Why I’m becoming anti-social

I deactivated my Facebook account a couple of months ago and yesterday I deactivated messenger and Instagram. I’m still on Twitter for the time being, because I have a particular need for it, but I’m hoping to be able to ditch that as well by year’s end. I’m keeping LinkedIn for professional reasons, at least for now.

Despite being a fairly early adopter of a lot of technology, I was one of the last to jump on the Facebook bandwagon. I was skeptical of the service and wondered why anyone would voluntarily put that much personal information out there for people to see. But, feeling like I was missing out, I joined. And was immediately sucked in. I posted pictures and statuses, hoping for the red like button to illuminate. I won’t say I was addicted by any clinical definition, because quitting wasn’t really that hard, but I was definitely a heavy user and loved getting the little hits of recognition (likes, comments).

After many years of indulging in various forms of social media, I came to realize that it was not having an overwhelming positive effect on my life. Indeed, I now believe that the positives did not outweigh the negatives.

So, here are some of the primary reasons, I decided to let go.

1 – It’s a time suck that prevents me from getting more meaningful things done. I recently finished reading Deep Work by Cal Newport. In it, he makes the case that most of what we find useful about Social Media has legible ROI on our lives, and should be eliminated in favour of pursuing more worthy work (note: work doesn’t necessarily mean our employment. It could be a hobby, etc.). I also recommend his other books, particularly, *So Good They Can’t Ignore You*

2 – I’ve read some research that indicates were only meant to have a small number of close friends and despite the rise of social media, most of us only have 2 or so close friends. Social media gives us the illusion of being closer to others and knowing more about them, then maybe we really do. Long before social media came around, we lost the concept of an acquaintance. Merriam-Webster defines this as: a person whom one knows but who is not a particularly close friend. We’re all supposed to be super friends, because we can share the most intimate (or close to it) parts of our lives online. It can be stressful to think you need to keep up with your feed, so you know what’s going on in other people lives. And, let’s face it, we all know social media is largely a lie. Or least, only a partial truth. We post the best of everything and rarely the worst. So, time to step away from it and get back to some reality.

Also, when I looked at my actually messaging, I realized that out of the 200-300 friends I have, I only message about 10 of them with any regularity. If I didn’t have their contact info, I sent them one last message asking for it. I can now phone, text, or email, when I feel I have something to say or ask, and not just because they pop up on my list and I think “Oh, I should message them, they’re online now”.

3 – I recently watched the movie Snowden and the documentary Citizen Four. Both recount the story of whistleblower Edward Snowden as he revealed the extent of the US Government’s surveillance programs. He also revealed details of the PRISM program, where it was revealed that the various spying agencies have virtually free access to the servers of multiple technology companies, including social media sites. So, my original unease with social media was correct, they really are watching us and more than perhaps we thought at first.

I’m not a paranoid person, I just believe in the rule of law and the concept of human rights. And while it is a common refrain to say, “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to worry about”, I think that misses the point. The government has no moral right to our information without our informed consent. It doesn’t matter if I’m doing anything “wrong”, they shouldn’t be looking in the first place. (But, seriously, if you do nothing else, cover up your webcam).

Jesus had 12 apostles, not 300. We weren’t biologically designed to manage this level of relationship with as many people as social media would want us to. When I emailed my friends and told them, many of them expressed support and a desire to do the same thing. There’s something that keeps us there and I don’t think it’s healthy when it can be that hard for people to quit. FOMO is a real cultural phenomenon and should be heavily scrutinized.

I am aware that this has implication for this blog. I can’t just publish it to all the various for the world to see, but that’s okay. I write this for me and whoever finds it.

So, those are some of my primary reasons for ditching social media (or most of it). My friends are still my friends and we will still email or phone or meet in person or whatever. But, the world doesn’t need access to children’s photos, or my every thought (no one really cares). Plus, I’ve got this blog, so if you want to know what I think, just stay here and you’ll get more than 140 characters of thought. Hopefully, that’s more worth reading.

Sermon: Honouring a Legacy

Originally preached in Chapel at Tyndale University College & Seminary on Wednesday, July 5th

Listen to the audio, here:

.

How did you first hear of Jesus Christ? How was the faith transmitted to you? Do you ever think of what it took for the story of God to reach us in the year 2017, over 2000 years after the death of Christ? It’s easy to say, “well God makes it happen”. This is true, but God doesn’t work in isolation. He partners with us and that partnership doesn’t always seem fair or easy or for that matter bloodless. Much blood has been spilled to ensure the survival and continuation of this faith we call Christianity. We still encounter it today; thinking of our brothers and sisters in Syria and other places. I want today, to give us pause and cause to consider what it has taken to get us the message today. We will do this by delving into the brief but pivotal story of St. Stephen, the first martyr of the Christian church.

To talk about the life of St. Stephen, we need to remind ourselves where we are in the story of Scripture. Through the Word, earth and the heavens were created and life began. The curse entered the world and so did death. The covenants of Abraham and Moses were established, leading to the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. Humble and meek as a baby was He born. 33 years did He live, teaching and ministering to those he encountered preaching of the kingdom of God and encouraging all to follow Him to a better way. He was then arrested and condemned to death. 3 days later he rose from the dead and then ascended to Heaven. His life, work, and message were his legacy to the church. It was entrusted to them and through pentecost the church began.

As the mission developed it became clear that the Apostles couldn’t and shouldn’t do everything. They then appointed Deacons, of which one was St. Stephen. We don’t know a lot of about Stephen, but what we do know is important and his story his pivotal for the spread of the gospel.

As soon as Stephen is commissioned by the apostles he is described as a man full of faith and the holy spirit. A man who is full of grace and power, who performed many wonders and signs, in his ministry to widows. It was not long however before he drew the negative attention of the Jewish leaders and brought to trial on falsified charges. His face was described as being as bright as an angels.

The persecution of Stephen is a wonderful example of a believer who listened to his master and trusted the teaching he had received. In the gospel of Luke, it records Jesus as warning:

“12“But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name’s sake. 13“It will lead to an opportunity for your testimony. 14“So make up your minds not to prepare beforehand to defend yourselves; 15 for I will give you utterance and wisdom which none of your opponents will be able to resist or refute.”

When pressed to refute the charges again him, Stephen didn’t so much offer up a defence as he did a witness. His speech is masterful and leads us through the stories of Abraham, Jospeh and Moses. He reminds them what God did through each of these men. He talks about “our ancestors”, “our people”, how Moses received life-giving words to “passed on to us”, how “our ancestors” refused to listen to Moses. Further he reminds them that it is again “our ancestors” who carried the tabernacle with them through the wilderness. He is constantly including himself in the story – “our ancestors”, “our people”…

Then, he drops the bombshell and signs his own death warrant. The Jewish system was completely connected to the temple system. But, God, as revealed through Jesus is a boundless God. God’s love is so great that he circumvented the temple system and came to earth to bring salvation to His creation.

Stephen says: “The Most High doesn’t live in temples made by human hands… Then, quoting the prophet Isaiah says ”

Heaven is my throne,
And the earth is my foot stool.
Could you build me a temple as a good as that?
Asks the Lord.
Could you you build me such a resting place?
Didn’t my hands make both heaven and earth?

Queue the fireworks. Stephen has just used their own scriptures against them. This is a direct challenge to the temple system of the day. But wait, he’s not done yet. He was a man full of grace, spirit and power and he has’t even mentioned Jesus Christ yet.

Here we see a change in Stephen’s emphasis. No longer is he talking of “OUR” – our ancestors, our people, etc. As one who has accepted Christ’s message he knows the rest doesn’t apply to Him.

