Occasio

Christian love amidst hate and neglect

The news today is sobering, especially after hearing and reflecting on Pastor James Bergen’s sermon from yesterday at North Fresno Church. Our congregation is in a series on 1 John and it’s hard to miss the point. It’s the Gospel in tweets:

Truths so simply put, they’re nearly impossible to fulfill. That’s the irony of the upside down kingdom.

Dear friends, let us continue to love one another, for love comes from God. Anyone who loves is a child of God and knows God. But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love.  (I John 4:7-8)

I learned these verses as a kid and even sang them as a camp song. But the older I get, the more difficult these fundamental principles become. Count up the “one another” statements in the New Testament—there’s 47, all encouraging love, forgiveness, service, compassion, honesty, fellowship, patience and more. Love is the means by which God presents himself and his mission to the world. We are the conduits through which that love flows, not just to those who reciprocate love back to us, but to everyone.

So, the news this morning was a slap in the face. Hate and neglect still surface and raise their ugly heads.

In Texas, two gunmen stormed a meeting yesterday, opening fire and injuring a security guard. These jihadists, in turn, were killed by police. That’s a terrible situation and I’m glad others weren't hurt or killed. I imagine these gunmen were filled with rage, but they weren't the only haters at the scene. The meeting they were interrupting was an anti-Islamic gathering where participants had the chance to win $10,000 by entering cartoons they had drawn of Muhammad (an act of blasphemy for Muslims). The organizer, Pamela Geller, planned this event specifically to draw out and taunt the Muslim community. The British government has classified Geller’s organization as a hate group. Promoted as a “free speech” event, it was clearly nothing less than an act of disdain and ridicule. Unfortunately, many Christians and church leaders have taken similar approaches, holding aggressively hostile positions against Islam.

Closer to home, there’s more devastating news out today. A new study appearing in the New York Times lists “The Best and Worst Places to Grow Up,” noting that “Fresno County is extremely bad for income mobility for children in poor families. It is among the worst counties in the U.S.” The county I live in ranks 97^th out of 2,478, which means it’s at the bottom 4% of all counties in America, receiving poor scores in five areas: less segregation by income and race, lower levels of income inequality, better schools, lower rates of violent crime, and a larger share of two-parent households. In short, children who are born into poverty in Fresno County have very little chance of ever escaping the cycle. Sadly, many churches are either complacent or ignorant about the situation.

God is love. He loves us. We ought to love others.

Christians are not called to hate or intentionally defame and deride others. Rather than protest against Muslims, we might be more productive—and strengthen our witness—by finding projects we can partner in together and by practicing hospitality. And, similarly, Christians can't afford to default to ignorance. The prophets continually blasted God’s people for their neglect of those who were powerless and suffering: the widow, the orphan and the foreigner in their midst. If every one of the more than 500 churches in Fresno reached out in a spirit of service to one of the 80 nearby elementary schools, children trapped in poverty would have a much better chance of escaping the bleak destiny that's already been charted out for them. Think of all the tutoring, caring and nurturing that could happen! It’s a simple equation: love + time/effort = change.

Defaulting either to hate or neglect is unconscionable for the Christian community. We can and should do better than that. The letter of 1 John doesn't allow for any other options.

A new opportunity for church growth: will we miss it?

There’s more proof out this week that North American culture continues to shift, transforming both church and society. Specifically, several recent studies reveal how multiculturalism is shaping Christian community, and also being ignored by it.

Take Britain for example. Christianity has been in decline there for decades, as is evidenced in dwindling church attendance. The phenomena is well documented and often interpreted as a foreshadow of America’s own future. Indeed, a Pew study from 2012 reveals that, for the first time in our country’s history, Protestantism is no longer the majority faith tradition and, conversely, there has been a steady rise in the “unaffiliated” (those who don’t identify with any organized religion).

Back to Britain. Though there have been catastrophic losses for the Church of England, the trend seems to be reversing, but not in a way that anyone could have predicted. A survey of London has revealed a significant increase in church participation between 2005, when average weekly attendance was 620,000, and 2013, when it had risen to 720,000. That is an astounding growth of 17 percent!

What could be happening here? Are the church growth strategies inherited from the ‘80s finally paying off? Have Anglicans been working overtime to attract more parishioners? Have evangelicals been creatively proselytizing?

The recent increase doesn’t seem to be the result of any innovative growth strategy. In fact, data shows that the “Fresh Expressions” campaign, initiated a decade ago to revitalize the Church of England (and now popular in the U.S.), hasn’t curbed the decline in attendance. It appears that pouring resources into new forms of evangelism and progressive church plants hasn’t been any more effective than traditional church structures. There are actually fewer self-described Christians in London now than ever before.

No, the rise of church attendance in London isn’t due to a strategic initiative carefully crafted by the established church, but rather, it has come through a surprising means – immigration. As London has grown into a global city, it has also become the home to Christians from all over the world, including Filipino Catholics, Brazilian Pentecostals, Caribbean evangelicals, African charismatics and more. With 40 percent of the city's population born outside of Britain, Sunday morning worship can be found in many different languages, representing a host of ethnic groups.

