Doing the Methodist Shuffle This Week

Along with many other UM pastors, I am doing the Methodist Shuffle this week and moving on down the road. We will be leaving Cambridge, Ohio on Tuesday and arriving in Akron, Ohio on Wednesday.

Blogging will be quite sparse this week.

A Prayer for the Second Sunday after Pentecost

To fulfill the ancient promise of salvation, O God, you made a covenant with our ancestors and pledged them descendants more numerous than the stars. Grant that all people may share in the blessings of your covenant, accomplished through the death and resurrection of your Son and sealed by the gift of your Spirit. Amen.

Politics, Pulpit, and Cultural Christians

Here are two excellent posts, which I think are related...

First, Scot McKnight comments on politics from the pulpit:

The single-most powerful political action Christians "do" is baptism and Eucharist, for in those actions we enter into an alien politics.

When you read Scot's post, in order to understand what he is saying you must think "church"... not "state," not "Democrat," not "Republican," not "progressive," not "conservative," not "left" not "right." You must think politics and church, church, church.

Second, is a guest post on Rachel Held Evans' blog, written by Laura Ziesel:

Growing up, the real Christians in my mind were conservative Christians. I literally believed that Democrats could not be real Christians. Really. I'm not exaggerating. I would say, about what I have categorized as liberal Christians, "Oh, they're only cultural Christians." But then I went to college and I started to learn about my own culture and how it affected my perspective of the world. And I overcorrected, finding myself saying, about conservative Christians: "Oh, they're only cultural Christians."

Now my husband and I find ourselves in the lovely world of the in between: We don't feel at home in either camp. We believe that both camps err in major and minor ways in regard to orthodoxy and orthopraxy. But, we still feel that we're forced to choose, more or less, between the two camps. And we hate this.

Indeed... and I would suggest not a third way between the two, but an alternative to both left and right-- the politics of the Kingdom.

Read both posts and feel free to comment... here or there.

Caption Contest 2011.8... And the Winner Is...

John: "White Castle started super-sizing their burgers upon request."

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Links of Note

This week's noteworthy posts from the Methoblogosphere:

Andrew C. Thompson: Faith: Preach it, or live it!

Pam BG: Reflecting on the holy feminine

Dale Tedder: Unconscious Competence

Dave Nichols: The Communion of Saints

Steve Heyduck: Should Churches pay taxes?

Gavin Richardson: Lying to ourselves in Social Media

Shane Raynor: Evangelicalism: Getting Our Game Back

Mainliners Telling the "Safe and Weak" Stories

HT: Michael Kruse:

___

From Gil Rendle's Journey in the Wilderness: New Life for Mainline Churches:

For the moment it is sufficient to note that over time in a difficult environment where it has been increasingly hard to operate from strength, it is natural that our mainline denominational identity and stories have become both safe and weak. Our stories, our identities, become safe and weak because we have learned to tell only the more comfortable, less challenging parts of the stories so that we are not demoralized. Consider what happens naturally in an established congregation over time. For example, a congregation tells its story about how warm and welcoming it is to the people of the congregation and how members reach out to one another in times of need. Indeed, the story is quite often true. But this is also a safe and weak story because of what is left unsaid. Missing in this story may be the congregation’s fear of the changed community that now surrounds its building and how it tends not to welcome and naturally include neighborhood people who might join in a worship service. Because it tells only the safe and weak parts of its story in this all-too-common scenario, the congregation robs itself of a future that can come from the strength of remembering who it really is as a community of faith and what can happen in the neighborhood if members of the congregation come to terms with their discomforts and fears. Like local congregations, our mainline denominations have been held captive by the safe and weak stories they have been willing to tell themselves while there is much more that could be said. (13)

Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction 2011.11: Some Things You Definitely Can't Take With You

Chattanooga man's body to be exhumed after denture mix-up

by Chris Carroll

Thursday, June 23, 2011

An intensive care patient at Parkridge Medical Center lost his dentures last week when a hospital employee mistakenly gave them to the family of a dead man who had occupied the same room.

Court records show that Kenneth Ray Manis, 76, died June 12 at Parkridge. His personal belongings — along with the dentures that weren't his — were placed in a box inside the coffin at Chattanooga National Cemetery.

Now Manis' body is being exhumed after his family learned of the dentures and requested "that the personal belongings that don't belong to the deceased be extracted from the coffin," according to hospital spokeswoman Alison Counts.

Parkridge apologized to both families, Counts said.

A court order drafted by Hamilton County Chancellor Frank Brown states Parkridge "shall bear the costs of such interment and reburial," along with attorney fees up to $1,250.

