Come, Holy Spirit!

This may not be the best time for me to write. My heart is heavy—grieving. I’m not angry; although, anger surrounds us and increasingly becomes the norm among some parts of our American population. I’m sure I’ll be angry at some point. Anger is a normal part of grief.

I find myself on the verge—and sometimes into the abyss—of tears more and more frequently. I recall that dreadful news clip of the fiery crash of the Hindenburg, and the sobbing voice of the reporter, “Oh! The humanity! The humanity!”

How calloused have we become when we so rarely are moved to tears at the sight of human suffering? What hideous kind of demon possesses one human to kneel on the neck of another human—a human who is face-down on the ground, handcuffed, with two other humans kneeling on his back—a human who is crying, “I can’t breathe! Please!”? And what kind of inhuman creature looks on, apparently more concerned about the camera that is recording it all than about the human who is gasping for his dying breath?

“Kneeling on a man’s neck is an extreme and dangerous step, well out of bounds for ordinary police procedures. The kneeling officer appears to have a long track record of complaints.”[1] I’ve seen three videos, each from a different perspective. In none of them did it appear that Floyd was resisting or uncooperative.

I know: there is a report that George Floyd had preconditions “including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease”; and the preliminary autopsy showed, “no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.” The report said death likely was caused by the "combined effect of Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions, and any potential intoxicants in his system.”[2]

Does such an analysis diminish the inhumanity of three humans sworn “to serve and protect?” As a medical layman I have to ask, “Would such unnecessary use of force exacerbate the preexisting factors, thereby possibly—even probably—contributing to Floyd’s death?”

But, I linger too long on one specific instance, when my grief is over the increasing commonness of justifying inhuman behavior on the basis of ideological absolutism. The controversy over where to stand in relation to George Floyd’s death appears to line up consistently with every other controversy in America: conservatives line up against liberals.

There seems little possibility that there ever will be an issue in which both liberals and conservatives agree. And there seems little possibility ever again that those disagreements will be pursued with respect and integrity. I see very little indication that anyone on either side wants to resolve any of the issues that divide them. Most just want to win the fight.

And so, I grieve. And the tears come more frequently.

We are watching something cancerous grow faster and faster each cay. It is, in my estimation, the satanic spawn of absolutized individualism run amok. Don’t misunderstand. I serve a master whose sacrificial love for individuals is unsurpassed in human history. But, Ayn Rand notwithstanding, the master I serve also called his followers to love one another sacrificially, to serve one another in humility, even to the point of washing one another’s feet, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself. And he defined one’s neighbor in his Parable of the Good Samaritan—a parable, incidentally, about reaching across lines of ethnicity to serve anyone who is in need.

The individual is important, and the individual’s importance is embellished in service to other individuals. Our individual importance reaches its highest potential when we “lose ourselves”. All four gospels report Jesus saying, “Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it. (Matthew 10:39 NRSV). I like the way the Message Paraphrase puts it: “If your first concern is to look after yourself, you’ll never find yourself. But if you forget about yourself and look to me, you’ll find both yourself and me.”

I write as a Christian Pastor to Christians; however, Christians are as divided and as hostile as the rest of the culture (which is a primary reason the church has been in decline for a half-century), and I struggle to find hope that peace and reconciliation can come from Christianity so divided. Therefore, my appeal is to all who are of a similar mindset, regardless of your spiritual base. I believe respect, integrity and compassion have no ideological or credal boundaries, and that people of all spiritualities can unite in the effort to be agents of healing and reconciliation.

Today is Pentecost. Christians celebrate it as the birthday of the church and recite the biblical story of the Holy Spirit of God descending upon a broken, frightened little band of Jesus’ disciples. The Spirit filled them, and they turned the world upside down. I suspect that our nation will not be healed by human effort apart from that same Spirit.

So, come Holy Spirit. Come as wind and breathe into us a passion for the humility of Jesus, who washed his disciples’ feet.

