:: in.a.mirror.dimly ::

Good ideas are such clean and safe things. Though they have their place and are a great starting place, true Christian ministry requires moving beyond good ideas into this realm of action.

Christianity itself stands or falls on whether we put our faith into action.

I often quote a wise administrator from my seminary who once observed, “When seminary students read a book they think they’ve put it into practice.”

Ah, that is spot on for me more often than I care to admit. I’ve done some ministry in my day, but ever since working my way through the safe confines of Christian academia, I have to confess that I would much rather read the book than do the ministry.

I mean, isn’t the book usually better?

Today I took my first headlong plunge into a new ministry that I’m really excited about. I have started a gardening group at my church. We’ll be tending a community garden plot and donating the food to local soup kitchens.

In my mind, this is but a first step among many. The end game is to also empower the poor to grow their own food. However, there will always be a need for soup kitchens in one form or another, especially if our economy continues to plod along. And for the time being, we hope to be handing out food sometime by the end of July.

I spent my morning working with several volunteers weed whacking and tilling our plot in scorching heat.  The owner of the plot had not used it, so the town gave it to us for our work, hence the late, weedy start.

We have some pretty huge work ahead of us, and I would appreciate your prayers for provision as we have two major needs (organic compost and tomato stakes/poles). However, today we got into the dirt and plowed up the soil.

Something has dramatically shifted. I can feel it. This ministry is moving forward, even if it’s a sputtering, jumping tiller at this point. I don’t even feel like I have complete control of it all, as if it has a mind of its own.

And that is exactly where I think God wants us to be right now.

As I look back on the positive impact diverse Christian perspectives have had on my faith, I should not neglect the downside of diversity.

Some question the merits of being overly inclusive, and caricature diversity as a wishy, washy and uncritical validation of every perspective. That, of course, is not what I’m talking about in this series on diversity. So while I’ve shared what we stand to gain, perhaps it would help to paint a realistic picture of where it could go off track.

A Time of Corrections and Over-Corrections

Many Christians in the west, particularly in America, are in a time of adjustment and correction. We could say this about nearly every period of Christianity, as we’re always making adjustments to the mistakes of those who preceded us, while clinging to all the good things they also left us.

During this time of correction for the mistakes of the past, it’s quite possible to become divisive in our embrace of diversity. In other words, we can set a bar for inclusivity and then alienate others if they aren’t as liberal or progressive as we think they should be.

While we want to correct the mistakes of the past, we should be careful to avoid a wholesale rejection of what has been passed to us or of those who still hold to what we view as a flawed version of the faith.

A Variety of Points without a Center

By including a variety of perspectives in our Christian faith, whether by denominations, locations, income, or ethnic make up, there is a danger of never quite settling on some central beliefs. Without a center for Christianity, we run the risk of letting the faith become reshaped dramatically into something that it may not be.

In this sense, both extreme exclusivity and extreme diversity run the same risk of remaking Christianity so that it reflects one or many perspectives. Either way, we can make the same mistakes without a center.

The hard part is that we arrive at our center through a diversity of perspectives: the revelation of the Triune God, the scriptures, Christian tradition, and the local/global body of Christians. Therefore, we have an imperfect but still Spirit-directed process where we hold to the central creeds and beliefs of the Christian faith while we interact with other perspectives.

Our beliefs and practices may change dramatically over time, but our interactions with diversity should not tinker with the core. If one particular culture can’t believe that God would enter the world incarnate in human form, then we can’t rewrite the Nicene Creed by way of accommodation.

We may be wrong about a lot of things, but there are certain beliefs and practices that stand at the center of Christianity. Someone has every right to disagree with us, but then that person is not talking about the historic Christian faith that has been passed down to us by Christian communities and the scriptures.

We gain much by interacting with a diverse group of perspectives, but the core elements of Christianity are not for us to modify.

I first encountered a diversity of Christian beliefs while attending college in the Mid-West. I met a lot of folks who were Methodist, Church of God, Nazarene, Presbyterian, and even one or two Catholics. I’m sure a few charismatic folks were blended in as well, but I only spotted them during worship services.

Back then I was light years away from understanding what it meant to be the body of Christ and how each member of the body could work together. I saw myself as a foot on the solid ground of my own beliefs and traditions, and anyone who differed was a threat who could knock me off balance.

It took years before I realized that all of the followers of Jesus around me played different roles and generally offered something of value to myself and to wider church.