"We're also paying for new dentures," Counts said. "We hope that this will bring peace and closure to the Manis family."

The dentures are the only misplaced object inside Manis coffin, said Counts, who did not know how the hospital learned of the error.

Chattanooga National Cemetery maintenance operations foreman Bill Hartley declined to give details of when the exhumation will take place, but he confirmed it hasn't happened yet.

"We're trying to honor the family and the veteran," he said. "We can't disclose any information or anything."

Parkridge officials said they would not release the name of the man who lost his dentures.

When God Goes to War

My friend and colleague, Dan Hawk is Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew at Ashland Theological Seminary in Ashland, Ohio. Some of you will remember the excellent series Dan posted on this blog about a year ago on the conquest narratives in the Book of Joshua. His book, Joshua in 3-D is a must have for anyone who wants to understand Joshua and its implications for today. It is an excellent piece of work and there is nothing else like it in print.

Dan has recently published an excellent article in the seminary's mggazine, The Table, dealing with war in the Old Testament and God's place in the midst of it. He even wades a little into the New Testament.

It is an extremely illuminating piece. I post it here in full having been given permission to do so from the author.

Read, reflect, comment if you desire, and ponder this important subject.

___

WHEN GOD GOES TO WAR

L. Daniel Hawk

The image of God as a warrior runs throughout the literature of the Old Testament. Israel knew God above all as “the LORD of hosts,” the God of the heavenly armies and the military forces of Israel. The title occurs over two hundred times in the Old Testament, constituting by far the most common among the many epithets for God in biblical literature. When the priests in Jerusalem invited the people to worship by asking “Who is this king of glory?” the people answered, “The LORD, strong and powerful! The LORD, powerful in battle!” (Psa. 24:8). God accompanied Israel in battle, with the Ark of the Covenant symbolizing his presence. As Israel followed the Ark through the wilderness the people would shout, “Arise, O LORD! Let your enemies by scattered!” (Num 10:35; cf. Josh 4:10-13; 1 Sam 6:3-9). God fought for Israel and against Pharaoh at the Red Sea, where Moses exclaimed, “The LORD is a warrior! The LORD is his name!” (Exod 15:3). God defeated the nations of Canaan when Israel entered the Promised Land and delivered Israel under the judges. God destroyed the massive armies of Assyria when no human deliverance was possible (2 Kgs 19:32-37) and used the nations as his agents to devastate Babylon (Jer 51:1-52:58). In the prophetic corpus, God the Warrior appears with particular frequency, his garments soaked with the blood of his enemies (Isa 63:1-60) and his bow at the ready (Hab 3:9).
.

While the imagery of a bloodthirsty God may shock modern sensibilities, it was right at home in the brutal world of the ancient Near East, where divine beings were constantly involved in conflict. Many ancient myths associate violence with creation. In the best-known of these, the Enuma Elish, the creation of the world takes place through an act of war in which Marduk, the titular god of Babylon, defeats the powers of evil and destruction, personified by a serpent and her minions. In short, violence was a fundamental component of creation itself in the thinking of the ancient world.

Caption Contest 2011.8

So, Just How Inclusive Was Jesus?

Michael Bird on his blog Euangelion comments on an article from the latest issue of Horizons in Biblical Theology written by Markus Bockmuehl entitled, "The Trouble With the Inclusive Jesus." Michael quotes a portion of what Bockmuehl has written:

However one parses the exegetical particulars, Jesus of Nazareth is (as Richard Hays puts it), not only the friend of sinners but also the nemesis of the wicked. Another way of putting this is to say that Jesus of Nazareth includes a remarkably wide diversity of the marginalized, yet he also marginalizes an uncomfortably diverse range of the religiously or socioeconomically included. That necessarily complicates any discussion of Jesus' "universalism" or "inclusiveness": Jesus, like Paul, appears to envisage the saved as well as the unsaved or the not-yet-saved … Our problem, then, is that the apparent smoothness and attractiveness of the "inclusive Jesus" hypothesis are acquired at a very high moral price. As we have seen, the structure of the argument typically follows the familiar liberal departicularizing of a Jesus who takes his stance over against the Judaism of his time: Jews were narrow, ethnic, culturally conservative; Jesus by contrast was universal, inclusive, and welcoming without exception. (p. 14, 17).

Michael himself goes on to comment:

Bockmuehl raises a good point, social inclusiveness is the only absolute modern value, and biblical interpreters are quick to try to make Jesus the all-inclusive hero who championed his message of inclusiveness against all forms of exclusivism.