The conclusion is startling – church attendance in London is on the uprise because Christians from all over the globe are settling there and establishing strong, committed worship gatherings.

And don’t forget: what happens in Britain is a sign of our own future in America.

But are American churchgoers ready for the influx of other global Christians and their unique forms of worship?

The American Values Atlas (AVA) released new data this week revealing the attitudes of Christians in the U.S. by affiliation. The study asked 50,000 Americans about their perception of immigration. Overall, 55 percent of respondents said that immigrants “strengthen” the country, and 36 percent reported that they create a “burden,” signaling that a majority of Americans view immigration positively. But a big revelation came when the AVA disaggregated the data by religious affiliation. Though the vast majority of Americans see the issue favorably, there was one religious group shown to think negatively of immigration. Only one.

White evangelicals reported the exact opposite of the national average, with 56 percent responding that immigrants are a “burden” and 36 percent indicating “strengthen.” Every other religious affiliation was more favorable than not toward immigrants.

Additionally, one other finding of the AVA is relevant here. In line with national trends, evangelicalism is becoming less white. While 66 percent of all evangelicals are non-Hispanic whites, only 52 percent of those under 30 are. In just a few years, there will not be any majority ethnic religious group in the U.S.

My friend and colleague, Dr. Darren Duerksen, teaches in intercultural studies at Fresno Pacific University and agrees with the recent findings:

It’s an amazing reality that has also come to the U.S. A friend of mine in New Jersey says that churches in his area would completely be on the decline except for immigrant congregations. And churches like the Nigerian Redeemed Christian Church of God in North America don't want to remain an "immigrant church." They have a strong vision for reaching out to the communities around them and becoming multiethnic churches. Many incredible lessons here...

There are, indeed, many lessons to be learned from the globalization of Christianity in the West. I can think of several.

1. North America continues on a trend toward multiculturalism and the U.S. will look less and less white in the coming years.
2. Generally a favorable issue, a majority of Americans think immigrants will help strengthen our society.
3. The only religiously-affiliated group that looks at immigration negatively is white evangelicals, who are driven politically and theologically to oppose reform, even though they only make up 18 percent of the total population.
4. Growth in church attendance and commitment will likely not come through existing institutional structures or strategic plans, but by the influx of foreign believers who have very different theology and worship practices than American Christians.

One final note of caution seems appropriate. In all of our efforts to counter declining church attendance, it’s possible that we will unknowingly miss the work that God wants to do in us through the arrival of immigrant churches. American Christians have long prayed for revitalization. Nearly every denomination is investing huge amounts of money and resources to plant churches. Amazingly, the very thing we’ve been praying for may now be on our doorstep.

I pray, as a white evangelical, that we won’t miss the movement of God – or worse yet, stand in opposition to it. No doubt, we will be uncomfortable with new colors, smells, traditions and foods, but a fresh movement of Spirit always comes with disruption.

Get ready to be disrupted.

The Most Dangerous Place for Christians

A few months ago, I stared into the night sky with excitement and expectation. With the clock striking midnight, I propped my young son up on a stepstool to peer through a small telescope, and we reveled in the totality of our first lunar eclipse together. But as the Earth’s shadow slowly crept across the surface of the moon, I was reminded of an important lesson for today’s North American church.

Long before we actually see the effects of a lunar eclipse, the event officially begins with a stage known as a “penumbral eclipse,” roughly a one-hour period when the moon enters the Earth’s shadow, but not completely enough to see its outline on the lunar surface. At best, a faint dimming can be viewed during this in-between phase. Soon, the distinct edge of the Earth’s shadow can be seen, and after moving through totality, the eclipse again ends with penumbral stage in reverse.

THE CHRISTIAN PENUMBRA

It’s the penumbral portion of the eclipse that has me thinking about the current context of religious faith in America. Author Ross Douthat has spoken of the “Christian Penumbra” as a precarious place of loose affiliation and quasi loyalties. It’s in this place that people identify with a specific faith tradition, but engage in very few practices of that tradition. This shadowy grey space is the place where lifestyle and belief are out of sync with one another.

Recent research has shown that a half-hearted commitment to Christianity—what many researchers are calling “nominal” Christianity—causes more harm than good, even to the point that it might be better to have no faith affiliation at all than to have a casual one. For example, divorce rates for nominal Christians are higher than those of both committed Christians and non-Christians. The same can be said of out-of-wedlock births.

This penumbral effect of Christianity might also explain why the Bible Belt of America contains nine out of ten of the “most religious states” and nine out of ten of the “top Bible-minded cities,” but still has nine out of ten of the least happy states in America and only three of the 20 “healthiest cities” in in the country. It’s here, too, that some of the nation’s worst poverty, health, racism and political corruption can be found. The question arises: Why are the most “Christian” states some of the most unfulfilling places to live? Some researchers are suggesting that residents of these states have a high level of identification with Christianity but not much commitment to Christian practice and lifestyle.

The in-between spaces of Christianity—not quite in the shadow of the faith and not quite clear of it—can be a very detrimental place to live.

