missional theology, deconstruction, and paul

This is the epistle reading from lectionary this week.

“(1) Think of us in this way, as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries. (2) Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. (3) But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge myself. (4) I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. (5) Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive commendation from God” (1 Corinthians 4:1-5).

It is becoming overwhelmingly apparent to me that the church just needs to not take itself so seriously. In other words, we make it harder on ourselves than it has to be. I am thinking about the marks of the church (one, holy, catholic, and apostolic), particularly the call to unity, or oneness. Could it be that the church has been trying to secure unity in the wrong way? Could it be that the church has been trying to come together on issues that were never meant to be agreed upon across the board? I am thinking particularly about structural patterns in local churches, but I am sure there are a variety of things one could discuss. In other words (with Paul) our unity lies in the gospel and the transforming call for responsibility. Our task is not about imposing our own culturally conditioned assumptions about the way things are in the world on other people, as true as they may be. Rather, as we the church face the freshness and challenge of each new day we are called to hold up our assumption with open hands to God and one another and ask (plea) for guidance and direction.

“The calling of the church to be missional – to be a sent community – leads the church to step beyond the given cultural forms that carry dubious assumptions about what the church is, what its public role should be, and what its voice should sound like. Testing and receiving our assumptions and practices against a vision of the reign of God promises the deep renewal of the missional soul of the church that we need. By daily receiving and entering the reign of God, through corporate praying for its coming, and longing for its appearance, and in public living under its mantle, this missional character of the church will be nourished and revived” (Darrel Guder, Missional Church, 109).

I am not necessarily trying to advance the cause of a Missional Theology. That leads us down the very road of absolutism and institutionalism that Missional Theology is hoping to steer the church away from. However, the basic premise (of this quote) indicates something that should always remain true: the gospel perpetually challenges all our assumptions until it is on earth as it is in heaven.

coulrophobia

I received an interesting forward today in my email. I am not sure if the person who sent it was supporting the content of the forward or if they were just passing it on to everyone. I suspect the person does support the emails content. In any case it got me thinking about a few things.

The content of the email was about Barak Obama refusing to solute the flag (you can find a ton of stuff on youtube regarding this matter). The email quotes Obama saying,

“As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides . . . There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it.”

To begin, I was given no indication as to where and when Obama said this. The quote has no source.

In any case, I want to consider this quote based solely on its own terms (words): (1) What if a Christian president took office not based on sides (America vs. the world)? (2) What if it’s true that the American flag is a symbol of oppression? We might about this in terms of war or global capitalism, if not just the shear ability to waste all our resources with a thought. (2) What if Obama wants to move America beyond its identity as a war-driven nation? Is he not aloud to critique or even protest and still be nationalistic? (3) Would it not be refreshing to see the president of the United States be driven by world peace through a common song/harmony?

To top is off this is what the person followed up with in their own words after this quote in the email:

“Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this could possibly be our next president!! I, for once, am speechless. He has absolutely NO pride in this country!!!!! This is outrageous!!!! He doesn't deserve to be [a] dogcatcher!!! (Oh, sorry dogcatchers, I mean you no disrespect.) LET'S SEND THIS CLOWN DOWN THE ROAD KICKING ROCKS!!!! Forward this to EVERYONE YOU KNOW.”

I suppose I am doing exactly what he wants. However, if someone comes across this on this blog I would hope that they might explore some of the other posts and consider the person (me) who wrote them as nonsupporting and that they might think critically about the content (of the email and my blog).

To clarify, I am not arguing in favor of Barak Obama. I am not in agreement with the content of his defense regarding this matter for a variety of theological reasons that I won’t go into now. I only offer this post as an attempt to expose some of the ignorance (with all due respect) of the church (and yes the email provider is a Christian) to think critically about these matters. To think about them in light of the gospel that challenges every assumption about the way things are in the world, even the Church. We all stand under the (loving) judgment of Jesus Christ who never wants to silence the other. Both Obama and his email opponent stand to be called into question by the gospel. Let’s see more of those emails flying around that speak with love and humility and respect to those who disagree in hopes that both sides might be called into question by the gospel because the Kingdom belongs to God, not His church.

"and it leads some people to ask the sort of questions that lead further"

“No sharing of the good news takes place except in the context of a shared human life, and that means in part, the context of shared conversation. In such conversation we talk about real things and we try both to communicate what we know and to learn what we do not know. The sharing of the good news about the kingdom is part of that conversation and cannot happen without it … It is the kind of conversation which is not an alternative to but the occasion for sharing our hope, and it leads some people to ask the sort of questions that lead further.