In recent scholarship, the caricature of Judaism as legalistic has been replaced with Judaism as ethnocentric. Now ancient Jews were well known for looking after their own kind, but synagogues did accept outsiders as guests and even proselytes if they became converted and circumcised. On top of that, the Romans were probably the most xenophobic group around at the time, and were always expelling some group from Rome on the grounds that weird foreign stuff from the east was getting too popular. There was usually an open door for Gentiles into Jewish synagogues, which is exactly where the early Christian mission took root. Likewise, Jesus appears to have upheld, as far as we know, Jewish ethics concerning wealth, sexuality, and family albeit in light of his eschatological conception of the kingdom. Paul, the great inclusivist for Gentiles, slaves, and women (see Gal 3:28), also railed against pagan sexuality, temples, and forbade marriage with outsiders (1 Corinthians 6-10). Jesus and Paul are inclusive in a way that other Jews were not, but at the same time they were also exclusive in ways that other Jews, Romans, and Greeks were not. The inclusive Jesus, with a brand of inclusiveness made conducive to modern culture, is another example of the liberalizing and modernizing of the Jew, Jesus of Nazareth.

I agree with Tom Wright that modern notions of inclusiveness are too broad and too shallow. Of course there is an inclusive aspect of the Gospel; it is, after all, offered to everyone. But one cannot avoid that along with the inclusive nature of the Gospel in the New Testament, there is also an exclusive character as well. One simply cannot read Jesus or Paul and conclude otherwise.

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #9

Attempts to Explain the Relationship Between Christ's Two Natures (Part 1)

In the east, several theologians tried to explain the relationship between the two natures of Christ. They were not very successful.

The first was Apollinaris, who was on the Alexandrian side of the argument. He said that the second person of the Trinity, the Word, took the place of the rational soul in Jesus. Basically, Apollinaris was saying that Jesus had a human body, but a divine mind. He asserted that the human mind is subject to great change and prone to fantasize about improper things. Christ's mind was the unchangeable, divine Word. Christ's body was a changeable, human body.

This explanation was eventually rejected. The opposition came for the Antiochene School; Jesus must be truly human. This was necessary because Jesus became human that he might save humanity. If he was only partly human, then humanity could only be partly saved. Gregory of Nazianzus spoke to the matter quite eloquently:

The Blessing that is the Methoblogosphere

Methoblogger Dale Tedder listed his top ten favorite Methodist blogs yesterday... and yes, full disclosure... this post is in part shameless self-promotion in that Dale listed me in his top ten. But his post got me to thinking about something I have thought about many times: what a wonderful place the Methodist blogosphere has become from its infancy several years ago.

The Methodist bloggers have become a large a diverse bunch of folks. The posts and discussions are often thought-provoking and you can certainly count on various points of view and opinions. I love being part of the Methoblogosphere and am grateful for all the Methobloggers and the perspectives they bring to the blogosphere.

Near the top of my blog in the left-hand column I have a blogroll of the latest posts from the Methodist bloggers. I have the roll set to list the ten latest posts, but if you click on the "show all" tab at the bottom of the blogroll it will open a list of all the Methobloggers I have linked. I invite you to check out the list daily. There's much good stuff available for your edification.

If you are a Methodist blogger and I have not linked you into the Methodist blogroll, email me at arbevere(at)yahoo(dot)com or post your link in the comment thread of this post, and I will make sure to add you to the list.

I am being truly sincere when I say that the Methoblogosphere is quite a blessing.

A Prayer for Trinity Sunday

Almighty and everlasting God, you have given to us your servants grace, by the confession of a true faith, to acknowledge the glory of the eternal Trinity, and in the power of your divine Majesty to worship the Unity: Keep us steadfast in this faith and worship, and bring us at last to see you in your one and eternal glory, O Father; who with the Son and the Holy Spirit live and reign, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

The Book of Common Prayer

John Wesley on the Trinity

From John Wesley's Sermon no. 55 on The Trinity (June 5, 1773)

"There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: And these three are one." 1 John 5:7.

2. Hence, we cannot but infer, that there are ten thousand mistakes which may consist with real religion; with regard to which every candid, considerate man will think and let think. But there are some truths more important than others. It seems there are some which are of deep importance. I do not term them fundamental truths; because that is an ambiguous word: And hence there have been so many warm disputes about the number of fundamentals. But surely there are some which it nearly concerns us to know, as having a close connexion with vital religion. And doubtless we may rank among these that contained in the words above cited: There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: And these three are one.