As I interacted with them, I realized that I may have made some mistakes with my beliefs and that I was rather self-righteous about what I believed. While in college, God began to chip away at my absolute certainty and self-righteousness.

At this point, when certainty wanes, we generally have three choices we can make. The first two involve either giving up or hardening in our own beliefs. However, the third choice is to evaluate what we believe, learn from others, and then arrive at some new conclusions. By the time we test out beliefs with other perspectives, we’ll either have a better understanding of them, or we’ll have an opportunity to modify what doesn’t work.

We may even help someone else do the same.

Diversity affords us an opportunity to help one another grow, to look at ourselves from the perspective of another person, and to ask God to shape us into his body of disciples. Diversity matters because we can’t see our shortfalls and we can’t verify our strengths unless we meet someone who is a little different from ourselves.

We need each other far more than we’d expect.

I remember the diversity group that the lone east Indian student started at my predominantly white high school in the Philly burbs: CAFE. It stood for Cultural Awareness For Everyone.

I was like, PHHHBBB! What’s there to know? I was shocked to see a friend of mine start attending the meetings, and just didn’t get it. I KNEW there were other cultures in the world. They just weren’t around me. What’s the big deal?

Thankfully I’ve left the foolishness of my youth behind, though I’m not always as proactive about correcting my diversity deficiency as I should.

A revelation came rocketing down on me while, if I may name drop a little bit since all Christian bloggers name drop—say if NT Wright sneezes on us or whatever, chatting with Christine Sine in New Haven, CT. I heard the words come out of my mouth, but didn’t realize how true and challenging they were until later that night.

While discussing the diversity of the Christian faith, I said, “All of my significant moments of spiritual growth resulted from interacting with a different Christian tradition.”

My trajectory is something like this:

Bored Catholic.

Jumpy Fundamentalist.

Saved but uptight evangelical.

Saved but relaxed evangelical.

Saved evangelical with spiritual gifts.

As I look back at my growth and how my life as a Christian changed, I can see that interactions with Christians from diverse denominations, backgrounds, and countries opened fresh experiences of God in my life.

Next week I’ll talk about why we need diversity and take a couple swings at what diversity can look like in our church today. If you want to take this a step further, check out my book Coffeehouse Theology, as I get into the place of Christian tradition and the global church in the development of our beliefs and practice.

During a time of transition it’s easy to settle into some bad habits, such as forgetting to exercise and eating unhealthy and fast food. These oversights impact how we feel physically and our spiritual condition as well.

Paul speaks of our bodies as the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is kind of a strange image. God is dwelling within us?

I don’t get it, but I have learned that the things I do to my body have an impact on my worship. If I care for my body, I create a healthy atmosphere in which worship can take place. Care for one’s body is not necessarily worship per se, but it is an integral part of the process.

Food for the Body…

My step-mother is a vegetarian, and so she always served huge salads for every dinner. My dad said that his body began to react to different foods differently after eating so many greens on a regular basis. After I married Julie, we generally ate vegetarian just to keep expenses low, but I soon discovered that steaks, cheese steaks, and even hamburgers made me feel ill.

I had trained my body to like certain food. To this day a cheese steak and a soda, two things I used to love while living in Philly, make me feel ill. I’d rather eat a Greek or Caesar salad—which feels kind of weird to type.

So now we eat lots of vegetables, fruit, cheese, and bread, and hardly ever eat meat more than once or twice a week. My body feels better now than it did back in high school and college, and somehow, though I don’t completely understand how, I am more physically available to God. I know that some folks may think I’m out to lunch just saying that, but so long as my lunch out involves sliced apples, cranberries, and a good vinaigrette for my salad, I won’t complain.

Exercise for the Body..

Whether gardening, walking, or hiking, our bodies need time outside. For most of humanity’s history, we have been dependent on farming or gardening to one degree or another, and there is something redemptive about digging our hands into the soil, sowing a seed, and watching it grow.

In addition, when we get out for a walk or set to work in a garden, we physically disconnect ourselves from the demands of our homes and workplaces. This places us in a position where God can break through. By doing these things we are not necessarily worshipping, but we are creating space to worship.

A Theology of the Body

As Christians, we need to talk a bit more about the spiritual ramifications of food and exercise. Even if we don’t understand all of the mechanics involved, the treatment of our bodies will impact how we worship God. Perhaps food will drag us into a heavy spirit, or a lack of exercise will fog our ability to concentrate or to break out of certain thought patterns.