He continues and says “YOU stubborn people” – some translations will say stiff-necked – YOU stubborn people! YOU are heathen! – Stephen is not interested in making friends. You are heathen at heart and deaf to the truth. In the greek, the word ‘heathen’ can also mean ‘uncircumcised’. Now, remember, circumcision was the sign of the Abrahamic covenant and an absolutely central component of their faith. He was now accusing them of being surface level believers. That their circumcision was literally, only skin deep. It did not penetrate their heart. We would hear similar words from Paul. In Philippians 3:3, Paul writes: For we who worship by the Spirit of God are the ones who are truly circumcised. We rely on what Christ Jesus has done for us. We put no confidence in human effort, OR in Romans 2:29 “But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.”

Must YOU forever resist the Holy Spirit.
YOUR ancestors did and so do YOU
Name one prophet YOUR ancestors didn’t persecute
THEY even killed the one who predicted the coming of the RIGHTEOUS ONE – THE MESSIAH
Whom YOU betrayed and murdered
YOU deliberately disobeyed God’s law.

YOU resist
YOU persecute
THEY killed
YOU betrayed
YOU disobeyed God’s law

YOU are HEATHEN!

Stephen clearly wan’t trying to talk himself out of the charge or his impending fate. He has submitted himself totally and completely the will of God, the spreading of the Gospel and calling the Jews to repentance. He was trying to save them. Stephen was directly pointing the finger of guilt away from him and towards them. He was calling them to a life free from the temple system, free from following strict laws, free from a limiting view of God to following the God of boundless love. To the truth that God is Love as personified in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Now, Stephens was standing trial in front of the Sanhedrin. The council, essentially the high court. So, we might expect that what came next would be the result of careful thought and deliberation. In fact – to skip to the end for a moment – Stephen’s death does not appear to have been an official judgement, but the result of a mob mentality. We know this because it does not appear that under Roman rule they had the authority to assign someone the death penalty. In John 18:31 the Jewish leaders, in order to convince Pilate to crucify Jesus, tell him they “have no right  to execute anyone” and thus the death of Stephen becomes a mob murder, rather than a state execution.

Stephen is granted a great comfort by God, when he looks up and sees the glory of God and sees Jesus standing in the place of honour at God’s right hand. It is curious that Jesus here is standing. Normally we are used to hearing of him sitting at the right hand… Is this just a different way of depicting Jesus? Is he standing in preparation of welcoming home his good and faithful servant, or is this an allusion to Daniel 7: 13-14, which reads.

I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

And to Him was given dominion,
Glory and a kingdom,
That all the peoples, nations and men of every language
Might serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away;
And His kingdom is one
Which will not be destroyed.

Here the Son of Man, as Jesus also describes himself, is standing in judgement and if correct, this may mean that Stephen’s vision means that Jesus is standing in judgement of his accusers. So, no wonder then that his accusers became all the more enraged when he TOLD them what he had seen.

“Look! I see the Son of Man standing in the place of honour at God’s right hand!”

They rushed Stephen, taking off their own clothes – presumably to give them more freedom in the rock throwing arm – and began stoning Stephen – careful to ensure that they did so outside the boundaries of the holy city.

Stephen’s life, once again parallels that of Christ. In his anguish, in his pain, he manages to get out the prayer: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” AND “Lord, don’t charge them with this sin!”

And then he died. But with his death, God was not defeated. His plans that all be saved were not derailed.

With this event, the first great persecution of the church began. The chief persecutor was Saul. Saul thought nothing of Stephen’s death and it seemed to embolden him and energize him to pursue his duties with vicious cruelty and vengeful anger!

What happens next is perhaps one of the most awesome and amazing bits of God’s story and early church.

The believers began to scatter all over; except that is for the Apostles. The greek word for scatter is as for the scattering of seed. Perhaps, like mustard seeds.

As the Gospel of Matthew records, Jesus said “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field; which indeed is smaller than all seeds. But when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in its branches.”

The grains of mustard seed that were the early church was forcibly distributed throughout God’s creation. The enemy was not winning; indeed this is an amazing example of using the enemy’s tactics against him. The seeds were spread and were planted. The gospel was spoken far and wide to eager ears, evil spirits were cast out screaming and the paralyzed and lame were healed, and many believed and were baptized. And there was great joy! And in the end, of course, Saul himself came to know the Lord Christ, repent of his wicked ways, and spread the Gospel even further, including through his letters so that we too may benefit from his zeal for the gospel.

St. Stephen, the first martyr of the church, did not die for nothing. His death was the catalyst for the spreading of the gospel defeating all the enemies designs. He also helped usher in one of the greatest evangelists of the new testament: Paul.

Stephen trusted in the legacy of Christ. He trusted in His teachings and message. Christ’s legacy of love inspired Stephen to serve widows, to exalt the name of Christ, even unto death. Even his death, with his plea that his murderers not be judged for their actions, was Christ like.

To all the Apostles, disciples, and believers who we read about in Scripture we owe our thanks.

To the early church, who stewarded the faith and the scriptures down through the ages, so that 2000 years later we can be here, living this faith, we owe our thanks. To the preachers of old, down to those who passed the faith on to us, we owe thanks. The faith depends on no one person, but an unbroken chain of disciples, filled with the spirit, who have as faithfully as they could and with the stewardship of the Holy Spirit, passed on the faith from generation to generation.

The question for us today is simple: in all the ways that we can live out our faith, in all that Christ has taught us, are we honouring our Christian past. Do we live in a way that honours our heritage, the blood shed by the Apostles, the witness of the martyrs past and present?

That is our call. To continue to pass this faith, bought by the blood of Christ and those who have come before us, down to the next generation and to encourage each other as we run the race.

Amen.

BENEDICTION
May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The need for beauty and art in a post-literate age [essay]

THE NEED FOR BEAUTY AND ART IN A POST-LITERATE AGE

”There is nothing that does not participate in the beautiful.
– St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Divine Names, IV, 5

“ Let there be light…”
– Genesis 1:3

Download the 16-page PDF version here.

God did not have to make anything, but chose out of infinite grace to create. To create the earth and the moon, the sun and the stars. The space in between planets, thereby creating vastness to demonstrate how “wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ”.[1] He created the animals big and small; and all this was declared good. Finally, we were created.

God is a creator. Creativity is central to God’s being. The original and ultimately, only creator. At its core, creation, the act of creativity, is creating something out of nothing. We cannot really create, try as we might. We can take existing things and arrange them differently, like taking different paints and arranging them in different ways on a canvas. But we cannot actually create ex-nihilo. Beauty, whatever that might be, exists because God made it exist. It is a reflection of who God is.

“And God saw that it was beautiful…”
–Genesis 1:25

After each creative act in Genesis, God proclaims it “good”. At least, that is what you’ll likely read in your translation. However, the Hebrew word for good, can also be translated as beautiful; and in fact, the Septuagint[2] uses the Greek word for beautiful, rather than good.[3] This seems to indicate that God found creation pleasing, not just in an intellectual sense, but pleasing to all the senses. To say it was simply good, in today’s world is, well, not good enough. We don’t accept good enough anymore. But, we do accept beautiful, however we may define it. Indeed, we are caught in a battle of wanting beauty, but not wanting to take the time to consider what it might be.

Think of the most magnificent sunset you’ve ever witnessed or seen. The oranges mixing with the reds mixing with the blue and grey. It is simply magnificent to think twice a day God paints the sky, all over the world. Does He do it to marvel at His own handiwork? Maybe. Why not? The artist is surely allowed to enjoy his own creation. Does He do it for us to be able to know that He is there? I believe so. The beauty of nature, serves as a reassuring sign that the sun rises and sets every day, just as the Lord is trustworthy with His promises.

Natural beauty, being a sure sign of God’s existence and character, has been found worthy of copying by artists for millennia. In paintings on cave walls, on parchment and canvas, God’s beauty has captured our imagination and inspired us to create. From painting to sculpture to poetry to song, we create because we have been given the drive to create something that speaks to us and teaches us. The artists, that special breed of creators who are, historically, particularly concerned with communicating truth through beauty, have been central to the story of God.