3. I do not mean that it is of importance to believe this or that explication of these words. I know not that any well judging man would attempt to explain them at all. One of the best tracts which that great man, Dean Swift, ever wrote, was his Sermon upon the Trinity. Herein he shows, that all who endeavored to explain it at all, have utterly lost their way; have, above all other persons hurt the cause which they intended to promote; having only, as Job speaks, "darkened counsel by words without knowledge." It was in an evil hour that these explainers began their fruitless work I insist upon no explication at all; no, not even on the best I ever saw; I mean, that which is given us in the creed commonly ascribed to Athanasius. I am far from saying, he who does not assent to this shall without doubt perish everlastingly." For the sake of that and another clause, I, for some time, scrupled subscribing to that creed; till I considered (1.) That these sentences only relate to wilful, not involuntary, unbelievers; to those who, having all the means of knowing the truth, nevertheless obstinately reject it: (2.) that they relate only to the substance of the doctrine there delivered; not the philosophical illustrations of it.

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Links of Note

This week's five noteworthy posts from the Methoblogosphere:

Lorna Koskela: red

Shane Raynor: Hold on to Discipline and Instruction

Scott Endress: Let's be honest regarding "clergy health"

Bishop Robert Schnase: Fixing and Healing

Craig L. Adams: Why Does the Bible Talk About Hell?

The Board of Ordained Ministry as Social Media Police

Jeremy Smith at Hacking Christianity has written a post on the Kentucky Annual Conference's decision requiring candidates for ministry to open all their social media to BOM review. Jeremy has concerns about this, as do I.

Jeremy writes,

While I applaud integrity and exhibit it in my own word and deed, integrity enforced by fear is not what we as clergy are called to preach and teach and I reject efforts that put that on the clergy. There's enough fear in the system already: fear of the future, fear of upsetting the wrong people, fear of speaking prophetically.

Personally, I think every business and church needs a water cooler: the place where people gather to complain about their bosses. It's the pressure-release valve that allows the individual to vent in healthy ways. Does that mean Facebook is all about pastors griping about their congregation? Of course not, I rarely see that and I know a LOT of pastors. But pastors (just like employees) need space to express themselves and release…to hold them accountable via an illegally-created online profile in an impossible-to-police method is not the way.

For a church to be prophetic, it must allow space for thoughtful musings. What would the BOM do if they saw pastors updating their statuses saying they "struggle" with Rob Bell's 'Love Wins'…would that become a mark on their chart? What if they shared a link for immigration reform…would that become a question of whether they heart America? What if people like me have really weird humor…would that become an issue?

Jeremy is spot on. Now I am not suggesting (and I doubt Jeremy is either) that pastors, nor anyone else, should not be held accountable for what they say. Indeed, I argued for the significance of such accountability in a recent post, but what such a policy will ultimately do is have a chilling effect on serious theological and ecclesial discussion and debate. Some of the best theological and moral discussions I have had of late have been on Facebook.

Now, I have no doubt that most members of Boards of Ordained Ministry in every Annual Conference will allow for such theological, ecclesial, and moral probings, but there are always a small handul who may very well use opinions expressed in social media threads by candidates for ministry against them. Some people are able to react rationally when someone expresses a different point of view on a hot button issue, and some are not.

It's the latter individuals who are of concern.

What do you think?

Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction 2011.10: Give Us All Your Dough!

Cops: Masked men hold up doughnut shop, get dough

From Associated Press

June 10, 2011 9:38 PM EDT

HYANNIS, Mass. (AP) — Police say masked and armed men in Cape Cod thought they were nabbing a bag of dough.

 

They did — just not the kind they wanted.

 

Three Hyannis men are facing armed robbery while masked charges after police say they robbed a Dunkin' Donuts with knives and a hatchet on Wednesday and only ended up with a bag of doughnuts.

 

According to police, the men demanded a paper bag that was in one of the worker's purses, mistakenly believing she was carrying cash from the day's receipts. But police say the men never looked inside.

 

The men were captured on video and police were able to track them down on Thursday. Arrested were 19-year-old Nicholas Mercurio, 21-year-old Lukas Peterson and 20-year-old Charles Iliffe.

 

It was unclear if any had attorneys.

Ronald McDonald as Pastor

From ASBO Jesus

HT: Richard Hall

A New Doctor of Ministry Degree in Wesleyan Practices

This coming academic year, Ashland Theological Seminary will launch its new D.Min. in Wesleyan Practices. Under the leadership of Dr. Paul Chilcote, the program is the only Doctor of Ministry program of its kind. I am pleased to be teaching the course on Incarnational Leadership. The following is the course description for that particular course:

This course will focus on selected issues facing Christian leaders in an ever-changing world from a Wesleyan perspective, with particular attention given to the Wesleyan emphasis on incarnational practices and the importance of contextuality in relation to leadership.