Come Holy Spirit. Come as fire and burn away all the divisive arrogance that solidifies our human understandings of your purpose.

Come Holy Spirit. Come as a dove and bring us peace.

That’s the way it looks through the Flawed Glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/george-floyd-death-minneapolis-riots-justice-requires-order/. I point out that the “National Review” is a conservative source. The inherent danger of such restraint was reported in several additional sources.

[2] https://www.insider.com/george-floyd-non-responsive-before-officer-took-knee-off-neck-2020-5

My 2016 Lenten Journey--Day 14

February 23, 2016 ~ Day 14

My 2016 Lenten Journey: Exploring the Gospels to discover what following Jesus and becoming more like him would look like? ‘And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32 NRSV).

On day 13 I noted how Jesus connected piety with almsgiving. It was the first time I had noted that connection, and the new insight broadened and deepened my understanding of piety. If my spirit is in synch with the spirit of God (which is the purpose of piety), then one way my piety will find expression is in almsgiving.

Today’s text Is much easier to link with piety. Matthew 6:5-15 contains a teaching about prayer, and the primary message is almost identical to the teaching about almsgiving: don’t do it for show. Do your almsgiving “in secret;” do your praying in your room with the door shut.

In his disapproval of ostentatious prayer, Jesus seems to refer specifically to public prayer. On the other hand, I can’t help jumping to Luke’s Gospel and remembering Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the Publican, both of whom prayed in public. But, the one who was “justified” was the one whose posture and demeanor was bowed and humble.

We associate prayer with kneeling and bowing our heads, which are physical postures of humility. Prayer from virtually any perspective is an expression of humility in which we subordinate ourselves before God, expressing praise, thanksgiving or petitions. Prayer and begging are not altogether different.

Think of times when you’ve observed people praying in public venues other than organized worship (e.g., in a public restaurant). What did their posture seem to communicate?

Have you ever prayed in public venues other than organized worship? What do you think your posture communicated to those who observed you?

It gives me pause. Can praying in public be counterproductive to our Christian witness? While we have to take into account the attitude of the observer, which we can’t control, this text, along with Luke’s parable, suggests it depends upon our posture, which always is in our control.

Whoever has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9 NRSV)

‘And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32 NRSV).

That's the way it looks through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

The Mind of Christ

I've spent most of my life studying the Bible and related sources in an effort to discover who God is and what God wants to accomplish through me. The longer I live the more important it seems that I continue to do so. That activity is called theology, and everybody, even agnostics and atheists, has “a theology.”

The greatest difficulty with theology is keeping ourselves out of it. What passes for Bible study too often is really an exercise in finding justification for what we already are doing or have decided to do. As the old cliché goes: “You can prove anything with the Bible.” In seminary we called that “seducing the text.” Sometimes it’s more like “raping the text.”

Perhaps the most egregious—and at the same time the most denied—abuse of Scripture and theology is how it is twisted to support the use of violence or the threat of violence to inflict and enforce specific doctrines or practices; and it makes little difference whether the enforced doctrine or practice is religious, political, economic or simple greed—even the enslavement of other humans has been justified through the rape of Scripture.

In other words, the history of theology is filled with intrusions of human fallibility. Theology and faith have been shaped by human need, desire and ambition to a much greater degree than they have shaped those human foibles. While most theology emerges as a way of shaping human relationships and culture, in virtually every case, culture eventually shapes theology, rather than the other way around.

The bottom line is power and control. In a recent blog, Kyle Roberts develops the idea that throughout Christian history theology has served “to empower certain persons over others and to inscribe authority in one way of theologizing over another way, one way of thinking of Christ over another, one way of understanding salvation over another way.”[1]

Why drag out all the dirty laundry? Isn't it more uplifting and constructive to lift up Christ and his grace? Absolutely. But, if that’s what we've been doing, we've done a terrible job! We've been long on condemning the sins of others, and short on any kind of self-evaluation.