In many ways, the story that initially unfolds in Scripture is the story of the distorting of beauty. The desire to discover beauty has not left us however, it has simply been redirected through a broken lens. St. Basil the Great wrote: “By nature men desire the beautiful”.[4] Could it be that along with writing the law on our hearts[5] our, albeit, distorted nature still glows with the light of the imago Dei within us and recognizes beauty as a beacon? A beacon to what we do not know, but it seeks to teach us and to guide us home. We desire beauty because we desire God. Perhaps this is why artists fascinate us so much; or maybe it’s just me. I love creators, someone who can paint a beautiful painting, sculpt a sculpture or turn disorder into the order we call music. Someone who can, using human limitations and spiritual inspiration, create something to help lift us out of ourselves and consider the existence or presence of something higher.

As I write this, I am sitting in a small room inside an Anglican Convent located in Toronto, Canada. Out of my window to my right is a beautiful winter scene. The snow is glistening white, covered in a thin layer of ice. There is a small building, some deciduous trees, naked until the spring brings back their leaves. The room itself has a bed, a rocking chair, a desk and a chair, a side table, a dresser and a sink. Pretty plain but elegant in its simplicity. Comfortable but not distracting. A couple of paintings hand on the walls, depicting spring and winter scenes, and a small crucifix at the end of the bed.

On my desk, I have my bible, some books, a water bottle, this laptop, and a beautiful icon. Not the kind of icons we are used to in our digital age, but a piece of wood on which is written a scene from the Old Testament (icons are not drawn or painted; they are written). You remember the scene from Genesis 18:1-15, where the three strangers appear to Abraham? The scene is properly called The Hospitality of Abraham and was written by Russian Andrey Rublev. It eventually became known as the Old Testament Trinity and depicts three figures gathered around a table and a chalice, with a city, tree, and mountain in the background.

It is beautiful, simple, and profound. It is a two dimensional image hiding the deep mysteries that can be found by meditating on its imagery. There is great intention hidden there. And to be clear, no one worships an icon anymore than I worship a photo of my deceased father. Regardless of what you think of Orthodox theology, this scene I find myself in helps to illustrate for me something that has been troubling me for some time. The intentional lack of beauty in the church today, particularly by those of Anabaptist heritage.

This room is beautiful for its simplicity. It is comfortable without been obtrusive. It is simply here. It asks for no attention, but puts itself at my service. My Bible is beautiful. It has a soft cover that feels good to touch, a font and pagination that makes for comfortable reading, and wide margins for notes. Of course, the message it contains is what is really beautiful. There are the tough passages, full of ugliness, hate and death, but there is that thread of love that permeates and holds the story together. Through it God teaches us how to find beauty in the horrific or the ugly. We find beauty in the very first chapters of scripture. We were created in the image of God, and that image resides in us regardless of our faith. This gives us inherent value and dignity; whether we or anyone else recognizes it, it is there.

Yes, all these things are beautiful, but so is art. When we decided long ago that the “church” didn’t exist in a particular place, we did a near complete 180-degree turn and decided to eradicate anything that made a particular building look any different from any other building. What a tragedy. No cross, no art, no obvious beauty. Sure, some of our buildings are bright and airy and look wonderful when the sun shines in, but how do we engage the senses? What did beauty do to us that we told it to get out, or else?

Like much of our theology, we over corrected to the excesses of the past. Such as in response to when we paid Michelangelo to paint the Sistine Chapel with taxes raised on the backs of the poor. That was a terrible thing for the church to do. Nonetheless, God is in the business of redeeming sinful acts and Michelangelo’s creation has inspired many. I know of someone who, while touring Italy, visited many churches and felt like she finally understood aspects of scripture that until that point had been hidden from her, because of the ancient art contained in those churches. Art is interpretation and in the case of religious art, it is interpreting something most Christians hold to be a source of truth. The painting is not infallible, nor is the artist, but it can help those who have trouble turning words into images, while reading Scripture. Beautiful art can take us out of ourselves and point us into a different direction, namely the Divine.

In her book Art of Spiritual Writing, Vinita Hampton Wright describes the task of the spiritual writer: “The spiritual writer communicates for the sake of uplifting the world, celebrating it, opening its depths, revealing its wonders, and healing its wounds.”[6] How is it, we are okay with spiritual writing, but not spiritual art? The task of the writer is the same for any artist, is it not? Does the world not need uplifting, celebration, and revelation? Why do we insist on limiting the ways in which we will join with God in exposing those joys? Do we stand in the way of the artist who has been given talent and inspiration by God? Do we limit the creativity of God when we limit forms of expression? Speaking of creativity in general, Wright says, “True creativity is a spiritual function, a form of engagement that requires openness, attentiveness, honesty, and desire. These same traits are necessary for spiritual growth and enlightenment”.[7]

“The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the LORD has made them both.”
– Proverbs 20:12

      Again, I ask, do we limit spiritual growth by limiting its expressions? Do we limit Divine communication to only certain human senses, when God has created them all? While it may be true that a church building is no different than any other building, why then does it hold true that a church building must be like any other building? The university I work for has recently taken possession of a new property, a former Catholic convent. It has one of the most beautiful chapels I have ever worshipped in. It is absolutely stunning. Stained glass windows that tower 56-feet above your head, carved marble markers for the stations of the cross along the walls, and a massive 27-feet tall cross suspended at the front. An amazing aspect of purpose-built chapels like this one is that everything has a purpose. Everything has a story, especially the stained glass. These are not just random collections of images; they have a story to tell. As an example, one of our university students wrote about her experience of our new chapel:[8]

 

On my first tour through Tyndale University College & Seminary’s Bayview campus I was immediately awestruck by the incredible art and architecture in the Chapel. I walked through this vast room and stared at all of the beautiful French stained glass windows that line the walls. The first picture to catch my eye was of a little elephant, which soon became my favourite and the focal point of my attention each time I was there. It was not until I was handed a Chapel Guide handbook that any of these pictures stood out to me as much as that little elephant first had.

I flipped through the pages of this book and each small picture in the panels was explained, I realized that not only is there a little elephant sitting nicely near the front of the Chapel, but there is also a unicorn, a camel and a whale hiding in the stained glass, each symbolizing one aspect of the Christian faith. It was interesting to me to know that both the elephant and the unicorn are symbols of chastity while the camel symbolizes patience and the whale represents the resurrection. As soon as I read that these other animals could be found in the glass, I went immediately to the Chapel to locate all of these treasures and was determined to walk slowly through the aisles and take in each and every picture individually.

I am not suggesting that we all go out and raise millions of dollars to build an equivalent space, but it does teach us something. When a young woman can write that she was “determined to walk slowly through the aisles and take in each and every picture individually” and learn about what they had to say about Jesus and her faith, isn’t that worth promoting, indeed, protecting.

It is not entirely the church’s fault for rejecting art. Philosopher Roger Scrunton has observed that, whereas the purpose of poetry, art and music used to be beauty, a value seen as important as truth and goodness, now in the 20th century, it has been replaced by originality. “Art now aims to disturb or break moral taboos, no matter the cost. Art and Architecture have becomes soulless and ugly”.[9] The cause of this transition, according to Scrunton is the rise of individualism. Like so many things in our society these days, beauty has become a secondary consideration to whatever highlights the skill, or meets the needs, of the individual. The art is no longer the object worth admiring, only the artist.

“Put usefulness first and lose it. If you put beauty first, then it will last forever.
It turns out useless is useful” – Roger Scruton[10]

      Scruton laments the loss of beauty, because as he sees it, beauty “leads us home”, helps us understand ourselves as spiritual beings and shows “human life to be worthwhile”.[11] And it’s not so much that art has vanished, so much as creativity. We’ve stopped trying to make things beautiful. Along with the rise of individualism, we’ve also seen the rise of impatience and a desire for instant gratification. Seriously, how much time does it take to hang a toilet on a wall and call it art? The lack of creativity has made art appear useless. I have toured the Modern Art Museum in Glasgow, Scotland where I found the aforementioned toilet. I do not recall there being a single thing worth contemplating or being in awe of. How can a stupid toilet, hung on a wall, compare to Monet’s Water Lilies, Van Gogh’s Starry Night, or DaVinci’s The Last Supper?