Check out the entire program here.

Some Things Never Change

I've been reading and enjoying a biography by Jonathan Vaughan on the eighteenth century Puritan preacher, Jonathan Edwards. Edwards was a fierce defender of Reformed theology. At one point in the book, Vaughan writes,

By 1734 there was a "great noise about Arminianism," wrote Edwards, "which seemed to appear with a very threatening aspect upon the interest of religion here." In response, Edwards began to preach on the doctrinal issues in dispute. In a series of sermons collected as Discourses on the Various Important Subjects, Nearly Concerning the Great Affair of the Soul's Eternal Salvation, Edwards reiterated and defended the traditional doctrine of justification by faith alone, as he had done earlier with the biblical teaching on regeneration.

Several members of his extended family, most notably the Williamses, issued a strong statement to Edwards demanding that he "refrain from the controversy" and "not... publish his sentiments" regarding it. Edwards refused and was strongly criticized for entering the fray. His cousin, Israel Williams had Arminian leanings and attacked him for defending orthodox Reformed theology. Edwards noted: "Great fault was found with 'meddling' with the controversy in the pulpit."

Two things stood out to me as I read this passage: First, just as today, parishioners in the eighteenth century didn't like their preachers wading into controversial subjects, preferring them to be preachers of pablum. Second, just as today, some (not all) of those who embrace Reformed theology believe that the only kind of true orthodoxy is Reformed orthodoxy.

Of course, this orthodox evangelical Wesleyan begs to differ.

Some things never change.

The Politics of Witness Is Now Available

Blurbs on the back cover:

Allan Bevere, an ecclesial theologian, combines in this book a wonderful “church as politics” with gospel in a wise, warm, and challenging manner.

Scot McKnight

Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies

North Park University

...

Allan Bevere ... calls us all to forsake the seductive, insidious error of Christendom and civil religion in order to follow Jesus and bear witness to the reign of God.

Michael J. Gorman

Professor of Sacred Scripture and Dean of the Insitutue of Ecumenical Institute of Theology

St. Mary’s Seminary & University

Baltimore, Maryland

...

Allan Bevere ... calls the Church back to its mission of incarnating the alternative polis that is God’s true kingdom – a necessary corrective for all Christians in times of heated rhetoric and increasing civil strife.

David W. Opderbeck

Associate Professor of Law

Seton Hall University

The Politics of Witness is available directly from the publisher and from Amazon.

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #8

The Council of Nicaea

The Arian debate was the impetus for the First Council of Nicaea which met in 325 A.D. Neither Arius nor Athanasius were present at the Council. They would argue with each other afterward. Arianism was repudiated by the Council and the Nicene Creed was formulated. Aside from the Apostles' Creed, it is the most ecumenical creed, finding wide acceptance among Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant churches. Even churches that do not claim to be "creedal" accept the doctrine of the Nicene Creed.

The question of Christ's divinity was officially settled at Nicaea, even though the debate continued to rage for some time afterward. The question of how Christ's divinity and humanity related to each other in the person of Christ still remained. There were two basic schools of thought. These have been labeled as "Antiochene" and "Alexandrine."

Both sides agreed that God was unchangeable and eternal. The disagreement came over the question of how the immutable and eternal God can be joined to a changeable, historical human being. The Alexadrines (e.g. Clement and Origen) emphasized Jesus' divinity. His humanity must not eclipse his deity. The Antiochenes (e.g. Diodorus and Theodore), on the other hand, emphasized his humanity. Both schools affirmed Christ's two natures; the question was how to understand the relationship between the two.

It is important to note that Antioch and Alexandria were eastern cities, as was Nicaea. The christological and trinitarian debates were primarily eastern in origin. In the west, the church had, what seemed to be, more pressing problems. The western church had its hands full dealing with the barbarian invasions. Western theologians were content with Tertullian's formula which affirmed God was three persons in one substance. Western theologians were content to leave the solution there.

In the east, several theologians attempted to explain the relationship between the two natures of Christ. They were not very successful.

___

See further Justo Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, Volume 1.

Off to Annual Conference

I am leaving this afternoon for beautiful Lakeside, Ohio and the East Ohio Annual Conference. I'll be blogging from there.

