelation.

Dave Camphouuse posts his "Pastor's Corner" for May.

Two kinds of hospitality according to Kathy James.

Will Humes writes on a new approach to illegal immigration.

Marty Schwartz reflects on the baptismal covenant.

Mark Winter hits a home run for God.

Pastoral appointments and the right of refusal-- thoughts from Lauren Porter.

Tim Good ponders innocence lost.

Dave Perry posts on the moral echoes of Christians vs Empire.

Rick Weber on Dr. Steven Benner on the scientific method.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

You Don't Get Strung Up on a Cross for Running Around Telling Everyone to Love Each Other

One of the flaws of the most characteristic Liberal portrayal of Jesus was the unlikelihood that anyone would have wanted to crucify such an attractive moral teacher. In recent questing it has been more widely recognized that a test of any hypothesis' viability is whether it provides a satisfactory answer to the question, Why was Jesus crucified?-- James D.G. Dunn

The great challenge for preachers of the Gospel in the West is to overcome the intellectually shallow and theologically inept summaries of Jesus' life and ministry being first and foremost, primarily, and basically about love. The focus on the concept of love marginalizes cross and resurrection, which ironically in turn undermines the radical nature of the kind of love Jesus displayed.

Stanley Hauerwas likes to get at this problem by asking if it's possible to imagine Jesus walking around Judea and saying something like, "Hey, Guys... I have this radical idea. I think we should love each other. And the response of the religious establishment is, "What! Love one another! We can't let this guy spread his subversive message! Let's string him up!

Now before I get all the comments and emails reminding me of how much Jesus and the New Testament writers mention love, let me respond by saying that I know such is the case. I am not exactly ignorant when it comes to Scripture. The problem is that the modern tendency to dehistoricize and detheologize Jesus and his ministry into principles and concepts robs us of the context which makes the biblical notion of love intelligible. Without it we lose what it truly means for Jesus to tell his followers to love one another. The great sacrifice of cross and the wonderful victory of resurrection by which Christian love is understood is replaced by the modern romanticism of love as primarily a feeling, as the justification for behavior without consequences, and living a life devoid of transformation. We move from Jesus' statement that no greater love can be displayed in laying down one's life to it doesn't matter how we behave because God loves us no matter what.

It doesn't take a profound thinker to know that the primary motivation for this dehistorizing and detheologizing of Jesus is to domesticate his life and work into something more palatable to modern sensibilities. The Jesus who comes to us from the pages of the New Testament demands too much from us. Moreover, in our modern cosmological reductionist assumptions, we simply cannot have a Jesus running around doing miraculous things. So in Bishop Spong and John Crossan fashion we first demythologize Jesus and then we remythologize him after our own image and our own expectations. Jesus now becomes safe to follow. Yes, Jesus is still presented as a radical, but he is a domesticated revolutionary. He is one who looks like a hippie from the 1960s or a political activist whose methods of power and coercion look no different from the politics of the nations. But a domesticated revolutionary will not bring about serious change; he will just reinforce the agendas of those who are frankly doing nothing more than using Jesus as a prop to get what they want. Jesus was crucified because he presented a true alternative to the ways of the world that could not and will not be displayed in the politics of the current age. Jesus was not killed for promoting right-wing violence on behalf of the state, and he was not crucified for advocating a progressive social agenda. Jesus was crucified because he presented a serious threat to the status quo in all forms; and it will not do just to present his life and ministry as supporting any modern political and social agenda. And those Christians who attempt to do so are domesticating Jesus into doing their bidding.

But the real Jesus, the Jesus who comes to us from the pages of the New Testament, will not be so domesticated. Jesus has not come to conform to our expectations. We must conform to his. You don't get strung up on a cross by running around telling everyone to love each other, and we won't be able to understand the nature of discipleship without knowing that cross and resurrection stands at the heart of what it means to walk with Jesus. Cross and resurrection are about more than what God has done for us (and what God has done for us is much more than sentimental niceties about love); they also provide the blueprint for how Christians are to bear witness to the love of God in the world.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Wednesday 4.28.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your post to me at umweeklyroundup(at)yahoo(dot)com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be listed in the MBDL more than once in a week.

Today's selection from the Methoblogosphere:

Bishop William H. Willimon writes on Wesley for everyone.

Dale Tedder comments on the loyalty of Ittai.

Michael Daniel reflects on the poisonous well of political incumbancy.

Some thoughts on illegal immigration and the police state from Henry Neufeld.

Spiritual hunger and worship according to Sally Coleman.

Ken Carter writes on how a generation is re-thinking church.

If he died would you attend John Meunier's funeral?

Joseph Slife on Bill Bouknight on the Council of Bishops.

Lorna Koskela is looking back... looking forward.

Ponderments on the color of new life from Deb Spaulding.

"The Bread We Need"-- a story from Questing Parson.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Opinion Central Poll 2010.13: Final Results

Joshua in 3-D: Biblical Conquest and Manifest Destiny #3

This post is the third in a series of five posts by Dr. L. Daniel Hawk, Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew at Ashland Theological Seminary.

Don't forget that readers of this blog are eligible for a 40% discount on Dan's just published book, Joshua in 3-D: A Commentary on Biblical Conquest and Manifest Destiny. To get the discount you must order from the website and when doing so you must insert the coupon code "HAWK40."

I am reading the book right now. It is an excellent read. After Dan's last post, I will be posting a review of the book.

+ + + + + + +
Double Vision
L. Daniel Hawk
.

Conquest narratives work by establishing and maintaining a stark distinction between the invader “us” and the indigenous “them.” Shaping the indigenous “them” into the opposite of the invader “us” enables the invader to soothe moral qualms about conquest. Casting the invaders as “civilized” and the indigenous peoples as “savages,” opposing “moral societies” to “lascivious people,” “pious” vs. “pagan,” “peaceful” vs. “warlike,” or even “human” vs. “animal” implicitly justifies the violence meted out to indigenous peoples, who in some way can be viewed as opposing “progress” or “destiny.” Invaders expend a lot of energy maintaining these distinctions, because if they break down, the indigenous peoples begin to look as fully human as the invaders…which makes dispossessing, exploiting, and killing them look uncomfortably like theft, oppression, and murder.