Oscar Wilde said “all art is quite useless”,[12] except he meant it as a compliment. Art is useless. It has no use or utility for our world. Its only use is to be useless. We may observe it, contemplate it, let it take our breath away or take our minds to places divine. This seems to have no immediate use for our world. Why should we care about a painting, when there are hundreds of girls kidnapped in Africa, a child sleeping on cardboard in the downtown city core, or children being trained as soldiers? This is why art is useless. It has no obvious utility and our world teaches us that utility is all that matters. I argue however, that we need to dig deeper into our mission as the church, to fully understand why we need art, when it seems so useless. I do not believe that anything is useless if it can help us contemplate the divine or give us hope.

To more clearly understand, in our modern context, what the lack of artistic creativity can lead to, let us consider the scourge of pornography. Sex is awesome, it is a gift from our Lord. Pornography takes everything that is right and holy and good about sexuality and the conjugal union, and turns it inside out and backwards. Whereas in communion we repeat the words of Christ who said, “This is my body, which is given for you”,[13] pornography turns it into a satanic anti-communion that says, “This is your body, which I take for me”. Whereas the original act in the upper chamber with Christ and His disciples was a beautiful act of service, of self-donation, pornography expels beauty and celebrates violent self-interest. If the conjugal act is the ultimate symbol of the union between Christ and His Church, then pornography is the destruction of that entire symbol. Pornography is not just a problem because it is sexist, racist and misogynistic, spreads disease, ends marriages, and uses women who are often trafficked. Even if you solved all those problems, it would still be evil because it degrades the human person created in the image of God and reverses the self-giving, all loving nature of God. Lust promises fulfillment, but instead, “lust, brings ugliness where one treats another as disposable”.[14] Pornography by its nature inherently leads to ugliness, as the participant is drawn ever more down the rabbit hole of despair, searching for the next hit. If pornography brings us closer to an encounter with evil, beauty through art can steer us the other way.

Counter to the “useless” art of beauty, pornography promises to be useful. It promises to cure our feelings of loneliness, detachment, low self-esteem, even if just for a fleeting moment. These are all available through Jesus Christ, but sanctification is often a slow cooker process and it can take longer than we would like to experience change. Not only that, but it distracts those with actual talents, away from a holier calling. This is why useless art, created by the true creative, is so important to the spread of the gospel. It has been said that the problem with pornography is not that it shows too much, but that it shows too little. Everything it has to offer, is immediately available. There is no depth at all. Contrast that with my icon of the Trinity, and it has such depth, that you could ponder it a lifetime and continually learn new things. How much can you learn from DaVinci, or Michaelangelo, or Monet? There paintings are beautiful on sight, but they have depth. There are layers of meaning, interpretation and significance. There is so much to be gained from true beauty as expressed through art and the true creative process. To my mind, the pornification of our culture, is simply the natural end result of a utilitarian view of beauty and art. It is something to be used and quickly discarded. It is a sacrament of the new religion of individualism. Whereas pornography grants us access to a carnal place, true art can give way to a thin place.[15]

The idea of a thin place, comes to us through the church’s Celtic tradition. It is a place where the veil between earth and the divine was thinner than other places. Witness the transfiguration of our Lord, as described in Matthew 17:1-13. The veil literally breaks open and Jesus stands with Moses and Elijah. Have you ever been in a place where there is something about it that puts you in a state that you just feel the presence of God all the more intensely? You walk a bit more lightly; you speak more softly, if at all. You are aware that there is a presence that was not there a moment ago, or at least, not so acutely.

“It’s easier to say what a thin place is not. A thin place is not necessarily a tranquil place, or a fun one, or even a beautiful one, though it may be all of those things too. Disney World is not a thin place. Nor is Cancún. Thin places relax us, yes, but they also transform us — or, more accurately, unmask us. In thin places, we become our more essential selves.”[16]

Does transformation need a particular place? No. It requires a particular saviour and a particular gospel to be alive in your life. But, it can be communicated through art. Gaze on a landscape of God’s creation and wonder at its richness and complexity. Find awe in a painting of the crucifixion of Christ, or the martyrdom of the Apostle Steven. Allow God to speak to you through pictures. It is ok. It is not a sin.

Perhaps the best reason to get back to the use of art to communicate God’s message of love to a broken world is the reality that we do not live in a literate society, but a post-literate one. In the beginning, there was the Word … and He was the only one who knew how to write. Everyone was illiterate. No one knew how to write or read. Eventually, we got to a point where much of the western world knew how to read and write, and we actually did read. We now live in a society where we still know how to read and write, but we do not use it much except for what we judge necessary to get through the day. We do not read as much, and what we do read tends to be superficial. So, we find ourselves capable but underutilizing our skills. This reduces our ability to effectively engage in society as a whole; but, as many studies have borne out, it is also reducing our knowledge of Scripture. Our post-literacy is increasing our illiteracy of Scripture. This is a trend that needs to be reversed, but I think we can at least help by giving Christ-followers something else to focus on, rather than reruns of the Bachelor.

Art can create a thin place where the gap between us and God becomes narrower and where we can learn to love God all over again. And it is not just for His followers, but for seekers in need of an easier entry point to God, rather than a daunting 66 book library. Art is integral to the mission of the church. I am not suggesting we replace the preaching of the Word. It must remain a central part of our lives, but there is no reason to limit ourselves. Indeed, to limit ourselves in such a way may itself be sinful, an act of rebellion. Who are we to deny someone the right to glorify God using the talents they have been given?

“Beauty will save the world.”
– Dostoevsky, The Idiot.

            Scripture speaks of God’s beauty many times, including: For how great is his goodness, and how great his beauty!”[17] Giving God the attribute of “beautiful”, seems to indicate that beauty, like love, emanates from the core of who God is. 1 John 4:8 tells us that “God is love”. To me this simply tells us that love and beauty are somehow connected, or more likely that one is a visible manifestation of the other; almost sacramental. Jesus death on the cross, the ultimate act of love, can then be seen as a beautiful act of service and sacrifice, even if the immediate image of the act, is horrific. Beauty does in fact save the world. Perhaps, this is why we seem to be born with an appetite for beauty. We crave it. We seek it. It can lead us to God who is love by pointing us ever steadily on the path to knowing Him better. Yes, in our fallen state, it also leads us to pornography and other forms of distorted and counterfeit beauty that promises much in the here and now but always leaves us empty. It does not take us anywhere deeper, for it is inherently shallow. Rather than us going deep into it, it digs deep into us and does everything it can to never let us go. Our quick fix and fast paced world limits our ability to seek the transcendent beauty of a God who saved us all 2000 years ago. The least the church can do is to give the world as many examples of beauty, including through art, as it can, to show God’s depth and richness. Leaving that work to art galleries, not only limits it to those who can afford such extravagance but takes it out of the place where it rightly belongs. The place where we gather weekly and throughout the week. A place for contemplation and peace. A place of shalom.

Scripture does not really give us much in the way of guidelines as to where we should meet and what that place should be. Over the years architecture in general has seen utility take priority to beauty. “Form follows function” is the foundational concept of design, beauty has been relegated to a back seat. It was no longer necessary. As pointed out buy Scruton, “if you only consider utility, a building will eventually become useless”.[18] Now, our places of worship may become useless for other reasons, but if there is one thing that the sad conversion of churches in to condominiums has shown us, it is that their beauty can continue to serve a purpose long after their congregations have left and the last words were preached. Beauty can lead us to adoration and worship; ugliness leads us to lust because we feel deprived and then depraved.