RIGID CHURCHES DON’T NECESSARILY CREATE MORE FAITHFUL BELIEVERS

To further complicate the matter, it’s important to consider the role of diversity and religious pluralism. We might conclude, based on the previous information about the negative effects of lukewarm belief, that what’s needed is more doctrinally defined and ethically rigorous churches. Greater loyalty and conformity would surely counter the penumbral effect by requiring increased commitment and participation. Or would they?

It is well known among researchers that strict churches tend to have strong, engaged memberships, and that the strictness of any organization fosters commitment and increases participation. But a highly structured community does not guarantee a healthy one (if that were true, then cults would be the most healthy of all communities). In addition, the more rigidly a community is structured, the more likely it tends toward conformity and homogeneity, and these characteristics come with an unexpected downside: members don’t get along with people who are unlike them.

Journalist Emma Green has reported that countries with less religious diversity tend to be the most violent. The more homogeneous a country is, the more likely it will be embroiled in violence; that’s true for both Muslim and Christian nations. Conversely, the same study verified that religious pluralism and diversity help create peaceful societies. It might seem counterintuitive, but inflexible doctrine and spiritual conformity do not lead to peace and stability.

THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE

The most dangerous place for Christians to live is in the grey area of the penumbra, that lukewarm, shallow space between belief and practice where people claim loyalty to a faith tradition but do not live out the beliefs of that tradition. The corrective, however, is not greater enforcement of doctrine or commitment to narrow, rigidm, homogeneous communities.

C.S. Lewis’s Screwtape advised his demon apprentice Wormood, “A moderated religion is as good for us as no religion at all—and more amusing.” So true. Amidst a crisis of declining church attendance and half-hearted faith expressions, what might be need most of all is highly-motivated, faithful Christian communities of varying political, social, cultural and theological traditions, who match action with belief, and work for peace in a diverse kingdom.

 

Words hurt, especially urban teens

The recent weekend retreat to Hume Lake Christian Camps didn’t end well for a group of urban Fresno teens. Coming home from their “mountain high”—a time of bonding, mentoring and worshiping with 800 other junior high and high school students—an inner-city youth group was on a bus that experienced mechanical difficulties. At some point on the long descent from 7000 feet, the bus driver attempted to pull over on a dirt turnout. Two things happened nearly simultaneously at this point. First, the driver misjudged the length of the turnout and the bus lurched as the front bumper came to rest on the hillside. Next, the cabin began to fill with smoke from brakes that had been overheating for quite some time. Scared and frightened, one teen opened the emergency exit in the ceiling thinking that the students were in a bona fide emergency (as they had been instructed to do at the start of their journey by the bus driver). Understandably, other students began to panic. Fortunately, there were no injuries and the bus was not damaged.

While that may have resulted in a traumatic experience for the teens, the mechanical problems were not the primary issue in ruining the weekend for this youth group. Further complicating the matter, KMPH posted an inaccurate “breaking” report of the story on their Facebook page, causing far more damage than a minor bus mishap.

The news organization errantly reported that a “crash” was “caused when driver was distracted by unruly teens trying to open escape door while bus was in motion,” and then in a later post that an “unruly teen trying to open an escape door distracted the driver and contributed to the wreck.” Such reporting amounted to nothing more than hearsay; it was erroneous and falsely accused innocent teens of causing the bus to “wreck.”

But that still isn’t the worst part. The urban teens implicated in the story were upset that they were being blamed (in an age of instantaneous news feeds, they were able to follow along on Facebook in real-time), but they were devastated when the comments on the post began to stream in.

• “That Dam kid should b[e] punished for distracting the driver and causing the incident.”
• “It was the teens fault that caused him to have the accident the teen needs to pay for all the damage he caused !!!!!!!!”
• “I Pray His Parents Put the 'Fear of GOD' into that Snot Nosed Punk Child!!!”
• “He shouldn't be trusted. Proverbs 23:13, Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die."
• “The kid should pay for EVERYTHING - little bully, should be extreme punishment minus prison.”

There’s more. A lot more. Many comments worse than the ones above, full of curses and condemnation. I’m sickened by them.

Due to KMPH’s irresponsible reporting, and the hundreds of negative comments that ensued, a group of urban teens were demoralized, stereo-typed and falsely accused. In my opinion, this is nothing short of bullying, and completely undeserved.

“What’s the harm?” many might ask (including KMPH when they were confronted with the inaccurate reporting). The harm comes in this: these kids are growing up in one of the toughest, most under-resourced, at-risk neighborhoods in Fresno, and the way they were treated on Facebook reinforces the negative view of life that they already have. They are at a disadvantage in so many ways. They don’t have the resources of nice schools, fine arts, well-stocked grocery stores, the latest up-to-date movie theaters, opulent libraries and so on. They are at risk of joining gangs, becoming pregnant and dropping out of school. They don’t have transportation, discretionary spending money or stable home environments.

But they do have something many middle-class Facebook readers and commenters don’t have. They have community, hope, faith, family and love. I know these kids (the actual kids that were on the bus). They smile, they laugh, they sing, they dance, they create, they overcome. I hang out with them intentionally because I know that they have much to teach me about my own faith. They inspire me to be a better person.