For a couple of generations people by the droves have been bailing out of virtually every manifestation of organized “religion.”

And the reason they’re leaving? They point primarily to a lack of integrity between what religion preaches and what it practices.

Of course they often generalize the entire religious world on the basis of some single manifestation of religion—quite likely one particular experience related to religion. But the tragedy is that those counterproductive experiences of religion seem to outnumber those of religious integrity.

In short, the church has lost its power, and none too soon! The problem with a power-based ideology is that power eventually runs out. The church has reacted to its loss of power simply by redoubling its investment in ineffective and counterproductive strategies of institutional maintenance.

Three quarters of a century ago those strategies spelled power, and “success.” But success increasingly was measured by the standards of the marketing industry, rather than by biblically-based theology. When “the customer is always right,” the church cedes its power to the market.

Power was never a part of Christ’s agenda in the first place! The truth is, we humans have gotten it wrong—over and over and over!

We’re not perfect; and one of the greatest manifestations of our imperfection is that we don’t always recognize or acknowledge it. It’s always the other guy who gets it wrong (you know, that cinder in the other guy’s eye…).

But the cry from the “spiritually yearning, institutionally disillusioned public”[2] is simple: “Show us how to follow Jesus.”

WHAT A CONCEPT!!!

How does one “follow Jesus?” Many of us have spent the greater part of a lifetime trying to do, and we still don’t get it right on a consistent basis. But how about starting simply by adopting one quality of Jesus at a time? For some of us even that will be a life-long struggle; and for most of us it will be an ongoing exercise in one step forward, two steps back.

I propose the quality of humility as a starting place. Fair or unfair, accurate or inaccurate, one of the most frequent stereotypes of Christians today is arrogance. It’s easy to see in some people (please don’t show me a mirror!)

In contrast, consider my favorite passage in the Bible:

 Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus,

6 who, though he was in the form of God,
    did not regard equality with God
    as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself,
    taking the form of a slave,
    being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
8     he humbled himself
    and became obedient to the point of death—

    even death on a cross.              ~ Philippians 2:5-8 (NRSV)

Humility, in this text, involves surrender of status, acceptance of a life of servanthood and remaining obedient to the life of service to which God called him.

How about that as a starting place for following Jesus?

That’s the way I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] http://www.longlooking.com/2015/04/theology-is-about-power/

[2] A phrase coined by Thomas G. Bandy and used in several of his books.

Pride? or Insecurity?

My Pastor’s Column in church newsletters was called “Jim’s Gems”. Sometimes it was more like “cut glass”. Today’s blog is a case in point. My mind is wandering; so I’ll see where it leads.

By the way, I need to give credit every now and then to the best Youth Minister I’ve ever known. Patty Methvin always signed her church newsletter column, “Together in the Walk.” In my opinion, it’s the best Christian sign-off around, so I've adopted it in most of my writing. Thanks, Patty!

Also, every now and then I need to reaffirm the philosophical position from which I think and write and work. Some will respond immediately, “You're Liberal!” Yes, I’m unapologetically liberal; but liberal is not where I start. It’s the end product of my thought process.

On the other hand, one of the classic definitions of “liberal” is “open.” I guess that’s a starting place.

If you've read almost anything I've written you’ll know I’m a “both/and” kind of guy rather than “either/or”. I believe no human is ever—EVER—totally right, or totally wrong, about anything. There's something good, and something bad, in everybody. And in almost any aspect of life, between me and any other human, there are infinitely more similarities than differences. And understanding trumps agreement.

If we remain open and honest in our encounters, I truly believe we can find enough common ground between even the most divergent positions to begin building an effective outcome, not matter what the issue may be. In my estimation, that’s what it means to be liberal (as opposed to popular understandings based on where one stands on specific issues, like abortion, LGBT rights, firearms, etc.)