.

These are precisely the categories that Anglo-America employed to shape its identity and that of the Native peoples of the continent. Literature, such as Robert Bird’s Nick of the Woods, popularized the image of the bloodthirsty redskin. Political discourse attributed indigenous resistance to Western civilization and Christianity to inferior intelligence or a primitive moral sensibility. Francis Parkman, the foremost American historian of the 19th Century, summed it all up with remarkable simplicity when he described the Indian as “man, wolf, and devil all in one.”

.

One problem is that reality exposes these projections for the pernicious fabrications they are. The early colonists would not have survived had not indigenous peoples imparted to them their rich agricultural wisdom. The eloquence and acuity of indigenous orators consistently impressed colonial listeners. Indigenous cultures were so strong and sophisticated that many scholars have conjectured that were it not for the epidemics that ravaged Native peoples (at mortality rates that in some cases approached ninety percent), the whole colonial enterprise might have turned out very differently.

.

The other problem is that even the invader recognizes the falsity of the constructions. Guilt and misgiving leak through in stories that exemplify the nobility of the indigenous peoples and portray invaders “going Native.” The result is an ambivalent, schizoid invader identity.

.

This bifurcated identity is expressed in Avatar by the earth people’s distance from the peoples of Pandora. The individuals involved in the Avatar Program are in Pandora but not of Pandora; they interact with the Na’vi through their avatars. They remain in an earthlike environment and among their own people but become indigenous through their avatar bodies. They are earth minds and identities clothed in Pandora bodies – not all that different from Americans who put on Native dress and mimic Native practices at summer camps, youth organizations, and sporting events.

.

Dr. Grace Augustine and Jake Sully comprise a complementary ambivalence: woman and man, brains and brawn, controlled and impulsive. Life among the Na’vi exposes the evil they are a part of and they become renegades. Like all renegades, they expose the Invader’s fiction and thus are singled out for particular hatred and violence.

.

In the biblical conquest narrative, the Gibeonite story (Joshua 9) dismantles the “godly us” vs. “ungodly them” polarity and humanizes the indigenous peoples. Joshua presents the Canaanite kings as the epitome of hostile indigenous power, but the Gibeonites (like Israel) do not have a king. Like Rahab, their indigenous counterpart, they are cunning and opportunistic. (Traits prized by Israel. Remember Jacob?). They alone praise Yhwh and acclaim God’s mighty acts of salvation. They trick Israel’s leaders into making a treaty and are eventually assigned to service at the altar – the holiest location in Israel and the center of invaders’ community. As a whole, the story presents them as more faithful representations of the people of God than the Israelites.

.

Avatar and Joshua take invader ambivalence in different directions; invaders are incorporated into the indigenous community in the former, indigenous into the invader in the latter. Both, however, highlight the ways that conquest narratives construct identities in order to justify conquest. And both challenge Americans to consider how Manifest Destiny configures contemporary attitudes and actions.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Tuesday 4.27.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your post to me at umweeklyroundup(at)yahoo(dot)com. Your linke will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be listed in the MBDL more than once in a week.

Today's reads from the Methoblogosphere:

How do you tell if someone is a Christian? Read Sue Whitt.

Andy Bryan recounts a Donor Sabbath service.

Kim Matthew reflects on Christian action.

It is time, says Pam Webster, for us to follow the leader.

Andy Stoddard wonders how the Israelites could think making a golden calf was a good idea.

Should Christians use birth control? Shane Raynor asks the question, and then follows up with a clarification.

Sky McCracken ponders whether Methodists are more concerned about the Kingdom or the Institution.

Greg Hazelrig posts his thought for the day on Colossians 4:5-6.

Cathy Turner writes on closing off the access points to negative thoughts.

It's that "Darn Bible" for Steve Heyduck.

Monday, April 26, 2010

Do Science and Faith Conflict?

A good video from Biologos. I especially like the quote from Pope John Paul II.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Monday 4.26.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup(at)yahoo(dot)com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Postings to ponder from the Methoblogosphere:

Angela Shier-Jones reflects on the "nice" lie of ministry.

Daniel McLain Hixon posts on reforming Communion in the UMC.

Tony Mitchell writes on seeing the world from our own neighborhood.

Some thoughts on warmongering from Dave Camphouse.

Jim Parsons begins a series on advice for young clergy.

Kim Fabricius says that the Iceland volcano eruption is God's judgment (well, not really).

Changing the world according to Larry Oksten.

For Melissa Yosua-Davis, it's resurrection time.

Jonathan Marlowe posts on Methodist theologian, Tom Oden.

"This is my body, broken by you"-- ponderings by Dan Dick.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

A Prayer for the Fourth Sunday of Easter

O God, whose Son Jesus is the good shepherd of your people; Grant that when we hear his voice we may know him who calls us each by name, and follow where he leads; who, with you and the Holy Spirit, lives and reigns, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

The Book of Common Prayer

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Weekend Whimsy 2010.1

A preacher went to his church office on Monday morning and discovered a dead mule in the churchyard, He called the police. Since there did not appear to be any foul play, the police referred the preacher to the health department.

They said that since there was no health threat, he should call the sanitation department. The sanitation manager said he could not pick up the mule without authorization from the mayor.

Now the preacher knew the mayor and was not too eager to call him. The mayor had a bad temper and was generally hard to deal with, but the preacher had no choice, so he called him anyway.

The mayor did not disappoint. He immediately began to rant and rave at the pastor and finally said, "Why did you call me?" Isn't it your job to bury the dead?"

