reaching back from the edges

Recently there has been a growing interest, perhaps fixation, on those extreme examples of people living the Christian faith.  ‘Radical’ is en vogue; guys like Shane Claiborne, Mike Yankoski fill speaking halls across the country and lots of people are dedicating themselves to living deeply missional, incarnational lives seeking justice and fighting poverty.

This is undoubtedly a good thing.  While so many people are struggling to build a life of comfort, security & convenience, these voices shock us into realizing that we weren’t meant to live this way.  These radical examples of the faith reveal to us the possibility of Kingdom living, of putting ourselves totally at the hands of God and living a life that necessitates faith. 

 I think when someone is concerned with issues on the edges of what is ‘normal,’ it’s very easy to remain in an ‘extreme’ state of mind.  Ideas, actions, and even expectations placed on others can all be shaped and transformed by radical thoughts that can make it difficult to relate with the center.  Someone who sells all he/she has and gives it to the poor might being to expect other Christians to do the same thing, even if for a good reason – he/she experiences a deeply fulfilling spiritual practice and thinks it’s good for everyone to live the same way.  When people don’t follow that advice, for lots of different (and often valid) reasons, divisions can arise between those extremists and the rest of the group as a whole.

Maybe pride is a big factor in the development of such an attitude.  So many people now are praising these ‘revolutionaries,’ heralding them as the example of a new (old) Christianity.  They become the examples of true spirituality for a day, and that’s always dangerous.

Paul mentions such a lifestyle of giving and service a couple of times in a few of his letters.  In the most notable instances, the context of each passage as a whole suggests not we should elevate and celebrate these extreme figures but instead that these particular examples should serve to foster greater unity of purpose and action in the church as a whole (even those who aren’t going to be the next St. Francis). 

• Romans 12:3-8: For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

• 1 Corinthians 13: If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Both of these passages place the gift of “serving” (even giving everything and surrendering to total suffering) is one among many; certain people have the calling to live a radical life of service while others might do not.  Certainly, everyone is to defend the poor and to seek justice, but this specific way of doing it – that of total self-abandonment – isn’t necessarily for everyone.

The Body of Christ is an amazing testament to God’s ability to plan.  Individual passions, talents and dreams can interact in remarkable ways, only if people can recognize just how unified Christians are to be.  With the way we can celebrate the extremes, it is very tempting to forget that first and foremost, our callings should unite the Body together.   Unity, however, isn’t simply “let’s all just get along.”  True unity is also unity of purpose, of vision, of action.  The church must see itself as working to restore the world in many different ways, because presenting an alternate picture of how the world works in God’s kingdom requires a total change in imagination, the arts, economics, politics, and just about any other arena of life. 

Perhaps here those extreme voices have their greatest value: their deep sacrifices can proclaim to the Church the importance of seeking justice, the deceitfulness of wealth, the myth of security.  As prophets, they can counsel from the periphery what Christians are to value.  The role of these figures then, isn’t to be celebrated or held up as an example.  Instead, they have a specific responsibility to the rest of the Body to declare the existence and possibility of such a life at the same time they involve everyone in the work being done.

 If the whole church cannot celebrate and feel like a participant in what those on the extreme are doing, then those must to a better job of reaching out to the Church.  The greater Church body, as the instrument of God’s will in the world, must feel a sense of ownership and responsibility to support, encourage and get involved in that work (even amidst mortgage payments and college savings plans).  And if more people get involved, there would be a greater exposure to God’s work and the possibilities of a life of faith – maybe leading to more people willing to take a radical stand in the name of Jesus.  

commissioning

At church this week a small group of people were commissioned to go on a short term mission trip.  I’ve always loved those special moments – having a community lay hands on a group, asking for blessing and encouragement – it’s all very touching and encouraging.

There is often a stigma with mission trips.  The term itself is a loaded concept – there are lots of connotations and implications that often aren’t very healthy about such experiences.  Having a “mission” to go to a particular place and change things often can lead to a sense of pride, authority and paternalism within the group of “missionaries” – the mission must be accomplished, the goal achieved, and change brought about.  Anytime where a group goes from one culture to another (whether that be internationally or even domestically), there can develop a subconscious feeling that the team brings “all that is good” to an “other” people living in darkness, ignorance, and evil.