They live in a place where neighbors watch out for each other’s kids, where whole neighborhoods celebrate holidays together, where people of many cultures reside in harmony and where the best tacos in Fresno are sold on nearly every street corner (Yum!). When violence shows up on their block, these teens band together, stand strong and endure, again and again and again. They engage life head on. They surmount adversities that would cripple that average teenager. They are real heroes to me.

Words hurt. Negative words especially hurt adolescents who have been continually bombarded by accusations and stereotypes. At such a formative stage of development, negative messages repeated over and over tend to impair the identity of a teenager.

But words can also be used to bless. We need to use words that bless our youth not bring them down. And when we have the chance to encourage teens who have grown up hearing mostly curses and condemnations, let’s not assume the worst about them but rather work hard to counter negative influences with words of hope, affirmation and love.

For one group of urban teens, the damage has been done. Unfortunately, they may remember the hurtful words associated with a bus trip more than the positive, spirit-filled words of a weekend retreat. But I still have hope. These are good kids—really good kids—and I believe in them. We just desperately need more people to believe.

What belongs in the church?

There's been a fantastic discussion going on my church's Facebook page the last few days (https://www.facebook.com/groups/8466882591/). The issue at hand emerges from a sermon that Pastor James Bergen and environmental activist Tom Cotter presented on Sunday morning. The two made the case for creation care as a form of biblical stewardship. While this could be a bit controversial, and hopefully provocative, for an evangelical/Anabaptist church like mine, the discussion has primarily centered on a secondary issue.

Ten environmentally conscious organizations set up displays in the foyer and encouraged people to consider options like recycling, solar power and bike riding. Some of the congregants felt uncomfortable with what could be perceived as "vendors" in church. Furthermore, it was hard for some to make a biblical connection to these "non-Christian" activists. The general question raised has to do with what is or is not appropriate to bring into the church. It's a great issue to consider.

One of the very large dilemmas Christians face is deciding whether something is Christian or not. We might want to say something should be kept out of the church because it is secular/non-Christian. But that presents at least three problems.

First, someone has to be the judge of what is Christian and what is not. What would be the test? In the case of inviting representatives from agencies, should we ask them whether they have made personal decisions to follow Christ? I know people who work for Planned Parenthood, an agency that would not be considered Christian by many, who would certainly identify themselves followers of Jesus. And I know some self-proclaimed Christian authors and artists who many faithful would regard as heretical. So it's a very big problem to start saying who is and who isn't a Christian and therefore allowed in the church.

For me, the scariest part of this dilemma is that the specific fault Jesus was continually accused of is that he hung out with irreligious people: tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, sinners. The danger here is that I might be missing the very people God wants me to interact with because I view them as secular, irreligious or non-Christian.

Second, if by some process we can determine what things/people/agencies are Christian or not, and we commit to excluding those that we decide are non-Christian, we're going to have to throw all kinds of stuff out of our churches. Start by tossing the Christmas tree, which has a long history of pagan ritual usage. Then head over to the guitars and drums, invented explicitly for use in secular music. Even the organ has its origins in the ancient Greeks. The church building itself was first a secular court house (basilica) in the time of Constantine. Finally, the cross, the most heinous, cruel and secular symbol of the Roman Empire, would need to be removed. The history of the Christian church is replete with similar examples. Maybe the church is exactly the place where symbols of the world collide with the truth of the Creator.

Finally, I wonder what the representatives of the environmental organizations thought about our invitation to participate in the service. I wonder if they've been invited to many other churches. Or, have they been rejected by churches enough that they have a negative impression of Christianity? I hope they saw on Sunday a congregation of grace, one that cares for them and the whole of creation. Maybe for that reason alone some of them will be back to worship with us. Maybe they'll find a God in our church they never new existed.

It's wonderful to have conversations about the spiritual nature of things. I hope that these conversations will not divide us, but rather drive us to a broader understanding of our diversity in Christ. This probably says a lot about my values system, but I'll favor grace over exclusion every time. Which means I would never opt to kick someone out if they disagreed with me. :-)

The handwriting is on the wall: mene, mene, tekel, parsin

I’m thinking about Daniel on this Election Day. Daniel, the young Hebrew who was taken into Babylonian captivity, served in the court of King Nebuchadnezzar and then King Belshazzar. There are many stories about Daniel—his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams, his ordeal in the lion’s den, his apocalyptic visions—the oddest of which includes an encounter with a disembodied hand and some cryptic writing on a wall.

In Daniel 5, we are told that King Belshazzar hosted a feast in which he desecrated the sacred vessels once used for temple worship in Jerusalem. At this banquet, a ghoulish hand appeared and began to write on the wall: “mene, mene, tekel, parsin” (loosely meaning: numbered, weighed, divided). After the king’s advisors failed to interpret the mysterious phrase, Daniel was called on to help.

Daniel immediately interpreted the inscription as an indictment of Belshazzar. His explanation is found in 5:25-26,

Here is what these words mean:
Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.
Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.
Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.