The preacher paused for a brief prayer and asked the Lord to direct his response. He then answered, "Yes, sir, it is my job to bury the dead, but I always like to notify the next of kin first."

+ + + + + + +

From Michael E. Hodgin, 1002 Humorous Illustrations for Public Speaking (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004).

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup 2010.9.220

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the Methodist Blogs Daily Links (MBDL), email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

If you discover that a link is not correct, please email me at the above address.

*Thanks to all for their email submissions!*

The week in review in the Methoblogosphere:






This week's Best of the Methoblogosphere:


Friday, April 23, 2010

Yes, Indeed... The Christian Left and the Christian Right Are Just Two Sides of the Same Coin

Scot McKnight at Jesus Creed is posting a series on James Hunter's new book, To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World. In the book Hunter offers critique of Christians on the political left and the political right, James Dobson and Jim Wallis, et al. In Scot's third post, he analyzes Hunter's critique of the right, and in today's post he takes a look at Hunter's critique of the left.

Scot assesses Hunter's analysis with this comment: "Again, the theory is the same as the Christian Right: politics is the solution. Hunter says Wallis is as much connected to the Democrats as Dobson is to the Republicans. Hunter sees this as a faith-based extension of the Left's discourse. Hunter thinks Wallis' style is as much civil religion as is Dobson's, but uses different texts than does Dobson."

"The Christian Left, Hunter argues, imitates the Christian Right."

I have been suggesting the very same thing on this blog for some time, except that I am sure Hunter's argument is more sophisticated than mine.

Scot's posts are a must read.

The first two links are here (1) and here (2).

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Friday 4.23.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Food for thought from today's Methoblogosphere:

Shane Raynor writes on reforming Communion.

Mark Winter went back to school.

Reflections on the fear of failure from Lauren Porter.

Blaek Huggins' second post on Incarnational eschatology.

In reference to Earth Day, Chris Roberts wants us to keep things straight.

Will Deuel comments on secular hymnody.

Steven Manskar reminds us that the Lord's Supper is a powerful means of grace.

What does it mean to grow? Jay Voorhees asks the question.

"New Life on the Road to Damascus"-- a sermon by Beth Quick.

Matt Kelley on Thomas Merton on change.

Betty Newman ponders holy hands.

It is a revolution of grace according to Ken Hagler.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Truth is Stranger than Fiction 2010.7

Burglars break into prison to steal TVs: Minimum-security prison robbed twice while prisoners were on furloughs

Reuters
updated 12:11 p.m. ET,
Wed., April 21, 2010

It would make a good gag for a comedy if it weren't actually true: thieves have broken into a Dutch prison to steal the inmates' televisions.

Twice in the last six weeks, burglars broke into a minimum-security prison and stole TVs from cells while prisoners were on weekend furloughs, a spokesman for the justice ministry said on Wednesday.

The prison, in the town of Hoorn, 26 miles northeast of Amsterdam, is for inmates near the end of their sentences.

The facility is what the Dutch government calls a "very modestly protected environment," where prisoners transition back into society. They are typically allowed weekend leave, which is when the burglars decided to take advantage.

The thefts happened on two separate weekends about a month apart in March and April. The ministry spokesman said it has still not been able to confirm how the burglars gained access.

A spokeswoman for the public prosecutor's office in the region confirmed only that a break-in at the prison had been reported to police and added that no arrests had yet been made.

Opinion Central Poll 2010.12: Final Results

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Thursday 4.22.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Some of the latest from the Methoblogosphere:

Tim Good writes on religion and politics.

It's inspection day for Graham Peacock.

Lorna Koskela shouts, "Don't mess with me! I belong to God!"

Kathy James posts on two kinds of hospitality.

Some thoughts on killing weeds from Cathy Turner.

Angela Shier-Jones comments on emerging ministers and the liturgical calendar.

Sky McCracken counsels us to put on Christ and wear him always.

"Christ Caring for People through People"-- a sermon by Ken Carter.

Joseph Slife says the UMC is worth fighting for.

Andy Bryan reminds us that attitude matters.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

One Further Example of the Problematic Nature of Rights Language

The chief of the European Union has declared that traveling on vacation is a human right, and that the poor should be subsidized so that they can travel to destinations beyond their own narrow borders (story here). Antonio Tajani, states, "Travelling for tourism today is a right. The way we spend our holidays is a formidable indicator of our quality of life."

My spouse, Carol, and I enjoy traveling. I wish everyone could travel who wants to do so. I remember when I was a young pastor with two young children, making just above the minimum salary and having school loans to pay. Carol and I would travel out of town with our two daughters on vacation every year. We did so because I knew that in my profession if I stayed at home, I would not get a vacation. I did not even think or wish that someone would pay for our vacations out of town. Carol and I saved every month each year for the next year's vacation. In order to do that, we had to go without things during the year. We could not have it all and we did not expect to have it all. We knew that if we were going to get some family time away where we would not be interrupted, we needed to make it a priority. We made it so. We said "no" to other expenditures during the year so we could pack up the van with our daughters and all their "stuff" to make our way down the road to new destinations.

The idea that traveling on vacation is a right and therefore should be subsidized is frankly absurd. But even more significantly it highlights the even greater problem of rights language. Once again, it is revealed what I have said on my blog for some time is true... rights language is more trouble than it is worth and Christians should just jettison it from their moral vocabulary. Rights language by necessity leads to rampant individualism which leads to selfish assertions of what one is owed. In other words, rights language leads to a sense of entitlement.

There are those who would say in response that just because somebody asserts the notion of an absurd right to travel does not mean that all rights language is incorrect. Fair enough... but I continue to challenge those Christians who want to hang on to rights language to give me criteria as to what constitutes a right. Why is one thing a right and not another? I have yet to hear from anyone on this.

I have many intelligent readers of this blog who disagree with me on this. I want to hear from you. How would you respond to this idea that travel is a right and ought to be subsidized by taxpayers? And if you reject the argument of the EU Chief, how do you still continue to argue for the validity of something called "rights?"

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Wednesday 4.21.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Today's reads from the Methoblogosphere:

Should long prayers be abolished? Craig L. Adams asks the question.

Richard Heyduck reflects on the "invention of religion."

Greg Hazelrig posts his thought for the day on 1 Corinthians 12:7.

Some thoughts on inviting guests from Kim Matthews.

Dave Faulkner cogitates on fishermen and shepherds.

Evangelicals, Genesis and Modern Science-- a post from Brian Russell.

Sally Coleman reflects on strange dreams, the Lord's Table and other Communion related ponderings.

Dave Camphouse is discerning himself.

Jeremy Smith is remembering April 19th.

"They Hear His Voice"-- a sermon by Tony Mitchell.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Joshua in 3-D: Biblical Conquest and Manifest Destiny #2

Today we continue Dr. Dan Hawk's series on Biblical Conquest and Manifest Destiny. The publisher of Dan's new book, Wipf and Stock, is offering all readers of this blog a 40% discount on Joshua in 3-D for those who order a copy by May 16th. You must order from their website and you must insert the coupon code "HAWK40."

+ + + + + + +
.
.
Indigenous Women and the Invaders Who Love Them
L. Daniel Hawk
.
One of the characters that figure prominently in biblical Joshua, Manifest Destiny, and Avatar is the indigenous woman who helps the invader. In Joshua, Israelites no sooner enter the land than they encounter a Canaanite prostitute named Rahab, who protects them when the local authorities come looking for them, and then helps them make their getaway. In America’s master narrative Captain John Smith, a leader of England’s first colony at Jamestown, is saved from death by Pocahontas, who then becomes a bridge between the colony and the Powhatan Confederacy. Then, when the young United States embarks on its voyage of discovery into the land it purchased from the French, Lewis and Clark (counterparts of the two Israelite spies at Jericho?) meet Sacagawea, who guides and helps the explorers on their mission. Along similar lines Jake Sully, in the person of his avatar, meets a Na’vi woman who rescues him from viperwolves in the Pandora wilderness. She then takes him to her village and, like Rahab and Pocahontas before her, becomes the invader’s advocate before the people.
.
Why do conquest narratives include stories about indigenous women who help the invaders? That the invader is male and the indigene is female can be seen as an expression of the patriarchal societies that tell the stories; men matter and men must remain the dominant characters. Yet why is it important to the invader to include a story-line about indigenous helpers – and in the case of America, to memorialize them in movies (Pocahontas, The New World) and tokens of economic exchange (Sacagawea, on the U.S. one-dollar coin)?
.
The stories can be read as expressions of the invader’s sense of superiority and a claim that destiny was on their side; the indigenous women’s welcome implicitly recognizes the invader’s power and the inevitability of their people’s demise. Or the stories can be read as attempts to assuage the invaders’ guilt about the conquest; the women’s welcome signals that the peoples of the land really wanted them to invade.
.
Avatar, however, does something that the American narrative does not do. Neytiri ennobles the indigenous peoples and, by contrast, unmasks the violence of the invaders and their supposed cultural superiority. The real “savages” turn out to be the invaders, not the indigenes.
.
This is precisely the reversal of perspective that the biblical story of Rahab accomplishes (Josh 2:1-24). Biblical readers know who the good guys and the bad girl are in this story. But as it unfolds, Rahab expresses the qualities that Israelites admired, and she is the only person in the story to praise God. By the end of the story, readers find themselves identifying with the indigenous woman rather than “the good guys,” just as earthbound viewers find themselves identifying with Neytiri and the peoples of Pandora.
.
The biblical account uses the device of reversal to humanize the indigenous peoples of Canaan, dismantle perceptions of superiority, and destabilize the rhetoric that viewed them as deserving of annihilation. The attitudes evidently remained prevalent when the story was written down, for Rahab’s descendents remained “to this day” at the margins of Israelite society (Josh 6:23, 25).
.
What then of the American story of “how the west was won?” How might the biblical story prompt today’s Christians to see that story differently, recognize the violent and exclusivist elements that configure it, and ponder how the story shapes perspectives and practices to this very day?
.
+ + + + + + +
.
Previous link in the series:
.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Tuesday 4.20.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Take a look at these links from the Methoblogosphere:

Bob Bryan reflects on loving our neighbor as ourselves.

"Restoring Eyesight"-- a sermon by Michael Daniel.

Henry Neufeld on Adrian Warnock on the doctrine of Scripture.

Pam Webster writes on restoration.

Dave Perry ponders photography and the art of pastoral ministry.

The Word of God must not be muzzled! says Kim Fabricius.

Some thoughts on faith healing from Deb Spaulding.

Dan Dick comments on the time for change.

Joseph Yoo will see you later.

Same program, bigger church-- a narrative from Questing Parson.

Monday, April 19, 2010

Question of the Day???

In Germany, public denial of the Holocaust is illegal. Would you support a similar law in your country of residence? Why or why not?

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links-- Monday 4.19.10

Any Methoblogger who would like a link included in the MBDL, email your link to me at umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. Your link will be posted within two weekdays. No blog will be linked more than once in a week.

Some posts to ponder in the Methoblogosphere:

Kurt Boemler writes on doctrinal word clouds.

Dave Nichols is dealing with the empty nest.

The risen Christ comes to the door according to Will Grady.

Everything Rick Weber needed to learn about theology he learned from his dingo dog.

Dale Tedder posts a primer for coaching kids' sports.

John Meunier will take gym rats over blue chippers.

Reflections on the God of Repentance from Andy Stoddard.

Bishop Robert Schnase asks, "Whatcha' reading?"

Bishop William Willimon comments on preaching and resurrection.
.
"Third Times a Charm"-- a sermon by Jim Parsons.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Do You Love Me?