I can’t explain this in a definitive or systematic manner, but I can testify that changes to my diet and to my exercise habits directly impact my relationship with God and my worship in particular. When I feel overwhelmed or weighed down, there sometimes are physical reasons that extend beyond what I know.

In a world where right belief is prescribed as a cure-all for our spiritual ills, we need to broaden our range of diagnosis. During a time of transition and change, keep the health of your body in mind as you set aside time to worship God. Sometimes we need to pay as much attention to our physical environment as to our beliefs.

While the Old Testament is essential for understanding the New Testament, roughly four-hundred years transpired after the last Old Testament book was written. New interpretations of the Old Testament emerged in between the testaments, the Intertestamental period, due to religious, political, and socio-economic events.

Israel began this period under Medo-Persian rule. Then the Greeks took over before a Jewish Dynasty revolted and took control. After a brief time of Jewish rule, the Romans, those mentioned in the New Testament, conspired to take over.

During these tumultuous years Jewish writers penned a series of books known as Intertestamental literature. Some of these books developed a strong sense of the apocalyptic—anticipating the immanent return of God to save his people and to punish evil-doers. In fact, the book of Revelation in the NT is a Christian version of Jewish apocalyptic, which is something quite different than a chronicle of events that would happen in the future.

Messianic movements rose up from the fertile ground of apocalyptic literature and various Jewish sects emerged with different applications of the Old Testament to their situations. Many scholars today view Jesus as a prophet in the apocalyptic tradition.

In order to better understand how people responded to Jesus, we need a clear picture of not only the Old Testament but also how his contemporaries read, interpreted, and applied it to their times. John the Baptist, Herod, The Pharisees, the crowds, and the disciples come to life when we read about Jesus with an awareness of his setting, the expectations of his audience, and the tumultuous period leading up to his ministry.

Suggestions for Historical Background Research

• Your best sources will be Bible Dictionaries and commentaries. Some basic Bible dictionaries are fairly inexpensive to purchase in sets of two or four if you wait for the right sale at Christian Book Distributors, though many churches should have some basic dictionaries on hand in a library. My favorite is the InterVarsity press series that’s available on a more affordable CD-ROM. 
• Some local libraries will also carry the works of popular authors such as Dominic Crossan who may not hold to orthodox views of Jesus, but who can flesh out the historical setting quite well in books such as Excavating Jesus: Beneath the Stones, Behind the Texts. Libraries may also carry some worn dictionaries or commentaries that may be of use for extracting historical information.
• For those with a little extra time, there is a wealth of information on the Intertestamental period’s literature on the New Testament in Larry Helyer’s book Jewish Literature of the Second Temple Period.
• I know you’re thinking it, so I’ll just say it: Wikipedia. Yes, you can learn a ton about the world of Jesus by reading articles on Wikipedia about the various groups, events, and characters that shaped the world of the New Testament. For starters, look up the Hasmonean Dynasty and read about its fall to the Roman dynasty of Herod.

Image credit: Jim Larranaga.

Before you read this piece of satire, I wanted to say that I’ve been feeling quite convicted that I take myself a bit too seriously sometimes. I wrote this piece with myself in mind—I am the target of this piece, but I know I’m not alone. I think a lot of us in America do this. I hope after reading this we’ll all be encouraged to tone down our debates over theology.

ROME—The historic Christian faith that has endured persecution at the hands of emperors, papal corruption, a divisive Reformation, colonialism, and modernism currently hangs in the balance over a struggle to define the nature of truth, justification, and how to interpret the Bible between warring factions in the white American church.

The Pope has declared a day of fasting, asking faithful Christians of all denominations and all nations to pray that the true expression of Christianity will emerge victorious.

Pastors in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East have stopped all ministry among their congregations and communities, encouraging their flocks to join the Pope in prayer and to check regular updates on the internet among the key blogs and news sites involved in the struggle for the future of Christianity.

The Theologians in Corduroy Blazers (TCB) faction has been gathered in meetings around the clock in New York City, planning their strategy to prove that truth is defined by multiple perspectives, justification is accomplished by Christ’s victory over evil, and that culture plays a significant role in the interpretation of scripture. Blog posts, podcasts, and online articles have been appearing faster than you can say A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I Am a Missional, Evangelical, Post/Protestant, Liberal/Conservative, Mystical/Poetic, Biblical, Charismatic/Contemplative, Fundamentalist/Calvinist, Anabaptist/Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, Green, Incarnational, Depressed-yet-Hopeful, Emergent, Unfinished CHRISTIAN.