A Prayer for Pentecost

O God the Holy Spirit, come to us and among us. Come as the wind and cleanse us. Come as the fire and burn. Come as the dew and refresh. Convict and consecrate us to our great good and your greater glory.

Grant, O Lord, to all of us to know what is worth knowing, to love what is worth loving, to praise what is pleasing to you, to esteem what is most precious to you, to spurn what is evil in your eyes.

Grant us true judgment to distinguish all things that differ and, above all, to search out and do what is pleasing to you, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

F. Donald Coggan (1909-2000)
The former Archbishop of Canterbury

N.T. Wright on Gnosticism... Ancient and Modern

N.T. Wright on the Explosive Nature of Jesus' Resurrection

Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction 2011.9: Double Vision at Graduation

Ohio school graduating triplets, 10 sets of twins

From Associated Press

June 01, 2011 4:55 PM EDT

CANFIELD, Ohio (AP) — The graduating class at an Ohio high school features a multitude of multiples: 10 sets of twins and one set of triplets.

They make up 8 percent of the 282 seniors receiving their diplomas from Canfield High School on June 12.

Principal John Tullio tells The Vindicator of Youngstown the 23 students from multiple births all have come up from kindergarten in the Canfield school district, about 60 miles southeast of Cleveland.

Some will attend college with their siblings. Anthony Ferraro tells the newspaper it would be a big deal to separate from twin Jesse, who calls his brother "a permanent friend."

Alex and Christian Syrianoudis are the only set of twins who are identical, and they are splitting up for college. Alex says it will be a growing experience.

Press Release: The Politics of Witness

Energion Publications is pleased to announce the release of the third book in its popular Areopagus series, The Politics of Witness: The Character of the Church in the World by Dr. Allan R. Bevere.

Dr. Bevere begins the dialogue on this important subject, the character of the church in the world. He ties the church's witness to politics and politics to ecclesiology. “I ask the church to consider the recovery of a robust political ecclesiology that sees the very life and witness of the ecclesia as its politics, and the primary and central political posture of the church toward the nations is not one of influence in the political chambers of Washington D.C., but by embodying in its collective life what God expects of the nations.”

In agreement with Dr. Stanley Hauerwas who said, “It is God and not the nations who rules this world.”, Dr. Bevere believes that most Christians believe in the truth of that statement, but only in the abstract. When Christians align themselves with the left or the right, Republicans or Democrats, they are actually stating that it is the nations running the "show".

Politics of Witness will be released on June 13, 2011 and is 92 pages in length.
___
Specific publication information and links coming next week.

Commitment Is Serious Business: Reflections on Mark Chapter 10

Mark 10

Commitment is serious business. Throughout his ministry Jesus dealt with those committed in a half-hearted way. Jesus understands the demanding nature of discipleship, so he insists that would-be followers count the cost before they decide to commit themselves.

Commitment is serious business in all other relationships as well. Some Pharisees approach Jesus asking if it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife, interjecting Jesus right into the middle of a hot debate in his day over what grounds constitute a lawful divorce. Once again Jesus is not simply going to allow the conversation to be framed within the conventional wisdom of the day. He goes behind the law, he digs below the surface of regulations, in order to uncover motives and to expose truths that others prefer were left buried.

For Jesus the issue is not about what makes for a just divorce, but what makes for a committed relationship. Jesus says to the Pharisees, “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law...what God has joined together, let no one separate.” Commitment is serious business.

Internet Access a Human Right... Really?

The United Nations has released a report arguing that Internet access is a human right. The report states,

"Given that the Internet has become an indispensable tool for realizing a range of human rights, combating inequality, and accelerating development and human progress, ensuring universal access to the Internet should be a priority for all states," said the report from Frank La Rue, a special rapporteur to the United Nations, who wrote the document "on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression."

The report goes on to argue,

The Special Rapporteur believes that the Internet is one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information, and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies.

Indeed, the recent wave of demonstrations in countries across the Middle East and North African region has shown the key role that the Internet can play in mobilizing the population to call for justice, equality, accountability and better respect for human rights.

Is There Such a Thing as God's Politics?

What do you think?

___

God's Politics? No Such Thing.

We aren't called to nation building. We are called to participate in the reign of God.

by Frederick Schmidt, Patheos:

There are those on both the left and right who are fairly confident that they know what God thinks about politics. And in the months to come, as the race for the presidency heats up, God will be enlisted on both ends of the spectrum to endorse a candidate or two. That's remarkable certainty, given the difficulties associated with applying Scripture to any dimension of the contemporary political landscape.