Today's audio sermon from John 21:1-19

The Quotable C.S. Lewis #29: Poetry Replaces Grammar

"Those who have attained everlasting life in the vision of God doubtless know very well that it is no mere bribe, but the very consummation of their earthly discipleship; but we who have not yet attained it cannot know this in the same way, and cannot even begin to know it at all except by continuing to obey and finding the first reward of our obedience in our increasing power to desire the ultimate reward. Just in proportion as the desire grows, our fear lest it should be mercenary desire will die away and finally be recognized as an absurdity. But probably this will not, for most of us, happen in a day; poetry replaces grammar, gospel replaces law, longing transforms obedience, as gradually as the tide lifts a grounded ship."

--The Weight of Glory

A Prayer for the Third Sunday of Easter

O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
.
The Book of Common Prayer

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Opinion Central Poll 2010.11: Final Results

A New Look for the Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup

As you no doubt have noticed, the MBWR has been hit and miss lately-- more miss than hit. It has simply become too much for me to keep up with in posting all at once. At the same time, judging from the hits on my blog when I post the Weekly Roundup, it is clearly something the Methoblogosphere reads in good numbers.

So... after much deliberation, I am going to try a third way. Starting Monday I am going to post the Methodist Blogs Daily Links. I will highlight a minimum of ten links each day, Monday through Friday. Since I have been posting approximately fifty links each Saturday, you will still be receiving the same number of excellent reads from around the Methoblogosphere, except in daily format. Then on Saturday morning, I will post my two choices for the Best of the Methoblogosphere from the week's posts along with links to the week's MBDL. This Saturday post will be entitled "The Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup." Sure, I may miss a day here and there, but I am hoping that this format will provide greater consistency from week to week instead of having no links for one or two or possibly three weeks at a time.

I will go through the blogs at random as I do now. At the same time, if you write a post you want included at some point during the week, send me an email and link as you have been doing to umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com. I will now be checking the email each day and utilizing the links instead of just on Saturday, so there will be no deadline for submissions each week. When I receive your email, I will post your link within a day or two. Every blog will be linked only once each week.

The Methodist Blogs Daily Links will be posted each weekday morning by 9:00 a.m. EST. My regular daily postings in which I ramble on and on and on will now be published each day at some point after the MBDL.

I am hoping that MBDL will provide as much service as the MBWR has.

As always your thoughts and feedback are welcome.

Friday, April 16, 2010

Theological Precision and Narrative Imagination

Anyone who knows me knows that as a Christian I proudly stand in the Nicene-Chalcedonian tradition. Every time I confess the Nicene Creed in worship I do so with deep conviction. I am unapologetically trinitarian and I resist any attempts at modern modalist reconfigurations of the essential Christian doctrine of God. I firmly believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus and I strongly object to any attempt to have a resurrected Jesus without his actual earthly body.

I love theology and I love the necessary precision of theological language. But I also love the imaginative narrative that displays theology in ways that speak to the head and to the heart, which is why I thoroughly enjoyed reading the book, The Shack, many months ago, and found myself rather baffled at so many of the very negative appraisals of the book on theological grounds from other Christians. Casting aside the not-to-be-taken seriously aspersions of the book as juvenile and sophomoric literature (I suppose one would have to be juvenile and sophomoric to know), what I loved about the book was that in a wonderfully imaginative way it dealt with doctrine, relating it to the always deeply relevant and timely philosophical and theological matters that relate to the problem of evil, forgiveness, the nature of God, and God's work in this world by God's very presence. To be sure, there were times when I didn't agree with a particular narrative move the author, Paul Young, made in a portrayal, but then again, I have yet to always agree with every scholarly constructive theological treatment I have read.

Without precise theological language, the great doctrines of our faith have no boundaries that give them their distinctive character. Without narrative imagination our doctrines will appear to many to be somehow beside the point of life. Theologians may prefer to read something more substantive like Karl Barth, and I love Barth, but they need to know that the folks in the pews (and outside the pews as well) are not reading the great Swiss-German theologian; they are reading Paul Young.

I heard Paul Young speak yesterday at Ashland Theological Seminary. If you ever get an opportunity to hear him you must make the effort. As I listened to Paul, I became rather angered at the charge of heresy that has been leveled against him by those, who may know their theology, but know little about the nature of true heresy, as well as having no idea how to express theological truth in a way that makes a difference in people's lives. C.S. Lewis often complained that the biggest problem with theologians was that they lacked imagination. If Lewis were still alive he would know that little has changed.

There are times when I have wondered if Jesus was accused of "heresy" when he compared the kingdom of God to a mustard seed. On occasion I have considered the possibility that Jesus was charged with a less than orthodox doctrine of God when he, in story form, compared God to the father who gladly threw aside his dignity and self-respect to welcome home a wayward son. There have been times when I thought that perhaps Jesus was ridiculed by the trained theologians for his portrayal of God as an unjust judge.

I love reading theology. I enjoy parsing terminology and honing the sharp edges of doctrine into something finely tuned and precise. But I also enjoy reading the imaginative narratives that help me think theologically about life and faith in ways I had never considered.

I am an unapologetic Nicene-Chalcedonian trinitarian theologian; and I applaud Paul Young for his portrayal of the Trinity and his narrative display of some of our most significant beliefs and convictions in The Shack.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

All Justice Is Social Justice

Political pundit Glenn Beck, who has a TV show on the former state-run media outlet during the Bush Administration, FOX News, created quite stir recently in reference to his comments on social justice and leftist agendas. The Christian blogosphere has been quite abuzz with responses to Beck's very misinformed views. Even the current state-run media outlet under the Obama Administration, MSNBC, has made much of the hoopla simply as a way to bash Beck. Their views are just as misinformed.