Social justice cannot be attained by violence.
Violence kills what it intends to create.

– Pope John Paul II

We have perfected our weapons, our conscience has fallen asleep, and we have sharpened our ideas to justify ourselves. As if it were normal, we continue to sow destruction, pain, death! Violence and war lead only to death, they speak of death! Violence and war are the language of death!

– Pope Francis[19]

When you think of Hitler, Pol Pot, and Stalin, I imagine you do not think of beauty. And, well you should not. They were men who did unspeakable evils. This evil showed itself in demonstrations of extreme state violence. Thousands were murdered for crimes such as being too smart or being the wrong religion or ethnicity. This is ugly. Violence is not beauty, it is the exact opposite. It is for this reason that I find it astonishing that Anabaptists have not embraced beauty and art more. It is a full frontal assault to the ugliness of violence. Beauty does not cause violence, lust does. Helen of Troy may have had the “face that launched 1000 ships”, but was it beauty or lust that caused that war?  The lack of true creativity and beauty in the world has deadened our senses, we need to awaken them again if we are to have a church of awakened people, able to provide an answer to violence and war, who’s language is death. Just as pornography will never deliver what the user is looking for, neither will violence every truly solve or create a solution. Violence is synonymous with death and death, violence death, is not what was intended when God created. We simply become more and more addicted, believing that if we just become a little bit stronger than our enemies, we will eventually prevail.

As Anabaptists well know, this is not the path taught by Christ. We are taught to live counter cultural lives and to pray for our enemies. For the sake of the reader who may not as acquainted with the words of Christ, I print them here from Matthew 5:44 (KJV): “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you”. Society is saturating our world with images of lust, death, and exploitation. Worse yet, it is trying to normalize much of it; and it is working. What could be more counter cultural then once again flooding our world with visual beauty. Not to titiliate, but as an invitation to consider that there is another way. There is another answer to violence, another answer to pain, a real hope, that will last and will never separate itself from us.[20] The artistic dimension is there for us to use, to introduce a hurting world to Christ and to help followers to go deeper. God is calling us to reclaim our heritage and use it, to spread the message of love and peace. Perhaps if we do, someone may hear the words “Wake up, sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”[21]

Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
– Matthew 11:28

Rest. I worry that Anabaptists are not good at this. We are so focussed on “doing” the works of God, that we find no time to rest ourselves. When do we find time for contemplation? For prayer? Art can provide us a time, place, and way for doing that. Contemplating a scene from Scripture, meditating on its meaning or simply trying to place ourselves in the scene, can help us commune with God in a special way that can give us fuel to carry on the mission. In my experience, Anabaptists are bad at doing this, despite numerous examples of Christ retreating to pray: But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed.[22] If you want some suggestions on how to find these times of reflection, I recommend April Yamasaki’s excellent book Sacred Pauses[23].

… and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills — to make artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze,

Exodus 31:3-4

          How then shall the church respond in this post-literate, violent, sleeping, and cynical age? Let us begin anew a dialogue with artists of all kinds: painters, sculptors, photographers, and more. Encourage them, disciple them, give them space to create and to bring their own ideas. Encourage those inside and outside the congregation to participate. What a witness and a blessing if the church became known as a champion of the arts! Not in a pompous exclusive way, but in a way that brings glory to God and highlights the needs of the least of these. Art not only links us to our present, but it can also imagine a future. The rich heritage of art throughout Christian history and beyond can link us to our past and remind us of the rich heritage that we have to draw on as we work to fulfill our mission. Art that points to that mission, like an arrow saying this is why we are here, these are the people we are here to help. Anabaptists do not typically use the term “corporal work of mercy”, but it is a great short hand to describe the sacred tasks outlined by Christ in Matthew 25:34-40 – Feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, visit the imprisoned, and bury the dead. We would also add that we are to be a witness to peace, even unto death. We take those sacred tasks very seriously. Sometimes though, I fear we place so much emphasis on doing those that we forget we also have the responsibility of introducing the world to Christ through those acts. I reflect on Matthew 16:26: “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” and believe we have a responsibility greater than the works of mercy. We have the charge to introduce people to Jesus, the great hope of this world. Beauty is a wonderful way, a modern parable in its own right, to introduce people to the Jesus and His message.

Fellow followers of the Way, what gifts are we failing to use for the glory of God and the mission with which we have been entrusted? In the deuterocanonical book 2nd Maccabees, the writer writes: 7 If it were possible for us to paint the history of your religion as an artist might, would not those who first beheld it have shuddered as they saw the mother of the seven children enduring their varied tortures to death for the sake of religion?” What will the artists paint of us? Let us be at the forefront of introducing beauty back to the world. Let us preach the gospel of Christ in every way possible, using the gifts He has so graciously given us. Let us be known as those who not only have “beautiful feet”[24] but whose minds, hands, voices, and eyes create beauty and put it back into a world so hell bound on elevating ugliness in replacement for God.

[1] Ephesians 3:18 (NIV)

[2] The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament.

[3] Many other translations are possible as well.

[4] Andrew Cuneo, Beauty Will Save the World – But Which Beauty?, http://www.cslewis.org/journal/beauty-will-save-the-world-but-which-beauty/

[5] Jeremiah 31:33

[6] Vignette Hampton Wright, The Art of Spiritual Writing (Chicago: Loyola Press, 2013), 2.

[7] Ibid., 3.

[8] Kaelynne Franck, I Spy With My Little Eye, http://tyndaleblogs.ca/explore/2015/01/i-spy-with-my-little-eye/

[9] Roger Scruton, Why Beauty Matters, https://vimeo.com/112655231

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Oscar Wilde, Picture of Dorian Gray, http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/owilde/bl-owilde-pic-pre.htm

[13] Luke 22:19 (NASB)

[14] Ibid., Why Beauty.

[15] I am indebted to Mark Groleau for reminding me of this concept, on his podcast, WikiGod. http://www.wikigodpod.com/home/7

[16] Eric Weiner, Where Heaven and Earth Come Closer, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/travel/thin-places-where-we-are-jolted-out-of-old-ways-of-seeing-the-world.html?_r=2

[17] Zechariah 9:17a (ESV)

[18] Ibid., Why Beauty.

[19] Pope Francis, Vigil of Prayer for Peace: Words of Holy Father Francis, http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/homilies/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130907_veglia-pace.html

[20] Romans 8:38-39

[21] Ephesians 5:14 (NIV)

[22] Luke 5:16 (NIV)

[23] April Yamasaki, Sacred Pauses: Spiritual Practices for Personal Renewal (Waterloo: Herald, 2013)

[24] Romans 10:15

I didn’t sign up for this . . .

You’ve been up all night and day. Not a wink of sleep. Whenever you have a moment to sleep, you are torn between cleaning and tidying up your messed up dwelling or trying to catch some zzz’s. Whenever you choose the latter, the second you hit the pillow, the cries of your newborn wakes you just seconds after you close your eyes.

Through your tears you hold your baby, bouncing, soothing, whispering to them that it’s ok and they can stop crying. Why won’t you stop crying? Are you dirty? I’ll change your diaper. Are you still hungry? I’ll feed you one more time. I’ve done all that, why won’t you stop crying? Do you have gas? I’ve been trying to make you burp for an hour. I heard a couple of small burps, even a big one, but you still won’t stop crying.

Please Lord, I just want to sleep.

I didn’t sign up for this.

Parenting is hard. Especially your first. Especially the first three months.

While I believe there is lots we can say about the awesome responsibility and privilege that is raising a child, it drives me beyond insane when I see people overly romanticize parenting; especially those initial three months. You can be told over and over again that parenting is hard, but until you endure it, you can’t truly be shown to an adequate level of understanding what that means. Unless you’ve been through painful, prolonged sleep deprivation, you can’t know what it’s like. You certainly don’t know what it’s like when the reason you can’t sleep is the cries of your child. The cries of this child who has only one way to communicate with the world and it’s through their tears and their silence.