I also strive, though not always effectively, for humility (yeah, I know: looks aren't everything.) Most of the time the humility thing is pretty easy, because I can almost always find somebody who’s better than I at whatever I’m doing. Still, pride is a demon I must resist daily. Where I have the most difficulty with humility is in the area of mental, intellectual process.

Oh, it’s not that I think I’m a superior intellect. Indeed, it’s easy to find many people whose thinking is far superior to mine and more clearly articulated. But I battle with the same human weakness I observe in most others: when I reach a conclusion I generally feel “I’m right.” And if I’m right, then anyone who disagrees with me must be wrong.  Of course, Logic 101 says logic is valid only if its premises are valid. “I’m right” is seldom a valid premise, because we humans are incomplete, and are incapable of perceiving truth absolutely [even though I believe absolute truth exists].

So, is the “I’m right” syndrome a symptom of pride, or of insecurity?

So I intentionally pull most of my conclusions through the sieve of “what if I’m wrong?” I make an honest effort to research a variety of resources on any topic I’m considering, and more often than my pride wants to admit, I end up altering or even reversing my opinions. I know far too many people who read and study only those resources they are confident will reinforce and strengthen what they already believe, which must assume they already have arrived at the correct belief. 

For me, faith is a lot more about being than about believing. The epistle of James says, “even the demons believe, and tremble” (2:19). Belief alone puts me at the same level as the demons.

Faith is the act of living as if I truly believe what I say I believe. It is a never-ending process of growing. Growing, by definition, is changing; therefore, the crucial question is, “Toward what am I growing?” My aim is the goal Paul laid out in Ephesians 4:13, namely, to grow “…until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ.” (NRSV)

My faith goal is not to solidify what I believe about Christ, although, I will always continue to study and learn everything I can learn about Christ. But that has to do with “belief,” not “faith.” My faith goal is to become more like Christ.  It’s easy to say.

I am inspired in my journey by my nephew’s one-year project to experience and understand what it means to follow Jesus[1]. I don’t yet fully comprehend his process or his goals; but, I’m totally in agreement with his desire to follow Jesus.

I trust whatever I accomplish in my faith journey will never be a foundation for pride, or for declaring the correctness of my beliefs. My faith is in a person, and whether my doctrine is correct will not change that person or influence the relationship into which he calls me. I will be wrong often. But that is the risk of faith. It also is the test of faith. “What if I’m wrong?” It’s tempting to cling to the need to insure my relationship with God by being “right,” rather than by trusting the “right” person.

Pride is still a daily demon for me. Every sermon I write is subjected to two questions: (1) “So what?” and, (2) “Why do these people need to hear this sermon this Sunday?” Not every sermon passes the test; but 11:00 o’clock Sunday morning rolls around about the same time every week, ready or not!

It’s difficult to be proud when a sermon I've worked on for six weeks falls off the end of my tongue, “plops” on the floor immediately in front of the chancel and slithers away to hide under the front pew.

Wow! My mind was on a wandering path today; but that’s how I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christianpiatt/2015/02/day-two-of-my-jesus-project-are-we-done-yet/

Seven Biblical Principles of Unity #4

The Model of Unity: The Mind of Christ

Philippians 2:8-11 (RSV) Do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves. ⁴Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. ⁵Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, ⁶who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, ⁷but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. ⁸And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. 

 “Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus…” Some versions say, “…have the attitude of Christ.”

Here is an early litmus test for being Christian: it’s not doctrine or creed or sacrament or ritual or moral living. It’s aligning one’s mind with the mind of Christ.

So, how does one “have the mind of Christ?” Is it a matter of having a Positive Mental Attitude? Can’t hurt. A poster making the rounds on Facebook says: “Whatever you Feed Will Grow: Faith or Fear; Worry or Confidence; doubt or belief. It’s your choice”

Proverbs (23:7) says, “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” The late Zig Ziglar said, “Your attitude, not your aptitude, will determine your altitude.” [And, by the way, my favorite Zig Ziglar quote is, “There’s no traffic on the extra mile.”]