I have expressed on this blog that I struggle with the language of social justice, but it has nothing to do with Beck's rantings and ravings. I would like to think that my views on the subject are a little more informed, which of course doesn't necessarily make them right; but I hope the questions I raise are cause for some serious discussion and debate instead of resulting mainly in a battle between two woefully biased cable "news" outlets who are more interested in selling a political agenda instead of informing the public.

In his book A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic, Stanley Hauerwas argues, among other reasons, that the problem with the language of social ethics is that it assumes there are ethics which are not social in nature. In so doing Christians have unwittingly reinforced the private/public distinction when it comes to ethical matters. As he rightly notes, "All ethics are social ethics."

I have the same problem with the language of social justice. By using the terminology only for certain issues (e.g. health care reform, feeding the poor), Christians unwittingly fall into the trap of suggesting that some matters of justice are not social in nature. But I say in response that all justice is social justice.

So I ask all the apologists for social justice as it is currently construed-- why isn't abortion a social justice issue? Is there anyone who would deny that the current practice of abortion on demand has huge social implications for the present and the future? There was recent outrage among the social justice crowd that some Christian political conservatives suggested a libertarian approach to giving to the poor. Without siding with them, let me ask, nevertheless, why is it that so many on the social justice side of the equation take a libertarian approach to abortion? How many times I have engaged "pro-choice" Christians in discussion who basically say, "Well, I don't approve of abortion, but I would never presume to make that choice for someone else." OK... fair enough. But then what is wrong with the statement, "Well, I think it is important that I pay more in taxes to the government for programs to feed poor children, but I would never presume to make that choice for someone else." It is true that those on the political right want to stop abortion through legal means, but want to leave care for children outside the womb up to the voluntary generosity of individuals. At the same time those on the political left want to use legal means to force people to pay more to care for hungry children, but when it comes to abortion, they want to leave that up to the individual with the strategy of working toward abortion reduction. Am I the only one who sees the problem here? If we should work for abortion reduction without legal means, what's wrong with working toward poverty reduction without legal means? If we are going to work to outlaw abortion, then why not work to increase taxes to feed poor children? As I have said before and will say again... the Christian political left and the Christian political right are simply two sides of the same coin, and they share more in common with the politics of the nation-state than with the politics of the Kingdom of God; they share more in common with the political platforms of RNC and the DNC than with the Sermon on the Mount.

If Christians are charged with defending those who cannot defend themselves, then I say that Christians should not only be concerned with defending children who are poor and hungry; they should also be defending the voiceless and defenseless unborn, and vice-versa.

And all I ask from both sides is consistency. If the left is going to force people through legislation to dig into their pockets to provide health care and food for hungry children, they should also utilize legislation to protect unborn children as well. And if the right is going to work toward outlawing abortion, then they better work to pass laws that provide more money for those children in need, who have already made their trip into this world.

Until both sides become consistent on these issues, their arguments will fall very short of the mark, as far as I'm concerned, and will be quite unconvincing.

All justice is indeed social justice.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Joshua in 3-D: Biblical Conquest and Manifest Destiny #1

For the next five Tuesdays (including this one), one of my colleagues from Ashland Theological Seminary will be a guest blogger here. Dr. L. Daniel Hawk is Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew. Among his publications he has written a commentary on the Book of Joshua for the Berit Olam series. He is an excellent OT scholar and is quite conversant in postmodernism. When I have a perplexing question in Old Testament, he is the first person I seek out for his opinion.
.
Dan and I have participated together in mission in Cuba. He is a man of deep faith in Jesus Christ and his scholarship proceeds from his profound faith convictions. A new book of his, Joshua in 3-D, has just been published. Dan has spent much time over the years looking at the conquest narratives in the OT book of Joshua, not only in reference to what they meant, but what they mean for us in the twenty-first century West, and how they have been used and abused. Dan takes an honest look at these complex texts and draws honest implications on the relationship between biblical conquest and the doctrine of Manifest Destiny. Dan is not afraid of asking the difficult and uncomfortable questions that the conquest narratives raise for believers at the dawn of the twenty-first century. His is truly a 3-D approach. Here is the publisher's excellent summary of the book:
.
This unique commentary generates a conversation between the biblical narrative of conquest, related biblical themes, and the American master narrative of Manifest Destiny. Writing in an accessible style and format, Hawk offers an exegesis of the biblical text with special emphasis on the ways the narrative of conquest shaped ancient Israel's identity as a people. A second level of commentary lifts key themes from the text (e.g., the land as divine gift and promise, mass killing, Israel's distinctive attributes, the construction of the Indigenous Other) and sets them within their broader biblical context. A third dimension reflects on corresponding elements in America's narrative of "westward expansion" (e.g. the conviction of America's unique character and destiny, total war and ethnic cleansing, the dehumanization of Native peoples, patriotism and homeland, the idea of the American Dream). As a whole, this book offers Joshua as a biblical resource for reading the American experience, challenging readers to reflect on how conquest shaped America's identity and how it continues to influence American attitudes and actions.
.
I invite you to read his posts over these next few Tuesdays and post your own comments. Dan will be monitoring the discussion and will be happy to respond to any questions and concerns you may have.
.
In addition, the publisher of Dan's new book, Wipf and Stock, is offering all readers of this blog a 40% discount on Joshua in 3-D for those who order a copy by May 16th. You must order from their website and you must insert the coupon code "HAWK40."
.
Dan's book is well worth the price even without the discount.
.
Here is Dan's first post. Read, reflect, ponder, and join the discussion.
.
+ + + + + + +
Avatar, Manifest Destiny, and the Conquest of Canaan
L. Daniel Hawk
.
I thank Allan for the invitation to post on this blog. Allan has been a valued conversation partner on matters biblical and technological. I particularly appreciate his energy and vision in utilizing the internet to stimulate important discussions and am grateful for the privilege of participating in this forum. Thanks Allan!
.
The stories we tell, and the stories we embrace, reveal much about how we look at ourselves, our world, and our place in the world. Narratives encode our convictions, validate our beliefs, voice our anxieties, and assemble the events of our lives and memory into a meaningful coherence. They define us more clearly than textbooks or mission statements. It is no coincidence that the Bible, the book that for Christians explains God, humanity, and the world, is a grand narrative that begins with creation in Genesis and ends with new creation in the Revelation.
.
One of the stories at the center of today’s cultural radar is the one told by James Cameron’s Avatar. Like all narratives, this one draws on building blocks that have shaped previous versions of a basic, deeply-embedded cultural story. One of the fascinating aspects of Avatar is the way it retells the story of Western colonialism and turns it on its head. Avatar is the American master narrative of Manifest Destiny, projected safely into a fantasy world. There is the Invader, armed with superior military technology and intent on plundering a lush new world. There are the Indigenes, tied deeply to the land and determined to resist conquest and the exploitation of their world. There is Miles Quaritch, the military leader in the employ of the economic power (RDA), who wants only to drive out “the savages.” There is Jake Sully, the conflicted Invader turned renegade, who embodies the Invader’s ambivalence about conquest. There is Neytiri, the Indigenous woman who helps the Invader and becomes the bridge to her people. And there is her counterpart, Dr. Grace Augustine, whose attempt to start a school for the Na’vi recalls American attempts to “civilize the Indian” by establishing boarding schools.
.
Manifest Destiny was itself constructed from the building blocks of a more primal narrative – the story of the conquest of Canaan in the book of Joshua. Although Manifest Destiny incorporates other building blocks (such as the claim that the conquest was divinely commanded), the three narratives follow many of the same themes. At the heart of all is the story of the conquest of indigenous peoples and the appropriation of the land’s bounty, with fear and mass killing of the indigenes as a prominent thread.
.
Yet there is also ambivalence. Neytiri has a biblical counterpart in Rahab, an indigenous woman who helps the invaders. The Na’vi resemble the Gibeonites, who embody the characteristics admired by the Israelites. In Joshua’s farewell address (Josh 23), we detect the anxiety of a community working hard to keep its distance from the indigenous peoples, reflecting the bifurcated identities of earthlings and their avatars.
.
Many early Christian teachers viewed the Bible as a mirror, a gift from God that shows us our nobility and dignity, as well as our sins and ugliness. Taking up the Bible as a mirror, how might Joshua illumine the stories we tell, and have told, and what they say about us and our culture? How might this scripture enable American Christians to “read” our cultural stories and our sense of how the God of Peace might be at work in our world?
.
Next Tuesday-- Part Two-- "Indigenous Women"