What do those tears mean? That is for you to detect and figure out. Sometimes there is no answer.

May the Lord have mercy on you if your child has colic.

Our first child (we have two) had colic. Hours long, virtually non-stop crying episodes in the middle of the night. How many times I saw my wife, after trying for hours to calm him, would walk out of his room in desperation. Tears spilling out, wondering how she’s possibly going to deal with this one more minute. There was little I could do to support her, other than listen and comfort. I had to work after all, and that requires driving, so I needed my sleep too. At least a modicum of sleep.

That’s not being supportive, some say. You should have taken turns, swapped out and given her a break.

Maybe. Maybe, you’re right. This is the reality of parenthood. Someone does the lions share of child care and one does the lions share of making money so the roof stays over our head, the food stay in the fridge and the oven and lights turn on. Sometimes, this means an unequal distribution of the hard stuff. Don’t get me wrong, there were plenty of early morning drives where I would take our son on a drive, which would settle him. I would take him 15 mins south to the lake. The sun would dawn and we would both sleep. It was exhausting, but I also knew it was giving my wife at least a couple of hours of sleep she desperately needed to get through the day. Then I would go home and sleep. Missing a day of work. I used half my yearly allotment of sick leave in one month.

The first days of your first child can be extremely difficult. Or they could be easy. But, if you tell me they were easy, I’m not going to believe you. If for no other reason than I don’t want to think it could have been easier. The 100 days of hell were just that. We became the living, walking dead. Able to function on an almost primal level, but not much beyond that. Work, when I was able to go to work, because I had had enough sleep and could safely drive, became almost like respite care. A time to get away from the terror of the screamer.

I love my son. And my other son. I learned that you can love someone even though they cause you so much grief and hardship. Intended or not. Love is a choice you make. Every. Single. Day. In those 100 days however, it seemed that the spectrum of time was sharply reduced and it became an hour by hour decision, if not minute by minute.

The reality is that holding a screaming baby close to your chest, puts their mouth right next to your ear, making the screams that much louder and visceral. They cut you to the core. You want to simultaneously fling the baby away from you and at the same time hold them closer. Holding them closer: hoping that you can make them stop if they just feel your breath, your heartbeat, your love a bit more. It doesn’t help. Sometimes love isn’t enough to make someone else’s pain stop.

This is the beginning of compassion.

Compassion is a desire to end someone’s pain, yes. But it is more than that. It is the willingness to sit with them through the pain. To take on some of that burden for yourself. To let them know they are not alone.

Love demands compassion.

In those 100 days, we learned about compassion and devotion. I learned by watching my wife consistently recommit to our son. Bounce. Tears. Bounce. Tears. Repeat. I think that must be God’s cycle sometimes. He teaches, he prods, he pokes. We disobey. God cries. Repeat. Never giving up, never stopping, never imposing.

You can’t impose on a newborn. They don’t know what they’re doing themselves, let along what you want them to do.

I suppose in a way, I was her Aaron to her Moses. I played a supporting role. That doesn’t denigrate fatherhood or manhood. It recognizes the supreme sacrifice that mothers make and the resultant sacrifice fathers must make. Food needs to be made. Bills need to be paid. You know, the necessities of adult life. Just help her get through the next hour. The next day. Eventually those days add up to a week and a month. Then finally, 100 days hits and a switch is flipped.

You start sleeping again. You feel human again. The tears subside. You take a deep breath of relief and start thinking long term again. You’ve made it through survivor without being voted off and now you can get on with the job of raising a family.

Parenting is hard. Don’t let anyone tell you it’s not. You can’t know how hard it is if you don’t have a child, and that’s a good thing. If you knew would you really do it. Parenting is a reflective exercise. Yes, there is planning. Sort of. (Can you hear God laughing?), but it’s ultimately a reflective exercise. So is much of life, I suppose.

If you are not a parent yet, are pregnant or thinking about being pregnant, I want to encourage you. You’re on the rollercoaster as it slowly rises to the top of the first curve. You’re about to drop super fast down that first mountain and you’ll feel like everything is out of control. You will get through it though. Almost every has. Spouses, remember each other. Have each other’s backs. Husbands, remember to “love your wife, just as Christ loved the church”. Support her. Love her. Cry with her. Make sure she knows you’re there for her.

If you have just become a parent and are saying “I didn’t sign up for this”, I say with love “yes you did”. There’s just no way to tell you that in advance. It gets better. It really does. Screw the fairy tales you were told. This is hard stuff. But you will learn so much about yourself, your spouse and God, if you only keep your eyes open and pay attention.

In the end, this is so worth it. Seeing your child grow and develop and learn, is one of the most awe-inspiring things I have ever witnessed or been a part of. My love for my children and my wife, continues to grow and deepen. But, there are the hard bits.

Parenting is amazing, earth shattering, terrible, horrible, and wonderful. All at the same time. Enjoy the ride.

Our Common Responsibility

LAUDATOSIHighResCover300

I’ve recently begun reading through Pope Francis’ recent encyclical Laudato Si (Praised Be To You) with a friend at work. It’s 184 pages, so not a quick read, though the language isn’t very technical (so far), so most of me readers should be able to get through it pretty quick if you want to.

It’s broken up into 9 separate chapters, each covering a different angle. I’m partway through chapter 2, and so far I’m enjoying it immensely. There is much that is challenging in it, comforting, and several things that make me grateful for the Catholic perspective on the issue of creation.

I don’t intend to provide a commentary on the entire letter, but only to highlight some of what my friend and I found of interest. I will post more as it appeals to me.

FOR ALL THE CHURCH
For all the talk that this is the “climate change” encyclical (and it is that), it is much more than that. I would submit that even if you don’t believe humans are contributing to global warming and negative climate change, what he presents should be taken on board by all Christians, as a call to the church universal’s responsibility to the creation, of which it is a part. There is a way in which we are to relate to the rest of creation which is proper and ordered, and the all too common way today, which is disordered.

Quoting Patriarch Bartholomew, who wrote “inasmuch as we all generate small ecological damage”, we are called to acknowledge “our contribution, smaller or greater, to the disfigurement and destruction of creation”. (page 8) Using strong language, which will continue through the document, the Patriarch states that “to commit a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against God”.

Drawing on the life of his name sake, Pope Francis draws on the life of St. Francis of Assisi, who is describes as a “mystic and a pilgrim”, who was particularly concerned with “God’s creation and for the poor and outcast. He loved, and was deeply loved for his joy, his generous self-giving, his openheartedness. ” (page 9).

Deriding our current mechanistic hermeneutic to reading the book of nature, (Pope) Francis, further recounts that (Saint) Francis’ “…response to the world around him was so much more than intellectual appreciation or economic calculus, for to him each and every creature was a sister united to him by bonds of affection. That is why he felt called to care for all that exists. (page 10).

There is much talk of “calling” today. What do I feel called to? To what is God calling me to devote my life? Do we feel called to live in harmony with the rest of the created world, of which we are an integral part? Pope Francis believes our duty is clear: “Because all creatures are connected, each must be cherished with love and respect, for all of us as living creatures are dependent on one another.”

ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY NOT AUTHORITY
We all come from God. Yes, we have been given a unique place in the hierarchy of creation, but that position comes with ultimate responsibility, not ultimate power. It also restricts our power over our fellow creation. Francis connects our humanity with the necessity to fall in plan with God’s plan.

“Authentic human development has a moral character. It presumes full respect for the human person, but it must also be concerned for the world around us and “take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system”.8 Accordingly, our human ability to transform reality must proceed in line with God’s original gift of all that is.” (Page 6)

He further quotes Pope Benedict XVI who wrote “the book of nature is one and indivisible” and that “the deterioration of nature is closely connected to the culture which shapes human coexistence”. We can’t go on living our lives assuming we can do whatever we want, just because we’re human, and think that the impact of those actions, are amoral, or worse, condoned by God.