The Old Testament was addressed to a small federation of tribes who could do little more than react to the foreign policy of their neighbors. Israel was, at once, indistinguishably religious and political. Moreover, it was ruled by a king who—if Scripture is to be taken at its word—was a poor substitute for being ruled directly by God.

The New Testament poses a different set of challenges: Jesus addressed his preaching to a nation that no longer controlled its own political destiny at all, but was forced to wrangle what freedoms it could from its Roman overlords. He seems to have accepted that state of affairs as an intractable reality and urged his readers to distinguish between their obligations to God and the inescapable demands of the Roman Empire. The rest of the New Testament is addressed largely to the shape of the fledgling church itself, which (for much of the period the New Testament covers) was a sect within a sect and lacked any kind of political voice at all.

For that reason the New Testament often urges social behavior that responds to the voice of God in ways that transformed the behavior of Christians living and working within the social institutions of the first century. But, understandably, the writers of the New Testament do not urge the church to craft or change the policy of ancient Rome.

In both Testaments, the institutions within which ancient Jews and early Christians lived were also very different from the ones within which we live today. The ancient world was populated by kings, empires, tribes, and theocracies. It knew nothing of the modern nation-state. Notions of democracy and republics bore little resemblance to their contemporary counterparts and, for the most part, were localized efforts that did not endure. The economic systems of the ancient world were also markedly different from the ones with which we live today. More often than not, they relied on bartering and the market-based exchange of goods. (There were no banks, for example.)

To further complicate matters, when Scripture does talk about social phenomena using language that is familiar to us, it often refers to realities that were very different from their modern counterparts. So, for example, the "poor" in the ancient world were not "poor" because they belonged to a particular socio-economic rung in the ladder, but because they lacked a male (a husband or father) with whom they could be identified. And, at other points (as in some of the Psalms), the plea that God not forget the poor, is the appeal of a nation that was afraid that God would leave them fatherless and unprotected.

Now, none of the complexities associated with reading Scripture means that Christians are not obliged to make faithful decisions about how to live in the world. Nor do the complexities free us from the obligation to vote or evaluate specific political debates. In fact, Christians of the 21st century are called upon to make a wide variety of decisions that lack an ancient, unequivocal precedent, including (for example) decisions about the end of life, birth control, and abortion.

Continue Reading-->

Ultimate Allegiance: The Subversive Nature of the Lord's Prayer

This is a book review written by a long time friend of mine, Chuck Tackett:

___

Allegiance of the Faithful

It’s really quite easy to claim an allegiance to something these days. Whether it's a sports team, a country, or a faith, we stand ready to recite a unifying cheer, slogan or chant and establish our place in the order of things. People of the United States are equally eager to talk about our individualism yet from adolescence through old age we often strive to be part of something bigger than ourselves. Robert D. Cornwall, in his recent book Ultimate Allegiance: The Subversive Nature of the Lord's Prayer, takes a different look at an all too familiar prayer, often recited by rote, that suggests this need for community is a fundamental part of our disposition as creatures of God and one that comes into direct conflict with many of the principles that are lifted up and cherished in our culture.

Cornwall is not writing a psychological treatise but a brief yet broad study of the Lord's Prayer. He lays the prayer out chronologically, studying and explaining it line by line but he also sets out a subtext slowly encircling three basic concepts: that God is, in fact, God and we are not; that we desperately need God; and, that we need each other, in spite of our tendency to think that we don't. Cornwall manages these themes nicely through the text, reinforcing their importance without being overly repetitive. More important, he weaves them together through historical teaching and application, revealing the context in which the prayer comes into being while also providing insight into how these frames of reference play out in our society.

Cornwall takes advantage of his premise by using the text to expose and illuminate how we often fall into routine in our lives, going through the motions of our days without examining the implications of our actions. Challenging popular conventions about what we believe to be the nature of God (God is Holy or God is Love), Cornwall invites us to think more broadly with an understanding that God cannot be pigeon-holed into what we want Him to be. Cornwall chooses to use the noun pater as the basis of his translation for God the father as opposed to the more familiar abba, particularly because the implications of pater require more of us. Establishing God as a patron, Cornwall places God in the superior role and challenges us to admit our role as inferior. The description of God as pater also provokes us to see more of God than just his mercy or just His holiness. The text invites us to find a way to perceive the implications of God as both and much more.

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #7

The Arian Controversy: Part 3

The theologian who would become the champion of the orthodox position was Athanasius. Athanasius argued that since the Word was divine and God could not be part of creation, the Word could not be created. Judaism had rightly drawn a sharp line between God and creation. Arius, according to Athansius, had put the Word on the wrong side of the line. Athanasius insisted that the Word was begotten eternally.