Monday, April 12, 2010

Divine Graffiti

Isaiah 49:8-18

The latter chapters of the book of Isaiah are written in the context of Israel's exile in Babylon. In 586 B.C. the southern kingdom of Judah was conquered and most of the inhabitants of Jerusalem were led off to a strange land to live. Exiled from their homeland and wondering why God had allowed them to suffer so, these latter chapters in the prophet are written in part to encourage God's people Israel to remain faithful in spite of their circumstances and in spite of the fact that they may wonder, at times, what good their faith is for them as they live their lives.

There were those in Israel who likely blamed God for their misery, but first they needed to blame themselves. Their exile was their fault. For several centuries they continually violated God's law, they worshiped false gods, lived immorally, put up with and even supported corrupt leadership; and they trusted more in themselves than in the divine one who had called them. Now they were away from their homeland living in a strange place. Often, the first step in dealing with a problem is to admit that you are the one who created it.

Nevertheless, having said that, at some point, God's people were surely wondering when enough was enough. Of course, they had made the mess they now found themselves in, but when would the price be paid, when would penance be sufficient, and at what point would Israel be allowed to begin again?

It is not easy to put life in a nice and neat order; neither is it possible to understand completely how God works in each and every situation. For we mortals time flies when we are having fun, and it drags on in the midst of difficult days. God, who stands outside of time in eternity, sees from a vantage point we can only wonder about. We wish God would work in our time, but God is the one who moves with us in time expecting that we continue to trust and live in faith, even though we wonder when and where and how we might find relief. If the people of God are to be faithful, they must be patient.

Through Isaiah God promises that in his divine time, he will deliver his people. It may not come soon enough for them, but it will arrive nonetheless:

Thus says the LORD: In a time of favour I have answered you, on a day of salvation I have helped you; I have kept you and given you as a covenant to the people, to establish the land, to apportion the desolate heritages; saying to the prisoners, 'Come out', to those who are in darkness, 'Show yourselves.' They shall feed along the ways, on all the bare heights shall be their pasture; they shall not hunger or thirst, neither scorching wind nor sun shall strike them down, for he who has pity on them will lead them, and by springs of water will guide them. And I will turn all my mountains into a road, and my highways shall be raised up 49:8-11).

God does indeed promise deliverance and restoration; in the meantime they must know and trust that God is with them. God has not abandoned his people in the past and he will not do so in the present. There are those who say that the Almighty has forgotten; that perhaps God has moved on to another people, but Isaiah insists that this is not true.

Can a woman forget her nursing-child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you. See, I have inscribed you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me (49:15-16).

It surely seems impossible for a mother to forget the child she carried and gave birth to. Sadly, there are some who do, even though most do not. For most mothers the thoughts of a child are always close at hand even when they are away from home. But God's love and compassion for us are deeper and more profound than the most loving and compassionate mom. The analogy of God inscribing our names on his hands is not an image meant to convey that God has to do something so he will not forget us; rather it is meant to demonstrate that God loves us so much, that he purposely puts us in front of him because of the joy God has in loving us.

Most homes have pictures of family on the walls and other places throughout the house, not for the purpose of having to be reminded of whom we are related to, but rather we display the images of those persons who mean so much to us. Photos of family members in our homes and in our wallets and purses do not serve as reminders; they are displays of love. We put their photos in prominent places precisely because we could never forget them.