Our responsibility to the rest of creation, is perhaps first a responsibility to recognize and affirm that all of creation brings glory to God, not just us. We must therefore tread carefully when we impact the ability of the rest of creation to bring glory to the God that created all us. Francis uses quite forceful language when he emphasizes this point: “Because of us, thousands of species will no longer give glory to God by their very existence, nor convey their message to us. We have no such right.” (page 25).

We, rightfully I think, applaud our artisans who create beautiful art and music, but what homage do we pay to the one who created the forests and the sky, the sunrise and sunset? Do we honour the artist by defiling their painting? Do we scrawl our own initials on it, and claim it to be our own? Never. So, why do we do the same with the paintings of God? Do we seek to replace the beauty of God with that which we create? Believing we can best the Creator-God?

Francis observes “We seem to think that we can substitute an irreplaceable and irretrievable beauty with something which we have created ourselves.” (page 26).

We are all part of creation. Our unique and special relationship to God and His creation, is an authority in as much as we have ultimate responsibility, not ultimate authority. As our Lord Christ Jesus teaches us, “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” (Matthew 20:16 NIV).

Becoming too familiar with holy things.

8575241676 54c158c409 z

 

I just finished reading a wonderful spiritual reflection by an Episcopal priest, Marcus Halley, on why he has started wearing his cassock again. It’s beautifully written and although it is mainly of interest to his fellow Priests, he asks a question that’s important to all of us: Are we becoming too familiar with holy things?

Halley writes:

The Eucharist became another “task,” something else “to do” on a Sunday morning as we priests, the “professionally religious,” engage the hundreds of people who come to Church looking for something – peace, joy, community, love, fulfillment, coffee.  It became a ritual in the worst sense – a habit that I was too familiar with. That Sunday morning when I stood before God’s altar, holding the bread and wine that still seemed to me to be just bread and just wine, I had a moment when I wanted to cry because despite my best effort, I had become too familiar with holy things.

As a former pastor and now, sometimes small group leader, there’s nothing I enjoy more than leading communion. I think it’s one of the most amazing gifts the church has been given. It’s a mystery, it’s wonder, it’s basic, it’s deep, it’s… Something only God could construct.

Even if you don’t subscribe to a sacramental understand and prefer the term ordinance, the question is still valid. Do you take your Bible for granted, do you take the Church and other Christians for granted? How about your baptismal call? How about the death on the cross and resurrection of our Lord? How about your salvation and the leading of The Spirit, working in and through your life? Do you take the very existence of your faith for granted? Is it so well worn that it is no longer new?

Like Fr. Halley’s professor said, we must “always … be on our guard against becoming “too familiar” with holy things.

Fr. Halley found renewal in taking his eucharistic preparation more seriously.  It helped him renew his call as a Priest. How can you renew your baptismal call to live out the resurrection everyday, to be a witness to the Gospel and to seek the leadership of the Holy Spirit daily. Are there aspects of belief that are a little dried up and needs the living water of our Lord to renew them? 

Seek the LORD and his strength; seek his face continually.
Psalm 105:4
 

Race and Privilege Resources

Violence top copacabana

I’ve created this post to try and curate the best articles, podcasts, etc, that I come across that address the concepts of race, white privilege, etc. As my time is extremely limited, I don’t pretend that this is an exhaustive list. It is sadly limited by my network. Thankfully, my network includes some pretty smart folks. If you have any suggestions for recourses to add, let me know and I’ll consider them.

Podcasts

  • Drew GI Hart: On Race, the Church, Anabaptism, and Black Theology, Seminary Dropout podcast
    (recorded long before Ferguson, etc, but still a good listen about undercover racism. Plus, Drew’s just cool to listen too).
  • Kyle Canty: On Privilege, Ferguson, and History, Seminary Dropout podcast

Videocast

Blogs

  • What my bike has taught me about white privilege by A little more sauce
    A good analogy helping to explain why “privileged” doesn’t mean you’re (necessarily) racist. The analogy isn’t perfect, but it’s a good start.
  • Mennonerds on Ferguson
    I have not read most of these articles, but they are a good collection from some honest folks (both black and white) trying to do their best to wrestle with the issues
  • Thoughts on Ferguson by Voddie Baucham
    This article has become both popular and controversial. I post some posts that respond below

That’s it for now. Let me know if you know of any others.

It’s so freaking obvious (or, it’s not)!

Baptism

Anabaptists are fond of saying that they read the plain meaning of scripture first, before we try to do any gymnastics to explain what a verse means or doesn’t mean. Oh, and we don’t start with our theological teleology and back the truck up into our reading of scripture either; no never. This sounds well and good and noble, but sometimes I really wonder how much this holds up.

Take this verse for instance: 1 Peter 3:21

ESV
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

NIV
and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also–not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

KJV
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

The thing it corresponds to, is Noah and his ark safely conveying people and animals through the flood waters to safety. It is, of course, historical anabaptist doctrine that baptism is only for those who profess faith in Christ and that it is an outward sign of something that God has already done on the inside. In other words, it has no actual metaphysical effect on the believer.

In that context, I’ve always struggled with 1 Peter 3:21. On plain reading, it clearly seems to be saying that baptism is salvific (having a direct metaphysical connection to salvation). “Baptism, which now saves you”. It’s really hard for me to see how we didn’t read our theology back into this verse. The explanation of how why this IS NOT actually making a connection between water baptism and salvation seem to me, at times, to be gymnastics worthy of the Olympics.

First, a selection of perspectives, found in various commentaries and the Church Fathers (sorry, some of these selections are quite lengthy).

First:Baptism has no real efficacy:

From the New American Commentary:
The typological thrust of the text is now specifically stated, expressed in the NIV by the verb “symbolizes,” though in the Greek the word is a noun that could be translated as “type” or “pattern” (antitypon; cf. Heb 9:24). The water that deluged the world in Noah’s day and through which Noah was saved functions as a model or pattern for Christian believers.324 But to what is the water related in the new covenant? The answer is baptism.

From the Holman New Testament Commentary
Verse 21 has also generated great debate. This writer believes that Peter used the historical account of Noah and his family as an analogy for the triumphant salvation provided through Christ. His reference to baptism, however, is not water baptism. The flood waters did not save Noah—quite the opposite. The waters of the flood destroyed everyone in judgment. Noah passed through those waters safely because he and his family were placed securely in the ark. Water baptism does not fit the picture and is not the point.

The point of the analogy becomes clear when we recall that when a person accepts Jesus Christ as personal Savior, he or she is placed into “the body of Christ.” At that moment the Holy Spirit enters that person’s life as a permanent resident. This action is described in the New Testament as “the baptism of the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor. 12:13). This is Peter’s emphasis. When you accept Christ, you are placed spiritually in Christ. As this occurs, you stand before God with a “good conscience” (v. 21) because your sins have been forgiven. Water baptism does not provide a person with a clear conscience before God; baptism by the Holy Spirit does.

Second: An attempt at a middle ground

From the Crossway Classic Commentary on 1, 2 Peter
That baptism has power is expressly stated: baptism that now saves you. What kind of power this is, is equally clear from the way it is here expressed. It is not by a natural force of the element. Even when it is used sacramentally it can only wash away the dirt of the body, as its physical power reaches no further. But since it is in the hand of the Spirit of God, as other sacraments are and as the Word itself is, it can purify the conscience and convey grace and salvation to the soul through its reference to and union with what it represents. It saves by the pledge of a good conscience toward God, and that by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Thus, we have a true account of this power, and so of other sacraments, and we find the error of two extremes. First, that of those who ascribe too much to them, as if they worked through a natural, inherent value and carried grace in them inseparably. Second, the error of those who ascribe too little to them, making them only signs and badges of our profession. Signs they are, but more than signs that merely represent something. They are the means exhibiting and seals confirming grace to the faithful. But the working of faith and the conveying of Christ into the soul are not put into them to accomplish in themselves but are still in the supreme hand that appointed them. God causes the souls of his own to receive these seals of his with faith and makes them effectual to confirm the faith that receives them in this way. They are then, in a word, neither empty signs to those who believe, nor effectual causes of grace to those who do not believe.