Some, but not many. I certainty cannot tell any story of ‘success’ in terms of numbers. I guess that is the experience of many working in such areas. The church remains small and vulnerable. I do not find in this ground for discouragement. The kingdom is not ours. The times and seasons are not in our management. It is enough to know that Jesus reigns and shall reign, and to be privileged to share this assurance with our neighbors and to be able to do and say the small deeds and words that make it possible for others to believe.” (Lesslie Newbigin)

(dis)unity and the common good

I noticed something interesting in John Hagee’s apology to Roman Catholic Church (you can look up the controversy on the internet, I’m not up to finding links today). He says this in his apology.

“Out of a desire to advance a greater unity among Catholics and evangelicals in promoting the common good, I want to express my deep regret for any comments that Catholics have found hurtful.”

What caught my attention is his implying that unity between Catholics and Evangelicals lies in “promoting the common good” (my italics). Instead, I might ask about Jesus Christ and the mission of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church? The fact that his apology revolves around promoting the common good without saying anything about the disunity of the Church in and of itself is problematic. I am not saying that the Church shouldn’t have anything to say about the common good. I only wanted to point out that I thought it interesting that for Hagee in this situation the disunity of the Church was not so much a problem as that of promoting the common good. Whereas for me I might say that the Church struggles to witness (or, promote the common good, i.e. be a blessing to the nations) when she is divided. Anyways, I just thought this little snippet in the paper was interesting.

movie meme

The meme madness is back! Thank you to the kind folk over at Faith and Theology.


Scott's meme

1. One movie that made you laugh
Dumb and Dumber

2. One movie that made you cry
Homeward Bound (every time that stinking dog comes over hill … )

3. One movie you loved when you were a child
The Natural

4. One movie you’ve seen more than once
Garden State

5. One movie you loved, but were embarrassed to admit it
Selena

6. One movie you hated
The Quiet Earth (although I was just a kid when I saw it)

7. One movie that scared you
28 Days Later

8. One movie that bored you
Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead (I don’t really get bored at movies, but I do remember fall in and out of awareness during this film.)

9. One movie that made you happy
Little Miss Sunshine

10. One movie that made you miserable
The House of Sand of Fog

11. One movie you weren’t brave enough to see
Shindler’s List

12. One movie character you’ve fallen in love with
Ahh, I can’t think of one. I buckled under the pressure.

13. The last movie you saw
Ironman

14. The next movie you hope to see
Fargo, or the Hudsucker Proxy

15. Your favorite movie (I added this one)
The Shawshank Redemption




Katie's meme (my wife)

1. One movie that made you laugh
Billy Madison

2. One movie that made you cry
Hotel Rwanda

3. One movie you loved when you were a child
Sleeping Beauty

4. One movie you’ve seen more than once
Love Actually

5. One movie you loved, but were embarrassed to admit it
Step Up

6. One movie you hated
Eye of the Beholder, or Lonestar State of Mind

7. One movie that scared you
The Ring

8. One movie that bored you
All the Star Wars films

9. One movie that made you happy
Big Fish

10. One movie that made you miserable
The House of Sand and Fog

11. One movie you weren’t brave enough to see
Shindler’s List

12. One movie character you’ve fallen in love with
George Clooney in One Fine Day

13. The last movie you saw
No Country for Old Men

14. The next movie you hope to see
Made of Honor

15. Your favorite movie (I added this one)
Unsure.


Now tag five people!!!!! I tag Wil, J.R., Tim, Mindy, and Dave

pentecost reflection

"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained" (John 20:23).

Perhaps an underlying assumption in this text is that should we ever retain the Sins of any we ourselves have retained our own Sins. In other words, when we do not forgive we ourselves remain unforgiven.

I often find that I have been formed to think of texts like this in terms of my responsibility to decipher which sins people commit ought to be forgiven and when. That’s just silly. Sin is bigger than that. Consider the full reality of Sin as that of a complex network of bad fellowship (physiological, emotional, physical) in which we are both victim and perpetrator of Sin in both intentional and unintentional ways. In this verse the risen Lord standing in the midst of His people breathing the Holy Spirit on them, the same Holy Spirit the empowered Jesus to fulfill all righteousness, or covenant faithfulness (both from God to humanity and from humanity to God), through whom we have the forgiveness of Sins, that is, through whom we have been redeemed, brought out, liberated from the power of Sin through this One who both effects and demonstrates our salvation.

To retain the Sins of others is to leave them still within this complex network of bad fellowship. It seems that Jesus is warning His people of the responsibility they now have to be a people of atonement, a people who forgive the Sins of many just like Jesus. Our responsibility is not to decipher when to retain forgiveness. Rather it is to be a people who live according to the rule and reign of God (good fellowship) in such a way that other can become incorporated into the body of Christ where there is forgiveness and redemption.

John Dunham - Achmed the Dead Terrorist