And so it is in Isaiah. God has put our names before him, not because he is afraid of forgetting us, but it is a display of his love for us. And in knowing this, it serves as a reminder to us that in the midst of life and, yes, even in the midst of its difficulties, God has not forgotten about us, God has not abandoned us, God has not left us to ourselves.

God takes our lives and brings them into his life; and while the character of God never changes, God nevertheless journeys with us as we grow in relationship with him. Isaiah reminds us that God's divine graffiti does not serve as a reminder to God, but a rather it is a reminder to us that God is indeed with us.

And perhaps Isaiah 49 is a preview of a day, centuries later, when God in the flesh would have our names, our lives, inscribed into his hands with the nails of a cross.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Oops! The MBWR

I got so involved with my tasks this weekend, I completely forgot about posting the Weekly Roundup.

I can't believe it slipped my mind.

The MBWR will return next weekend. I have tied a string around my finger.

Quote of the Day: Ain't Politics Fun...

From Michael Kruse of the Kruse Kronicle: "Democratic Party Image Drops to Record Low-- And all this tells you is that the Dems have now fallen into the gutter with the GOP. Ain't politics fun with Baby Boomers in charge?"

Fun indeed, Michael... I personally refer to it as a hemorrhage of pleasure.

Caption Contest 2010.4... And the Winner Is...

Mark: Egg-pacalypse

Friday, April 09, 2010

The Character of Our Discontent

I want to give a special thank you to Bob Cornwall for his very helpful review of my soon to be published book, The Character of Our Discontent: Old Testament Portraits for Contemporary Times.

If there are any bloggers or reviewers out there who would like a free advance copy for review, you can contact the publisher here.

Thursday, April 08, 2010

When It Comes to Justification by Faith, How Protestant Was John Wesley?

I just finished reading William Abraham's book, Wesley for Armchair Theologians. I have been asked by several people over the years what I thought of the book; and even though I love Abraham's work, I didn't want to recommend something I hadn't read, so I decided to take up his book and read.

Abraham gives us a nice introduction to Wesley's theology. It is not a difficult read, but it is substantive. On Wesley and justification by faith he writes the following:

The crucial point to observe, surely, is that Wesley has abandoned the traditional Protestant position on justification by faith alone. He keeps the verbal and technical form of the original doctrine of the Reformation, but he has radically abandoned the substance of the tradition. His protests and denials are precisely what we would expect from a hair-splitting, competent logician, such as Wesley clearly was. They do nothing to ease the theological shift he has made.

We see here the drive to holiness that animated Wesley's theology as a whole. He is totally opposed to any vision of justification that will open a door to the denial or neglect of the moral law. Clearly, unwary doctrines of justification by faith alone have paved the way for views of the Christian life that downplay, if not reject completely, the quest for virtue and the struggle against vice. After all, if all I need is faith, then it ultimately does not matter what I do.

Now, it must be said that Wesley is not promoting justification by works. He is not remotely suggesting that salvation is something to be earned, but for Wesley our works express the reality of our justification. Thus grace is a transforming thing. It is not something that we receive passively with no response on our part. As Abraham says of Wesley, "there was no standing still; one either moved forward or backward."

There is no doubt that Wesley's account of justification by faith has been viewed suspiciously by Protestants of other theological stripes. So, here is my question for discussion: Was Wesley's account of faith and his view of its relationship to works a rejection of the hallmark doctrine of Protestantism, or an affirmation of the best of the Protestant Reformation. Why or why not?

All are welcome to comment.

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

It's Not Just the Last Act of the Play; It's the Entire Drama: Some Reflections Post Holy Week

I was raised in a very low-church Protestant tradition. What that meant for me was that the church we attended never had Holy Week services and my family never attended Holy Week services anywhere else. Of course, that also meant that we did not observe Ash Wednesday nor Advent, but my focus in this post is on Holy Week. We celebrated Christ's resurrection every Easter, but Maundy Thursday and Good Friday was something the Catholics did, and I was raised in a church environment that determined what worship practices were to be done or omitted based upon whether or not the Catholics did or didn't do it. So when I asked, as a young boy, why we did not observe Good Friday, I was told, "The Catholics do that."

I was not exposed to Holy Week observances until my days in college. In attending my first Maundy Thursday and Good Friday services, I experienced a widening of the Gospel narrative that made the celebration of Easter even more significant. Of course, I knew that Jesus celebrated a last supper with his disciples and I certainly knew of his crucifixion. Those two things were significantly highlighted in my worship experience throughout the year. But for the first time in worship I was on a journey with Jesus and the church in worship that made Easter Sunday and resurrection much more than coming into the theater for the last act of the play, which is what I had been doing all of those years when Maundy Thursday and Good Friday were just two regular days, while we pulled out all the stops for Easter Sunday. For all of those years, I had been missing out on Holy Week in the same way as one misses out when one reads only the last chapter of a book.

Many years ago, I read an article by L. Gregory Jones, the Dean of Duke Divinity School, who recounted a conversation he had with a visiting pastor from South Africa, who said he had trouble understanding why in the US Good Friday services are among the poorest attended services of the year, with Easter Sunday only a few days later being one of the best. Whatever the reasons for this, one thing is clear from the New Testament-- cross and resurrection cannot be understood apart from each other. Indeed, according to the New Testament the two make up one saving event. One cannot have resurrection without the cross and the cross is useless without the resurrection.

So, as a pastor it can be quite discouraging to have a fraction of the people at Good Friday service that will be in worship on Easter Sunday, but I am thankful that years ago I was introduced to the entire narrative of Holy Week worship. It is my favorite week of the year for good reason; and after journeying with Jesus from the Upper Room to the Garden of Gethsemane, and then to the hill called "Calvary," the joy of Easter and resurrection comes into full view and clear focus.

My only wish is that more and more believers would come to see the significance of participating in the entire divine drama of Holy Week, and not be content with witnessing only the last act of the play.