In my personal experience, though, I’ve always felt like I’ve received so much more from the group that I visited than I ever could give.  Sometimes, this was obvious: traveling across the world for construction projects is not as financially efficient as simply giving the money for the program – especially travel costs – to local companies to do the work themselves.   After all, that would create or sustain jobs (and the quality of the work would also be much better).  However, those experiences have often been designed to help those who leave home to experience life (and God) in another culture.  Ironically, it is the “missionaries” who often are those most reached and changed by the process.  Some have tried to alter the focus of these trips by calling them not “mission trips” but “vision trips” since they give the participants greater perspective on spirituality, faith, and life outside of our own cultural blinders.

In the synoptic Gospels at one point Jesus sends his followers on their own short-term trip.  Before they go, he gives them very specific instructions that give an important picture of how these trips should be undertaken.  Passages in Matthew 10, Mark 6 & Luke 9-10 all give specific instructions to groups he sends out.  Anyway, there are specific instructions to highlight:

•  The disciples have a message to proclaim, and they have deeds to perform (i.e. healing the sick, raising the dead, etc.).  But there’s an interesting juxtaposition of ideas in verses 8-10: “Freely you have received, freely give. Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.”  The disciples have obvious gifts – the message and miracles given in the power of Jesus.  However, one thing they are forbidden to take is money.  How often do we think that the most valuable thing we can give to other peoples is strictly financial gain?  Are we shortchanging our abilities and gifts by focusing on the things we can give and not the deeper talents God has given us?
• In all 3 Gospels Jesus has specific commands to take almost nothing for the journey (Luke even says not to take sandals).  There is a major risk involved in setting off with nothing.  Typical trips today do almost the opposite – groups can have insurance policies, security guards, huge suitcases and access to deep financial resources for those “just in case” situations.  I think there’s a deep spiritual reason to head off with nothing, and much of it is about faith.  Because the sent have nothing, they cannot rely on their own abilities to survive.  Instead, all that provision must come from God and those locals who take them in.  Nowadays, it’s easy for wealthy travelers to control every aspect of a trip.  They have the financial means, security and knowledge of “the safe places to go” that can often actually be a hindrance to discovering God’s ability to provide when people desperately need it.  Stepping out and taking a risk is a leap of faith that God can reward and use in wonderful ways.
• But for many people, such a radical stepping out isn’t particularly possible.  While still asserting that Jesus’ words can be taken literally (perhaps by a select few who are so called), there is an underlying idea that can be applied to all traveling groups.   Certainly, people traveling to a different culture must learn to abandon the hope to control everything.  Traveling is risky, it exposes people to different ideas and ways of living that only come in letting go of control.  Once that happens, relationships can form.  Jesus commands people traveling to enter the houses of the local people – in effect, to allow them to serve the “missionaries”:  “When you enter a house, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house” (Lk 10:5-7).  A missionary team that already has every need figured out doesn’t need to open itself up to be served by the locals.  Often, it is extremely difficult to allow people to be served by other people, but in so doing we experience deeper relationships with each other and learn to see ourselves as also served by Jesus, who chose to wash his disciples feet.  Openness, then, is central to any missionary experience – the group must allow themselves to be changed by the experience of interacting with others.
• Like so often in short-term trips, the groups Jesus sent out came back “on fire.”  Luke 10:17 says the group sent out “returned with joy and said, ‘Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.’”  In this moment of vulnerability (after all, they had no money or control), they were able to experience the power of God.  It’s always a risk to involve humans in the work of God – we mess things up way too much to be considered ‘effective’ at proclaiming the Kingdom.  However, Jesus chose to send out his followers to do this work, even if he himself could accomplish it much better.  Teaching his followers was a primary motive – they came back encouraged and stronger from the experience.

So, with these ideas in mind, I suggest that at a commisioning service, a deal be made between the sending church and the team itself.  Because these trips do incredible things to change perspectives, deepen faith, challenge assumptions and build relationships, simply keeping the “Let’s send them out to change the world” mentality misses so much of the depth and value of such experiences.  Perhaps they should say:

“We’re sending you out to experience difficulties, to challenge assumptions and to lose control.  We hope you learn to rely on God – and not your own abilities – to get you through this experience.  We anticipate and pray for deeper relationships of mutual trust and understanding as you allow yourselves to be served and changed by the people you will meet.  May you be open to understanding God’s ways and mindful of his lessons in every experience.  And, when you come back, we hope you will share with us the lessons you have learned.  We have much to learn from you, and those you will have served, about a life of faith.  May you return to be missionaries for us, teaching us of God’s Kingdom as you learned it there to free us from our own prejudices, misconceptions and lack of faith in God’s power and faithfulness.”

That’d be sweet.