TCB leader Rick Heckman shared, “We are living in the most important period of Christian history. Everything pivots here. What these courageous leaders decide to do today will forever change the course of Christian history.”

Not to be outdone, the Theologians in Tweed Blazers (TTB) have assembled a broad coalition of bloggers and media superstars in Seattle to spread their message that truth is absolute and certain, justification is a legal transaction, and that culture pollutes the truth of scripture. They have countered with a staggering number of blog posts, articles on mainstream media web sites, and reports on Christian radio that make Calvin’s commentaries look like a pocket guide.

In a press release, Paul Shoutman of TTB declared, “Without a clear definition of truth we run the risk of allowing anyone to define Christianity in any way they want. With so many individualist Christians operating as if the bulk of Christian tradition has nothing to do with them, we have no recourse but to fight for a rigid formulation of truth and interpretation for the faith to survive.”

In a separate and possibly related event, Wikipedia has repeatedly crashed as theologians in the developing world have been looking up entries such as postmodernism, inerrancy, and absolute truth in an effort to figure out how they relate to their ministries in preaching the Gospel and serving the poor.

I’ve been asking myself a few questions lately that I’d like to play with here, spurred on in part by Harvey Cox’s book The Future of Faith (which I don’t necessarily agree with as a whole, but I find a great read):

What did Jesus leave us?

Why did he leave those things and not others?

How far dare his followers expand and innovate upon them in order to remain faithful?

The list could be longer, but in a sense he left three key things: a group of followers, a meal for them to celebrate, and the Holy Spirit. While he certainly taught a great deal, he never wrote down his sermons, trusting his followers to pass them along under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. He didn’t leave us with a creedal statement, but rather a ritual meal along the lines of a reimagined Passover celebration.

So that leaves me wondering what we should infer based on these things.

If I may dare to speculate, I wonder if Jesus was telling us that it’s far more important to focus on him, on one another, and on the Spirit rather than any kind of written account or a creed, even if those things have a place. In fact, Jesus may have been passing along a way of living more than a set of beliefs. How can we make Jesus’ priorities our own without descending into a holy mess?

Let’s remember that God knows how to give commands, to write lists, and to dictate scripture. However, Jesus focused on creating a community that was shaped by a meal centering on him and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

I wonder if Jesus knew we’d turn scripture into an idol if he wrote anything down directly? I wonder if he knew we’d become so enamored with truth and scripture that we would miss the more important parts of his message: imitating his way of life, focusing on his death and resurrection, and living in accord with his Spirit.

It doesn’t seem to have been a mistake that Christianity was first called “The Way” or that Christian literally means “little Christ.” Jesus left us with a way to live, not a set of creeds that define us as believers.

On one occasion John the Baptist asked Jesus if he truly was the Messiah. In reply, Jesus listed his actions, not his beliefs. He defined himself and his beliefs according to how he acted.

However, us Christians today have swung heavily toward defining ourselves by what we believe. Churches list their beliefs on their web sites and candidates for ministry write doctrinal statements because that’s how we establish our credentials. 

Imagine if we added action statements to our doctrinal statements: we heal the sick, we feed the hungry, we visit the prisoners, we cloth those in need, we gather to worship Jesus, we celebrate his death and resurrection, we follow the lead of his Spirit. That sounds curiously similar to Matthew 25. Underneath these actions there are beliefs, and in fact I would argue that these beliefs are even more valuable and relevant because they prompt us into action.

In fact, it may be that our beliefs are irrelevant unless they are overshadowed by their actions. Maybe the only way to save, preserve, and truly honor our beliefs is by spending a significant amount of time on action, putting them into practice. The people who love truth are the ones who act on it.

That kind of speculation makes my head spin.

I love scripture, and I believe in truth, but I wonder if Jesus would really care about the many things we argue over in relation to the truth. Keep in mind that I devoted a significant amount of time to writing a theology book, so I’m pretty sure I’m not flirting with relativism here. I’m seeking balance here, but in order to arrive there I need to critique the side of certainty that can stumble into conceptual idolatry, while hoping to avoid falling to the other extreme of listless relativism.

Continuing my meditations on the book of Romans…

What are the marks of weak faith?