The conflict centered around the words "creating" and "begetting," and between "in time" and "eternally." What is the difference between creating and begetting? Athanasius stated that anything that is created is made out of separate material. A bench has nothing in common with the carpenter. Begotten, or "born from," implies that the Son comes out of the Father's substance like a child comes out of his/her parents' substance. Therefore, calling Christ begotten makes him divine and not a creature. Athanasius said that the Father and the Son were of the "same substance" (Greek: homoousios). This became the crucial point in the debate. Arius argued that the Father and the Son were of "like substance" (Greek: homoiousion).

Athanasius realized that his analogy went only so far. He warned that the begetting of the Son was not exactly like the begetting of a human child. After human children are born, they are dependent upon their parents. The nature of the Son is infinite and eternal, just like the Father. This is where the question of time comes into focus. According to Athanasius, there was never a time when the Son was not. If the Son had come into existence in time, then he would have had to undergo change. If the nature of the Son was like ours, being liable to change, then eventually he might turn to evil ways. How much confidence could we have in our salvation if the Savior might change? Notice that the question of salvation is raised. In the Old Testament, God's changelessness is directly related to his faithfulness as the covenant God of Israel.

By the end of the first quarter of the fourth century, it was clear that the church was going to have to gather to settle the dispute. The Emperor Constantine would call such an assembly.
___
Previous Posts in the Series:

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #1

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #2

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #3

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #4

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #5

The Question of Christ in the Earliest Centuries #6

A Prayer for Ascension Sunday

Risen and ascended Christ, you surround us with witnesses and send us the Counselor who opens our minds to understand your teaching. Bless us with such grace that our lives may become a blessing for the world now, and in the age to come. Amen.

Making Sense of Death

The Storyline for Jesus' Ministry

The nation of Israel was created for a purpose. Long before Abraham's birth, God was planning to redeem the world, and Israel was to be the vehicle by which that redemption would be proclaimed and embodied. Israel was called out by God from among the nations, not to be isolated from the Gentiles, but to model for the nations what God desired of them. It was absolutely essential, therefore, that God's people keep the covenant, not only for their own sake, but for the sake of the world. Israel existed for the sake of the world.

The problem, however, was not only idolatry and the trampling of the covenant, but the attitude later on in Israel's history that what it meant to be the people of God was primarily a privilege, not a responsibility. There were some Jews who came to see their chosen status as more of a statement as to how special they were as God's people, better than everyone else, instead of understanding their calling as a claim as to how much God cared for the entire world—Jew and Gentile as well.

The theme of Israel's calling and witness for the sake of the world is not the only narrative thread that runs throughout the Old Testament. But what is critical for our purposes is that it is precisely this storyline that Jesus draws on for his ministry. Just like Jeremiah before him, Jesus will criticize his fellow Jews for failing to be a light to the nations.

Why Interfaith Dialogue Doesn't Work

Rabbi Eric H.Yoffie, writes in The Huffington Post:

I have been participating in interfaith dialogue as a rabbi and Jewish leader for more than 30 years, and most of the time it just doesn't work.

Most of the time -- and it is painful for me to admit this -- it is terribly boring. Most of the time there is a tendency to manufacture consensus, whether it exists or not. Most of the time we go to great lengths to avoid conflict. Most of the time we cover the same ground that we covered last month or the month before. And far too often we finish our session without really knowing the people across the table and what makes them tick religiously.

And most of we time we are satisfied with mouthing a few noble, often-repeated sentiments. Thus, we affirm the importance of mutual understanding, tolerance and dialogue; we assert that all human beings are created in the image of God; we proclaim that despite our differences, all of our traditions preach love of humankind and service to humanity. Nothing is wrong with these sentiments, of course; in conceptual terms, I believe in them all. But if we don't dig beneath the surface and focus on substance rather than rhetoric, they mean very little.

Rabbi Yoffie highlights three problems with much current interfaith dialogue:

The Pain of Loneliness and the Glory of Solitude

Twice a year I take a week's study leave at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia. There I do sermon planning and work on my latest writing projects. I enjoy the time alone studying, but, of course, I miss my family and I am always glad to return home.

The theologian Paul Tillich wrote many years ago, "Our language has wisely sensed the two sides of being alone. It has created the word 'loneliness' to express the pain of being alone. And it has created the word 'solitude' to express the glory of being alone."

When I spend the week alone in study, I have experienced both the glory of being alone with my thoughts and my books, and I have experienced the pain of being alone away from my wife and children.