Third: Baptism is efficacious

According to: Ambrose of Milan. “On the Mysteries” and the Treatise “On the Sacraments.”
Therefore, when the Lord saw that the transgressions of mankind were multiplied, he saved the righteous one alone with his offspring, but he bade the water rise even above the mountains. And therefore, in that flood all corruption of the flesh perished, only the family and pattern of the righteous survived. Is not the flood the same thing as baptism, whereby all sins are washed away, only the mind and grace of the righteous is revived?

According to: St. Cyprian, The Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle LXXV
2. But that the Church is one, the Holy Spirit declares in the Song of Songs, saying, in the person of Christ, “My dove, my undefiled, is one; she is the only one of her mother, she is the choice one of her that bare her.” Concerning which also He says again, “A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring sealed up, a well of living water.”9 But if the spouse of Christ, which is the Church, is a garden enclosed; a thing that is closed up cannot lie open to strangers and profane persons. And if it is a fountain sealed, he who, being placed without has no access to the spring, can neither drink thence nor be sealed. And the well also of living water, if it is one and the same within, he who is placed without cannot be quickened and sanctified from that water of which it is only granted to those who are within to make any use, or to drink. Peter also, showing this, set forth that the Church is one, and that only they who are in the Church can be baptized; and said, “In the ark of Noah, few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water; the like figure where-unto even baptism shall save you;” proving and attesting that the one ark of Noah was a type of the one Church. If, then, in that baptism of the world thus expiated and purified, he who was not in the ark of Noah could be saved by water, he who is not in the Church to which alone baptism is granted, can also now be quickened by baptism. Moreover, too, the Apostle Paul, more openly and clearly still manifesting this same thing, writes to the Ephesians, and says, “Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water.”2 But if the Church is one which is loved by Christ, and is alone cleansed by His washing, how can he who is not in the Church be either loved by Christ, or washed and cleansed by His washing?

Next, from First and Second Peter, Jude: Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture
21–22 Stepping aside from his narrative of Christ’s journey, Peter now applies the waters of the flood to us: This prefigured baptism, which saves you now. This is the only explicit reference to baptism in 1 Peter, though baptismal imagery and themes are found throughout the letter (1:3, 22–23; 2:1–3). The syntax of this verse is extremely complicated, and scholars continue to debate how to render it appropriately in English. Yet all agree that the meaning is fairly clear. “Prefigured” translates a rare word in the Bible that indicates here a divinely ordained correspondence between the waters of the flood and the waters of baptism. What happened to Noah is similar to what happens to us, and we can learn about our baptism by understanding Noah’s passage through the waters of the flood. What then is Peter saying? Just as Noah and his family were saved from death by passing through the waters of the flood, so we are saved from sin by passing through the waters of baptism. In both Noah’s case and ours God himself is the true cause of salvation, but the waters are the instrument through which salvation comes.

Peter goes on to clarify that baptism is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a clear conscience. It is not perfectly clear what Peter means by this contrast. He seems to be saying that baptism does not consist in cleansing the body from dirt (literally, “filth”) but in our appeal to God to give us a “clear conscience.”
A “clear conscience” (literally, a “good conscience,” the same as in 3:16) is similar in meaning to a pure heart; that is, those who have a clear conscience are morally upright and pure. By submitting to the waters of baptism we purify our souls (1:22) by asking God to cleanse us within. It is God’s power that brings about a “clear conscience,” but by actively submitting to baptism we make an appeal to God to accomplish this in our hearts. Some scholars believe that “appeal” is better translated as “pledge,” such that baptism is “the pledge of a good conscience toward God” (NIV). In this interpretation, we are not making an appeal to God to give us a clear conscience but are pledging ourselves to live with a clear conscience in an upright way. Both senses are true: baptism includes our appeal to God and our commitment to him.

In a final phrase Peter shows that the true power for salvation comes through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is not the water itself that saves, and even less our appeal or commitment to God; it is God who saves us through the resurrection of Christ

Finally, we can’t conclude such a brief outline of views, without quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1094:
It is on this harmony of the two Testaments that the Paschal catechesis of the Lord is built, and then, that of the Apostles and the Fathers of the Church. This catechesis unveils what lay hidden under the letter of the Old Testament: the mystery of Christ. It is called “typological” because it reveals the newness of Christ on the basis of the “figures” (types) which announce him in the deeds, words, and symbols of the first covenant. By this re-reading in the Spirit of Truth, starting from Christ, the figures are unveiled.16 Thus the flood and Noah’s ark prefigured salvation by Baptism, as did the cloud and the crossing of the Red Sea. Water from the rock was the figure of the spiritual gifts of Christ, and manna in the desert prefigured the Eucharist, “the true bread from heaven.”

Now, back to Sacred Scripture: There is this particularly odd verse from Ephesians: “25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,”

So, now baptism is connected to preaching?

Ok, I’m tired just thinking about it now. Truthfully, I’m less concerned about “what” baptism does, as I am the clear necessity for it. I am often distressed at the length of time it seems to take professing Christians to be baptized (if they have not already been as infants and therefore they may legitimately be struggling with the decision to be re-baptized).

… But, that’s for another post.

Essentially, the point of this post was to point out that there is valid diversity of opinion, and that the “plain” reading of Scripture is maybe not os plain after all. Let’s give each other some grace as we work through these things.

Increase Your Saltiness

Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in your sight, O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.

In the passage before the one we heard today, Jesus was teaching his disciples the beatitudes: Blessed are the poor, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness. He tells us to Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven...

Those who do the blessings are his people, his church. If we stop being salty, that is, if we stop being and acting like His people who spread and teach the Gospel of Love, then we are like salt mixed with other impure substances. We will, as the Gospel of Luke tells us, become “of no use either for the soil or for the manure pile. It is thrown away”.

A world class chef works hard to put just the right mix of spices on his food, so it tastes exactly right. Then when the food comes out to the guest, someone who doesn’t know better, may immediately pick up the salt or pepper and throw it on the food, completely destroying what the Chef intended the food to taste like.

God wants his people to taste a certain way. He keeps it simple to understand, but in a way that will take a lifetime to comprehend: which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” … . You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbour as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

As Jesus says he didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. The law properly understood is Love. Love the Lord your God with everything you are, and love your neighbour as you would love yourself. The more you love, the more salty you become. The more you study the words of God, the more time you spend with him in prayer, the more you come to know him and the more you will radiate his light to a dark and hurting world.

Jesus is the light of the world and just as one flame lit all these candles behind me, the flame of the holy sprit lives in each of us and reflects the love of Christ to the world around us. Do not hide this love from anyone, not a single person. It is easy to love someone who loves you, or at least doesn’t annoy you. To love one who appears undeserving of your love is an act that is only possible through divine intervention. Allow the love of Christ to flow through you to each other. While you are here in this place, recovering, I encourage you to do things that will increase your saltiness. Comfort each other, pray with and for each other, and study God’s words if you can get a Bible. Jesus says we ARE the salt and we ARE light. We are to be salt and light where we are right now today, not just some day one day.

You are all here for different reasons, but you can all show the love of Christ while you’re here. Show each other what it means to love and to be loved by Jesus.

Amen.

We’re moving

Hello everyone:

As I’ve mentioned several times, this blog is ceasing to exist. Instead, I’m merging this blog with my other blog and creating a whole new experience. Come over and visit me at Discipling the Body. This blog will continue to exist for posterity’s sake, but I will no longer update it.

Thanks for your patronage and I hope you’ll follow me over at the new space.

Blessings,

Andrew