One person’s faith gives great liberty in disputed matters, but the weak in faith place limitations on themselves.

They key is to avoid quarrels over disputed matters. Don’t condemn others whether they have more or less freedom.

In the case of acceptable food among the Romans there is no cause to judge one another because God has accepted both sides of the debate. Judgment of fellow believers is a mark of a lack of faith in God’s ability to make someone stand or fall. They have no place in judging God’s servants.

The standard set involves being convinced in one’s own mind about these matters, but to also hold back on judging others. We can expect to hit interpretive conflict when attempting to apply the principles of this passage to our doctrinal disputes today. Where do we draw the lines? I think we would quarrel over which matters are even worth quarreling over.

However, Paul reminds the Romans that they do not live for the approval of one another, but rather they live and die for God. Christ’s death and Resurrection established his Lordship over all humanity. If God acts in mercy, reigns as Lord, and is able to make his servants stand or fall, then there is no room to judge his servants.

When considering judgment and quarrels, it is important to ask whether the person being judged or challenged in an argument has anything to gain. In fact, does the judge or instigator derive the most “benefit” by justifying his/her own views or way of life?

Judgment has been reserved for God. The Romans are challenged to resolve to not put any obstacles in the way of a fellow believer since judgment and quarreling do not lead to peace or edification. Even those with freedom to eat anything should be willing to abstain out of love for those with weak faith. These peripheral matters do not promote righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. When promoting the growth of one another so that we are approved before God and others, the Romans will find that disputes often do little to help anyone.

When considering how to handle disputes, the direction of God and the peace of the Kingdom should lead all responses. That doesn’t open the door to heresy necessarily, but rather the goal is to build up others rather than picking them apart and condemning them.

They are free to hold opinions on disputed matters, but they are ultimately accountable to God and need only be approved by God in them. Their beliefs should be rooted in faith, believing that God is honored by their beliefs and practices. In fact, the practice of condemning others may be a sign that some need to justify themselves, to build up their convictions and ultimately their faith by pulling others into their systems of belief. Judging others and pushing them to accept other convictions on disputed matters shows a vestige of doubt and fear that one’s beliefs may be wrong unless everyone else accepts them.

However, if someone is not fully convinced on a matter before God, then there is a real possibility of sinning because his/her relationship before God is put into jeopardy with uncertainty interfering with the relationship. Faith is also the means by which the Romans are made right before God, and so departing from faith means reliance on other means for holiness and perhaps salvation.

For more on this topic, see my previous post: When We Should Not Debate Theology

I recently finished studying the book of Romans, and I can’t shake Romans 14, as well as a few other related verses where Paul tells the Romans to stop fighting over peripheral matters. The challenge it seems is that others would not agree with his assessment that issues such as Jewish laws and customs were peripheral.

The debates in Rome seemed to center on observing feast days and dietary laws, though Paul was also working on rethinking the role of the law under the new covenant of grace that is accessed through faith. Some believed these Jewish practices were important, while the Gentiles didn’t really have a grid for them.

Paul tells them to make up their own minds on these matters, to live by faith in God, and to trust that God is able to approve or condemn his servants. Under no circumstances should they put a stumbling block in front of other believers by casting them under judgment or doubting that God isn’t able to approve those with whom they disagree.

Am I the only one a little disturbed by this?

I feel like I spend so much time scrutinizing and debating points of theology that may well be peripheral to the big picture of God’s redemptive, Gospel message. Paul isn’t advocating for lazy or bad theology that falls away from the core teachings of the Gospel. He spends plenty of time spelling that out. However, he sees how debates over doctrine can divide believers and cause them to lose focus on their common love and common mission.

On twitter today I ran across an article on Christianity Today with a series of opinions regarding whether some believers should fast with Muslims for Ramadan. I would usually retweet this on a typical day. This is one of those issues where there are a host of qualifiers added by Christian participants, straw men created by critics, and some well-informed debate from the moderates on both ends of the debate.

However, even if those debating this are well-informed and charitable, is this even a debate worth having? I can see Paul saying “Some fast with Muslims to reach out, while others abstain. Both are living by faith to please God and should be convinced in their own minds by faith. All should leave the judgment to God.”

Maybe I’m just putting words in Paul’s mouth, but after reading Romans 14 I have a feeling that many of the issues I label as “important” may in fact be peripheral issues where grace, trust, and faith must replace arguments and debates.