The chapter continues, “That very night Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians, was slain, and Darius the Mede took over the kingdom” (5:30). It was the end of an empire.

This is a great story for Election Day because it reminds me of two things.

First, regardless of who wins the presidential election, the days of any leader’s earthly reign are numbered. Presidents, princes and prime ministers are temporal officials, all subject to removal. Tomorrow, November 7, we’ll know who will lead this country for the next four years. After that, who can tell? In a very short time we’ll hear of politicking in Iowa and Ohio, we’ll weigh the validity of parties and candidates and we’ll decide who will be given the next chance to run the earthly empire called America.

Second, I’m reminded that God’s kingdom is very different than those of nations and states. “God has numbered the days of your reign.” Earthly kingdoms are temporal. Kingdoms rise, and kingdoms fall. But God’s kingdom is eternal. The “now and not yet” has already come, is coming in an ongoing way and will continue to come, regardless of who is elected. Daniel’s role in the empire of his day is also worth paying attention to. He engaged the court and served the king, but he never abandoned his Hebrew heritage. Daniel refused to capitulate to the king or surrender his identity as a member of God’s kingdom. In fact, he very quickly spoke truth to power, an act that could have meant his death. Thus the tension: how to live as members of a nonpolitical eternal kingdom while participating in an earthly one. Daniel is one of my heroes in this regard.

The handwriting is on the wall. Whether it’s Obama or Romney, the days are numbered. Not so with God. What a grand kingdom we have the opportunity to be a part of. The King of all kings is active and working for the advancement of his kingdom in ways that political pundits and strategists will never understand.

A declining church in a spiritual culture

Here is a teaser for an article I just wrote for "Scholars Speak," a series of editorials by Fresno Pacific University professors.

A declining interest in religion has been well documented, but a recent survey by the Pew Forum signals the trend is accelerating. For the first time, less than half of the U.S. population considers itself Protestant. Just 40 years ago, Protestants could boast an affiliation with two- thirds of the country.
 
The number of those who don't identify with any faith tradition has also skyrocketed. Forty years ago only 7 percent of the country reported no religious affiliation. That number rose to 15 percent five years ago, and today almost 20 percent of Americans declare they are unaffiliated with any religion.
 
The culture, however, is not as secularized as we might conclude. Of those who don't claim any religious tradition, two-thirds believe in God, one-fifth pray every day and over half think of themselves as religious or spiritual. What is going on? How do we make sense of a trend toward religious disaffiliation while living in a highly spiritual culture?

Want to read the rest of the article? Follow this link.

Why I think "Why I hate religion but love Jesus" is dangerous

To all my friends who have been disillusioned by church, have been hurt by organized Christianity, or have given up on religion, please don’t jump on the “I hate religion” bandwagon.

Within the last few days, a video by Jefferson Bethke labeled “Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus” has had over seven million views on YouTube. That’s quite stunning. Comments on Facebook about this video show that countless people identify with the sentiment that “religion is bad” and “Jesus is good.” I have numerous friends who have been judged, ostracized or treated unfairly by the church. I understand the pain that can come from these experiences.

I, myself, have been confronted, questioned, censored, and banned for challenging assumptions and suggesting solutions to problems within the church (here and throughout this post I’m referring to the church as a whole, not my local congregation). In fact, I’ve been placed on a “watch list” and know that some people will be reading this in an effort to keep an eye on me (peace and grace to you all). All of this has caused a significant amount of pain for me and my family. If anyone has a right to bash institutional religion, it’s me.

A common response when wronged by the church is to condemn the church and then withdraw from organized religion. But this is not the way forward. Isolation, dislocation, fear and hate of anything will not help anyone become a better follower of Christ. Unfortunately, it’s far easier to walk away from and condemn something than it is to stay and help make a change.

So, though I have a pretty consistent (and I think valid) critique of institutionalized Christianity, here are some reasons why I think a “why I hate religion but love Jesus” approach is simplistic, unbiblical and even dangerous.

1. It is not possible to have a belief system without religion. An organized religion is a framework for understanding a particular faith, and includes beliefs, values and practices. A religion creates a whole culture in which one lives and worships. The notion that someone can have Jesus without having religion is a bit like the person who wants a contemporary music-driven worship service because he or she doesn’t like liturgy. Yet even the most charismatic and spirit-led church undoubtedly follows a pattern for worship that is repeated again and again on a weekly basis. This is precisely what a liturgy is—a way of “doing” church. Religion is a way of “doing” faith. It is the system which allows faith to be expressed and passed on to all of its adherents. Religion can be used for good or bad, but there is no escaping it if you believe in and follow God.
2. It’s a very sad point, but this notion that one must make a choice between religion (which is evil) and Jesus (which is good) reflects a prevailing idea among Evangelicals: all that matters is my relationship with Jesus. Our narcissistic, individualistic and egocentric culture has led us to unconsciously believe the myth that the most important thing a person can do is make sure that he or she is right with God. Just in the last fifty years believers have turned worship into a desperate search for therapeutic healing, singing “I want you, I need you, I love you,” and “help me, save me, love me.” It’s the Jesus-is-my-boyfriend scenario. We think God exists simply to help us and make us feel better, and that’s how we judge our Sunday morning worship experience. On the contrary, the Christian life is one of community and the worship experience should not be a focus on the self but on the mystery, majesty, character and transcendence of God. Bethke argues that religion is for the self-righteous, but that argument backfires on him. It’s those who think they can exist outside of religious structures that are the most self-righteous and indulgent. Religion is the vehicle that brings us to the place of community and worship. To suggest that one can do without religion is to suggest that one can live apart from the body of Christ.
3. The video does not present an accurate interpretation of scripture and Bethke contradicts himself multiple times. Here’s just one example. The opening line in this video states “Jesus came to abolish religion.” The idea is later repeated as “Jesus hated religion.” Is this true? If so, Jesus would have had to toss out the entire Hebrew Bible (our Old Testament) and all the “law” within it. Due to a gross misreading of Paul, we often believe that the law is bad and that Jesus came to replace it. But, in Jesus' own words, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). In the parable of the Good Samaritan Jesus affirms the law and tells his listeners to “go and do likewise.” The law of the Moses, essentially the code of Hebrew religion, was not something Jesus hated, nor did the Jewish people in general. The law guided, directed and freed the Hebrews to love their God, learn about their God and live for their God. The main point of Psalm 119, the longest chapter of the Bible, is exactly that—love for the law of the Lord. While it’s true that Jesus had harsh words for the hypocritical teachers of the law, he had the deepest respect and honor for his Jewish heritage. The Bible simply does not support any dualistic notion that Jesus and religion were in opposition to one another.
4. Another problem with the “I hate religion” approach is that it never offers any answers. Those who withdraw from organized religion seldom have any hopeful suggestions or practical ways to positively work for change within religion. I teach and mentor a lot of young adults who are preparing for ministry at Fresno Pacific University where I am an associate professor of ministry. I see many students who are discouraged and frustrated by the institutional church, and in many cases rightly so. Unfortunately, the favored option is to withdraw from the established church, strike out on their own and plant a new church. And who can blame them? Working in an existing church, especially an historic church can be very hard. Patterns are often engrained and rigid. It’s simply easier to go it alone. There are many troubling issues about this scenario, but perhaps the greatest is this: we need the gifts, talents, skills and contributions of all people in the church, not just from those with which we agree. Church should be the safest place on earth to be different, to disagree and to offer countering ideas. True community encourages fresh ideas and new practices. If you are a young pastor, leader or member of a congregation thinking about leaving the institutionalized church because of disagreements, please don’t—we need you! 
5. Finally, while I recognize that organized religion has numerous faults and has hurt many people, the way forward might actually be through a renewed and revitalized interpretation of religion itself. Just as Jesus didn’t call for the abolishment of the law but its complete fulfillment, so we might find a correction to the church’s dysfunctions through a recommitment to its practices. Whatever we might call this culture we live in—postmodern, post-Christendom, post-Christian or other—and for all of our attempts to create new models of church, target new segments of the population, initiate new musical styles or flee our religious past, I believe the answers lie in the historic church. I’m encouraged when I see college students engaging in the ancient spiritual disciplines of the church. A new generation is finding deep meaning in lectio divina, silence, fasting, prayer labyrinths, historic creeds and so much more. These practices are the bedrock of the historic church. As we again discover these rich disciplines of a 4000-year old religion, we will draw together in communities that reimagine the role of the church while listening for the active presence of God in our midst. This isn’t a time for throwing religion out, it’s a time for rediscovering what it really is, working to right the wrongs and stepping into the great adventure that God has always intended for his people.

As I said earlier, I certainly have reason to be negative and judgmental of the church and organized religion. But condemning it is not the answer. Neither is expecting everybody to become like me and believe like I do. If you have been hurt, please consider that no church is perfect, nor are the people in it. Religion is not bad or good, though it can be used for both. In the end, the church is the biggest and best run volunteer organization in the world. Let’s not give up on the church, but let’s keep working, together, to shape it, change it and imagine what God could do through it to accomplish his purposes, just as he did through the chaos of the Spirit’s coming 2000 years ago to a frightened gathering of believers in Jerusalem.

Anabaptism for the twenty-first century

Today I had the amazing privilege of participating in an historic event. As chair of the division of Biblical and Religious Studies at Fresno Pacific University I represented our department in the dedication of the Center for Anabaptist Studies. The purpose of this Center is to research, teach and envision how the original Anabaptist movement of the sixteenth century might influence and inform our theology and churchly practice in the twenty-first century.

These are my people. This is my tradition. This radical wing of the Reformation was neither Protestant nor Catholic. Harold Bender reminds us in his book The Anabaptist Vision that it was a movement of priests and peasants who centered their understanding of God’s kingdom in three things: discipleship, community and the way of peace. For this they were hunted, persecuted and martyred.

Dr. Valerie Rempel gave an inaugural address in which she provided a concise definition of Anabaptism and offered a rationale for the founding of the Center. Here is an excerpt from her presentation.

In the 16th Century, some of the greatest theological minds of that era began to read the Bible in new ways. The text itself hadn’t changed but because of their experience in the Roman Catholic church, their own study of the scripture and, I have to believe, the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives, they began to develop a new understanding of God’s grace and free offer of salvation. Among those who were committed to reforming the church were those who wanted more than reform – they wanted to restore the kinds of communities described in the New Testament. These were the men and women who became known as the Anabaptists. Many of them lost their lives because of their witness to a new way.

Anabaptists were radical Bible readers at the core. They understood the reign of God to be centered in the church rather than the state, and believed that the body of Christ was to give visible witness to its proper citizenship. They saw themselves as present-day disciples of Jesus and because of that, they gave special weight to Jesus’s teaching – to his invitation to live generous lives, to his call for love of enemies, to his encouragement to participate in God’s work of healing and justice and hope. They formed voluntary churches based on an adult confession of faith. They practiced mutual aid. They practiced church discipline.

As spiritual descendants of those early radicals, these ideas have informed our theological tradition and our church practices. But, nearly 500 years later, we live in a very different period of time. Separation between church and state has morphed from a theological idea about proper allegiances, to a political idea embedded in a constitution. Old enemies – church bodies that persecuted early Anabaptists, are now brothers and sisters in common endeavors – mission enterprises, community development projects, health and human service ministries, and educational programs. We are witnessing the demise of Christendom, a political and cultural reality that privileged Christianity but also invited, indeed welcomed, compromise. In its place is an increasingly secularized society and an increasingly secularized church.

I believe that this is a time that calls for radical Bible reading. The text hasn’t changed – but the times we live in have and they call us to re-engage with God’s Word and with our own theological tradition to see how it can offer us wisdom for living as Christians in our world and for engaging in mission that invites all people to become followers of Jesus and children of God.

I, too, believe that Anabaptism is a viable and relevant option for our postmodern, post-Christendom culture. In an age when people are increasingly skeptical of a superficial gospel that amounts to nothing more than “fire insurance” from the “flames of Hell,” the call to discipleship is compelling and authentic. As people face the crushing and dehumanizing consequences of individualism, the call to community is meaningful. As people recognize the failure of war and militarism to bring about positive change, the call to a way of peace is hopeful. This is the time to dream dreams and allow the Spirit to move us in ways that are often counter to the culture we inhabit. And a re-envisioned Anabaptism gives us the theology, history and tradition from which we can engage the new world around us.

Another quote from Dr. Rempel:

I want the Center to be a place that encourages our own tradition – the Mennonite Brethren church that gave birth to the University and the Seminary – to reclaim its theological heritage. The question of allegiance – to God or to the state – has not gone away. We, too, struggle with an increasingly secularized society and its impact on the church. It is difficult for us to resist the lure of a consumer society – to live lives of simplicity and generosity. Too often, we find ourselves fighting over how God accomplished the work of salvation through Jesus, rather than joining together to proclaim the message that Jesus does indeed save and that through him, people and communities can be transformed. We need active imaginations that can envision ways for our congregations to live out their calling to be the body of Christ and we need the courage to lead.

My people died at the hands of their persecutors for these beliefs. They would not claim allegiance to the state. They would not take up arms against the enemies of the state. They would not baptize their children, but rather chose adult confession of faith. They would not coerce anyone to join them. They were, however, a people of discipleship, community and peace, committed to the Sermon on the Mount. For this they died.

Particularly thrilling today, was when I got to hold a copy of a 263-year-old book. This book, The Martyrs Mirror, is a collection of stories chronicling the deaths of an untold number of Anabaptist martyrs. First published in 1660, the copy that I held was printed in 1748. Documented as the largest book to be printed in Colonial America, and older than the Declaration of Independence, the book before me held story after story of people who sacrificed everything to be a part of this radical way of life.

One of the most famous stories tells of the Anabaptist Dirk Willems. Dirk had the opportunity to flee his captors, but as he ran across a frozen lake he suddenly heard the cries of his pursuer. Dirk’s would-be-captor had fallen through the ice and was certain to be drowned. In an act of compassion, Dirk rescued his pursuer, was recaptured and later burned at the stake.

These are my people. I am very proud to be a founding partner in the Center for Anabaptist Studies. I believe that God has a great and vibrant future for us as we bear witness to his Son through the ongoing creative work of his Spirit, and as we carry forward the heritage of our past.

Here is the dedicatory prayer I offered for the center:

We come today, our great God and Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, through the guidance of the Spirit, to ask for wisdom and discernment. We ask that you would enlighten our minds, open our eyes and soften our hearts for the mission at hand. We ask that you would challenge us through the vast host of witnesses that have gone before us, the forbears of a great tradition of faith – a tradition committed to discipleship, witness, service, community and peace. 

We ask, Father, that you will anoint and bless The Center for Anabaptist Studies. And as the various partners work together to further a theological, historical and educational mission, will you revive the hearts of your children and draw all people to yourself.

We ask a blessing upon Dr. Valerie Rempel, our center’s director. Give her vision, passion and purpose for the challenges that lie ahead.  We are grateful for the benefactors that have made this center possible. We honor their faithfulness to the Anabaptist vision and thank you for them.

God our Father, an idea is born today. For some, it would seem to be an idealistic one, an antiquated aberration of history. Some would even call it heretical as they did 500 years ago. But today, God, we stand together to again commit ourselves to the way of Jesus, though that way may not make sense, though that way may not be popular and though that way may not walk easily in step with the current culture.  We believe that we have a vital and prophetic message for the twenty-first century and we believe that there are those, especially the young who are so disenchanted with popular ideologies and paradigms, that will also find hope, meaning and purpose in a third way.

So, today, our great God, we dedicate The Center for Anabaptist Studies to you and ask that you grant us favor.

Ephesians 3:20-21
Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.

 

The spirit/wind/breath of God's creation

Psalm 104 is a beautiful poetic recounting of God's marvelous act of creation. In this 3000-year-old poem the author praises Yahweh for his creativity and his sustenance of the cosmos. The psalmist mirrors the Genesis story by recalling God's creation of the heavens and earth, the plant and animal kingdoms and human beings. Yahweh is to be praised as the divine author and sustainer of his magnificent creation.

As I read this inspiring psalm recently, I was struck by the psalmist's testimony of what he perceives God to be doing, not just in the past, but in the present activity of everyday life. He reminds his soul to rejoice in the ongoing work of creation which is evident in the continual blessings and benefits God bestows on his handiwork. God continues to be at work as humans do all the normal things of daily life and activity, as animals hunt for and gather food, as plants spring to life then wither and die and as streams and rivers swell and recede in their normal seasonal patterns.

Verses 29-30 are particularly thought-provoking. Speaking of the living world, the psalmist asserts,

When you hide your face,
   they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
   they die and return to the dust.
When you send your Spirit,
   they are created,
   and you renew the face of the earth. (NIV)

Essential to understanding these two verses is the use of the Hebrew word ruach. It's an amazing word representing a broad and important concept. Ruach can be translated in several different ways, most commonly as spirit, wind, and breath. Verse 29 literally says, "when you take away their spirit/wind/breath, they die...." In a similar way, verse 30 says, "When you send your spirit/wind/breath, they are created...." God's ruach is his ever-present ongoing spirit-of-life/wind-of-life/breath-of-life which enables the act of creation.

Though ruach is used in Psalm 104, it has a much older history. We find the first use of ruach in the first book of the bible. Genesis 1:1-2 records, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters" (NIV).

The NRSV translates the last line as “a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.” The general sense is that God was actively beginning the process of creation through his spirit/wind/breath. Furthermore, ruach is clearly a feminine noun. Ruach hovers and broods over the nest of creation, and as it germinates and begins to take shape she guides and nurtures the process.

As we step into the New Testament we are quickly confronted with “spirit” language. In one of the bible’s most famous stories we find a Pharisee named Nicodemus coming to Jesus with questions about God (John 3:1-21). Jesus responds, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again” (NIV). Rather than “born again,” a more accurate translation is “born from above.” Either way the emphasis is on new life through a birth other than that of a human nature.

When Nicodemus asks Jesus how this is possible, Jesus responds with,

Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit. (NIV)

Every time the word “spirit” or “wind” is used in Jesus’ response, it is the Greek word pneuma. This word is the equivalent to the Hebrew ruach in the Old Testament. In answering Nicodemus’s question about how to enter the kingdom of God, Jesus draws upon the creation story of Genesis, as well as the long tradition of ruach as a creative motherly process. Eugene Peterson’s translation from John 3:5-6 of The Message is helpful and enlightening:

Jesus said, "You're not listening. Let me say it again. Unless a person submits to this original creation—the 'wind-hovering-over-the-water' creation, the invisible moving the visible, a baptism into a new life—it's not possible to enter God's kingdom. When you look at a baby, it's just that: a body you can look at and touch. But the person who takes shape within is formed by something you can't see and touch—the Spirit—and becomes a living spirit.

The same creative, life-giving spirit/wind/breath of Genesis is present and active in the salvation process. Thus, God continues his ongoing creative work through the very spirit and act of creation.

It’s not by coincidence then that Jesus appears to the disciples after his resurrection with a similar message. John 20:21-22 records the scene for us: “Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” In a final act with his disciples, Jesus breathes on them and grants them an equal portion, an in-filling, of God’s pneuma. The ruach of the Old Testament now hovers and broods over and in them to continue the powerful process of creation.

Psalm 104 took me on a journey through Old and New Testaments this week. I was reminded again to praise God with my whole being for his ongoing creative work in this world. The spirit continues to blow and breathe a fresh wind of life, restoration and salvation. And I, as a vessel of this nurturing, life-giving, brooding spirit, am called to join in the ongoing work of creation. When God sends his spirit, we should expect improbable and generative acts of creation -- the kinds of acts that most of us wouldn’t dare to imagine or dream about.

But let’s keep imagining and dreaming. To do anything less might mean quenching the spirit and impeding the creative work of the kingdom at hand.

 

I know a girl who's like a sea
I watch her changing every day for me

One day she's still, the next she swells
You can hear the universe in her sea shells

No line on the horizon