What is the Gospel?

So a while back I wrote about living so people ask, “Why do you live that way?” But I never actually answered that question. Here, in brief, is my long-winded answer, i.e., my explanation of the Gospel (sadly, it’s not as convenient as the “Four Laws”). Since I have never had a creative thought in my life, I need to give credit where it’s due – lots of my thoughts are indebted to people like Scot McKnight & Bryant Myers who write/speak about this more clearly.

The Gospel is the story about God, and to explain it means to explain a little bit about the nature of God. Ironically, I have to begin with one of the most confusing parts of Christianity – the Trinity. God – being Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – lives in unending relationship. Each of the “persons” (a misleading term) enjoys full intimacy, knowledge, and enjoyment of the others. The basic identity of God, then, is relationship.

And this description of God has incredibly deep ramifications for us as humans. The Bible says, in the beginning of the Bible, that we are created in the image of God. So, when Gen 1:26 says, “Let us make human beings in our image, in our likeness,” it implies that we share the basic characteristics of God, namely, that we are made for relationships. Humanity is at its highest – what its Creator intended it to be – when it is living in healthy, creative, intimate connections with others.

In a world that works as was originally intended, all aspects of human relationships flourish. Many of these are also described in the creation narratives, present in Eden before sin enters the picture:

• The first relationship, of all humans, is with God. From the beginning of creation, where God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gen 2:7), we were designed with this relationship in mind. In the Garden, Adam and Eve walk with God, have no shame in relating to him, and rest in his care and protection.

• But this was not the only relationship in the Garden. It was not right that the first human (who I think was gender neutral, but that’s a different story) to be alone, and another relationship needed to be created. So, God took the rib from this human to make a distinction – Adam and Eve. These two shared deep personal intimacy, and the two are actually incomplete independent of each other; wholeness only comes in relationship.

• Also, Humanity has a special relationship with the environment. Although many translators and interpreters claim that humans are allowed to dominate nature (overemphasizing the negative connotations of subdue and have dominion), humanity was intended to care for and tend for all nature. In the Garden, Adam is commissioned to care for the plants and animals, and not to destroy it for personal gain. (Gen. 1:28)

Anyone who lives in deep relationships, in any form, realizes that maintaining them is extremely difficult. The root cause of this failure to connect, the Bible teaches us, is sin. Although it is often described or intimated that sin is extremely personal and individualistic, sin is fundamentally a relational problem.

When Adam and Eve both sin, eating that fruit, the closeness of all those relationships is lost. They discover their nakedness, and they cover themselves up (Gen 3:7). They hide from God (v. 8). Even the environment becomes a source of toil and pain (vv. 17-19). All of these once-healthy relationships become distorted, and people try to hide and cut off from each other.

Nowadays, relationships are much more complicated than they are in the Eden story. Humanity has grown beyond simple one-to-one interactions, creating social groups and societies. For this reason, the Gospel has an explicitly social component. Sin also distorts and ruins the relationship within and between groups of people as well. Elitism, social injustices, genocides are all examples of how sin has distorted and ruined relationships between groups.

Unhappy with this separation, God decided to restore these connections to how they originally were. Through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, God was able to make that connection with people again. Through Christ’s sacrifice (which required his painful separation from the Father as seen in Mt. 27:46), our sins could be forgiven and the relationship with God could be eternally restored. “Salvation” isn’t simply the forgiveness of sins, but instead the restoration of this relationship. In a way, it’s not a one-time-only event, but the beginning of a long journey that must be lived out, not simply known or acknowledged.

And Jesus’ work goes further. Throughout his time on earth, Jesus announced that he was creating a new order of life, what he called the Kingdom of God. As I’ve said before, it operates under different values and ideas than the rest of the world, values that facilitate healing relationships between people, with the environment, and even between fighting groups. Through the participation in this Kingdom, and the model and power of Christ’s life as an example, restoration can occur.

To live a Christian life, then, is to work to restore and repair relationships. That means helping others connect with God, yes, but also to repair human relationships as well. At times, it might even have priority over the relationship with God.

Matthew 5:23-24: “If you are offering your gift at the altar [that is, to God] and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.”

So, Jesus’ message applies to how we live in our world, since we participate in God’s acts of restoration (2 Cor 5:17-19). Therefore, healing broken families is God’s work. Fighting injustice is also the work of God. A Christian has a responsibility to care for the environment (as was established in Eden). Even if people don’t always accept Christ, his followers must work for the betterment of humanity and our world.