So, is having the mind of Christ a matter of filling our heads with nice thoughts? In winding down this beautiful, joyful letter to the Philippians Paul writes (4:8),  

“…whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”

Will that give us the mind of Christ? In I Corinthians (2:7-16), Paul again mentions the mind of Christ:

No one can know a person’s thoughts except that person’s own spirit, and no one can know God’s thoughts except God’s own Spirit. ¹²And we have received God’s Spirit, so we can know the wonderful things God has freely given us.

Then he quotes Isaiah 40:13:

“Who can know the Lord’s thoughts?
    Who knows enough to teach him?”

And he concludes: “But we understand these things, for we have the mind of Christ.”

So, we don’t develop or achieve or work for the mind of Christ. Like virtually everything else in our relationship with God, it is a part of God’s grace: we simply receive it.

But in context, it’s relatively clear that “the mind of Christ” is more than pretty thoughts. The church at Philippi is conflicted, and the aim of this passage is to persuade the Philippians to lead lives in which disunity, discord and personal ambition are dead. Thus, “the mind of Christ” is set before them with five distinct qualities:

1.       He did not exploit his divinity. He was in the form of God. There two Greeks words we translate form. One indicates a shape—an appearance, like when we say a cloud looks like a Teddy Bear—it has that form. The word used here signifies essence—basic nature, like when we see a Teddy Bear: “it doesn’t just “look like” one; it IS a Teddy Bear!” That’s how Christ Jesus was in the form of God. But, he didn’t exploit that status. Instead, he…

2.      …emptied (literally, “poured out”) himself; and he…

3.      …took the form (same word) of a slave. This is not like the Prince and the Pauper; the Prince could take back his status any time; but Jesus “emptied himself”. He didn’t put on a disguise (as The Living Bible puts it). In the same way he was in the form of God, he took on the form of a slave; and he...

4.      …humbled himself. Humility thus becomes the key quality in what Jesus did; and he did it voluntarily. He “emptied hmself.” And he…

5.      …became obedient. There are two possible understandings of this obedience.

a)     Many commentaries understand that he was obedient to God; and, all the Gospels affirm that. His obedience to God was the primary quality that defines Jesus as the Christ—the chosen one.

b)     But from another valid perspective, being found in human form he was obedient to that form. And what one experience is universally human? Death. Once found in human form he maintained that form all the way to the end of the line. He didn’t bail out when the going got tough. He was obedient to his chosen form and identity as a human.

And why is that important? Paul called his readers to “have the mind of Christ.” But, how is that humanly possible if Christ remains only divine?

I guess every kid loves a circus. I always admired those daring young men on the flying trapeze. Wow! But, I couldn’t identify. What were they thinking?

Then there’s the clown: down on the sawdust tripping over his own feet, stumbling around… Yeah. I can identify. I know what that’s like.

I can’t have the mind of the circus aerialist; but, I can have the mind of the clown. I can’t have the mind of a divinity; but, when another human faces death in a special way, that means it is humanly possible to do so; and I have hope. I can identify with and trust that way of thinking. It's almost the definition of faith.

This whole passage is summarized in verse 4 above: “…in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others.”

Humility: Greek philosophers discounted humility because it implied weakness, inadequacy and worthlessness. But Jesus redefined humility by accepting that by ourselves we are incomplete (1 Corinthians 4:7). It is God alone, through Christ, who completes us in order that we may live as God created us to live.

And so, to the divided church in Philippi, here is Paul’s model for unity: “Have the mind of Christ: in humility, put others ahead of yourself.”

Think of persons you have deeply admired. I suspect your admiration emerged form their humility; the way they were always putting others (including you) first. To live in Unity, model your life after theirs, but even more importantly, model your life after Christ: “Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus…”

And that’s the way I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim