« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »
November 30, 2005
Any cultural theorists out there? I am processing something I don't know much about, and am looking for some insight....
I was having lunch with a student in my ministry when he began talking about the book he was reading in class, which is Marxism and Literature by Raymond Williams.
It was an interesting conversation because he was sharing with me some of his feelings regarding church, Christianity, etc. And what was most interesting to me was that he was almost saying verbatim what I have been reading in Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures. And he's not even reading the book. But as he was sharing with me he was talking about this book by Raymond Williams and the cultural theory of a residual, dominant, and emergent culture.
Here is a paper I found online by Raymond Williams regarding these ideas. Here are a few excerpts of what he says about emergent culture:
By 'emergent' I mean, first, that new meanings and values, new practices, new relationships and kinds of relationship are continually being created. But it is exceptionally difficult to distinguish between those which are really elements of some new phase of the dominant culture (and in this sense 'species specific') and those which are substantially alternative or oppositional to it: emergent in the strict sense, rather than merely novel. Since we are always considering relations within a cultural process, definitions of the emergent, as of the residual, can be made only in relation to a full sense of the dominant.
and
The case of the emergent is radically different. It is true that in the structure of any actual society, and especially in its class structure, there is always a social basis for elements of the cultural process that are alternative or oppositional to the dominant elements.
and
Cultural emergence in relation to the emergence and growing strength of a class is then always of major importance, and always complex. But we have also to see that it is not the only kind of emergence. This recognition is very difficult, theoretically, though the practical evidence is abundant. What has really to be said, as a way of defining important elements of both the residual and the emergent, and as a way of understanding the character of the dominant, is that no mode of production and therefore no dominant social order and therefore no dominant culture ever in reality includes or exhausts all human practice, human energy, and human intention.
and
What matters, finally, in understanding emergent culture, as distinct from both the dominant and the residual, is that it is never only a matter of immediate practice; indeed it depends crucially on finding new forms or adaptations of form. Again and again what we have to observe is in effect a pre-emergence, active and pressing but not yet fully articulated, rather than the evident emergence which could be more confidently named. It is to understand more closely this condition of pre-emergence, as well as the more evident forms of the emergent, the residual, and the dominant, that we need to explore the concept of structures of feeling.
Interesting stuff. I am not cultural theorist so I will not pretend to be one. But has anyone done any research in this area, or have any thoughts on this topic. I am speaking and writing out of what I have not read at length, but am curious about.
I found this statement to be interesting:
Cultural emergence in relation to the emergence and growing strength of a class is then always of major importance, and always complex. But we have also to see that it is not the only kind of emergence. This recognition is very difficult, theoretically, though the practical evidence is abundant.
Why? Because I know that the "emergent church" has been accussed of a lot of things such as having no theology, or defining perimeters, etc., etc. And even as I read through Ryan Bolger's book, I am still trying to get a better grasp of the "emerging church" though he and Gibbs do an excellent job. But more compelling in the book, and in what I am seeing is the practical evidence that is abundant in regards to the "emerging church." The communities are springing up everywhere and the topic is growing, though the recognition may be very difficult theoretically.
Does this make sense? Or am I way off, and misinterpreting his writing. I guess what I am saying is that the "emergent church" is here, and has arrived, but now is in the process of defining themselves more clearly...though I don't believe that is necessarily a goal of the "emerging church" at this point. A little bit of chaos on the inside and on the fringes is acceptable and even welcome, and keeps the communities thriving.
So if any smart person can illuminate me on the work of Raymond Williams or the cultural theories of the residual, dominant and emergent, I would appreciate it.
And in closing, I guess why I am interested in this thought is because in church circles, emergent usually refers to a style, or structure, or type of church movement, but in reality, emergent is more encompassing than how it relates to church. Just as postmodernism is more encompassing than its relation to theology, but stretches and probably even had its genesis in architecture and art.
To be continued...hopefully my student will be posting in the near future the thoughts we shared at lunch. Because the unsolicited conversation that we had, pretty much solidifies the research by Ryan Bolger and Eddie Gibbs in their book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures.
Posted by rhett at 06:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The 9 minute supertrailer...Chronicles of Narnia
Wow! Here is the 9 minute Chronicles of Narnia supertrailer. It sent chills up my spine.
I know I'm not stepping out on any limb by saying this, but I think that the mainstream media has no idea how big this movie is going to be.
Don't watch the trailer if you don't want to know too much information.
Posted by rhett at 05:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Some must read quick hits.....
Frank Peretti and Spiritual Warfare
I was reading over at The Thinklings, Jared's post, When Innovation Becomes the Default. In this post Jared stands by his claim:
....I stand by the claim that when the average evangelical thinks about spiritual warfare these days, it is not any passage in Daniel or Isaiah that comes to mind, but rather the comic-booky conflict of This Present Darkness and its sequel, in which angels swordfight demons and the battle’s outcome is dependent upon the frequency and fervency of someone’s prayers.
For those of you who don't know Frank Peretti is, well now you can read up on him.
In 1991, former Fuller professor of New Testament, Robert Guelich wrote an article for PNEUMA: The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies. If you can find it online, then good luck, but I have had no luck. But here is the reference taken from their site, Guelich, Robert A. "Spiritual Warfare: Jesus, Paul and Peretti." Vol. 13 (Spring 1991): 33-64.
It is a fascinating article, and a must read. You will walk away realizing just how much of your views on spiritual warfare have been more based on the popular culture of Peretti's work, rather than on the actual teachings of Jesus, Paul, or the bible. Very enlightening.
Guelich closes the article by saying this:
In sum: "Peretti's" accent on spiritual warfare as the fundamental description of the Christian life risks turning the "Prince of peace" into the "Commander-in-Chief," a role that fits the messianic expectation of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology more than the Christology of the Gospels and the Pauline corpus. It leads to numerous distortions about the person and work of Christ, the believers' role in proclaiming the gospel with its personal and social implications, Satan and his hosts and the nature of evil. Indeed it can even harm the cause of the gospel, while attempting to serve that cause, and it can create severe trauma to individuals while seeking to bring them health and wholeness. In the end, by falling into C.S. Lewis' second error we can become victims of Satan's own "battle plans!"
C.S. Lewis and the Narnia Film
BoingBoing has an article up today which says that Lewis wrote a letter stating that he never wanted Narnia made into a film. Here is the letter, which I pasted from here:
The Kilns,
Headington Quarry,
Oxford
18 Dec. 1959
Dear Sieveking
(Why do you 'Dr' me? Had we not dropped the honorifics?) As things worked out, I wasn't free to hear a single instalment of our serial [The Magician's Nephew] except the first. What I did hear, I approved. I shd. be glad for the series to be given abroad. But I am absolutely opposed - adamant isn't in it! - to a TV version. Anthropomorphic animals, when taken out of narrative into actual visibility, always turn into buffoonery or nightmare. At least, with photography. Cartoons (if only Disney did not combine so much vulgarity with his genius!) wld. be another matter. A human, pantomime, Aslan wld. be to me blasphemy.
All the best,
yours
C. S. Lewis
[Letter to BBC producer Lance Sieveking (1896-1972), who has written at the top: 'The Magician's Nephew' and, after the address, the phone number "62963".]
It would be interesting to know if Lewis still held to those convictions....surely the portrayal of his characters with today's movie technology has come a long way since 1959. And speaking as someone who is a book purist, and doesn't think the movie adaptations ever pan out...I can say that I am looking forward to this movie. But if you haven't read the book yet...do it now.
Posted by rhett at 12:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 29, 2005
good words from Matthew Anderson....
Matthew Anderson who is a great blogger, and who was the main man for GodBlogCon posted this comment in regards to my latest post:
Rhett,
I don't have any thoughts at all about the emergent church, but I thought I would point out a third way. You mention that either people are modern or post-modern--I actually think that it's still possible to live as a pre-modern. The categories are fuzzy, but the best of Medieval thought (Thomas) seems to allow for a rationally defensible worldview that is fideistic (not badly fideistic) and optimistic about truth acquisition. The modern mindset questions the former--the post-modern (which, I'll point out, I'm no expert on either--I just recently bought Grenz's primer on Po-Mo) seems to question the latter. So, all that to say, hooray for the third way.
Thanks Matt. I appreciate his honesty and his desire to come to this issue with new thoughts, new ideas, etc. I look forward to what you learn, and what you have to say on this matter.
And vitriolic language either....sweet!
Also, I know in my last few posts I have been putting people into two camps, either modern or postmodern...saying that the two shall never meet. I agree that that is an overgeneralization on my part. There are people who probably fall in many different places, and who would probably place themselves in many different places. But for argument's sake, it seems like the disagreement tends to come between the modern and postmodern camps.
But hey...I am learning through this process.
Posted by rhett at 08:46 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Why all the vitriolic language against the "emerging church."
If you have been reading this blog as of late, you know that I have been commenting on the new book by Ryan Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Communities in Postmodern Cultures.
I am a little over 200 pages into the book, and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in the Emerging Church. (By the way, I find Bolger's and Gibbs' definition in the book more helpful than any other ones floating around out there. And more helpful than this Wikipedia link that I posted). I also listed his definition in one of my posts the other day.
There are tons of things that I will be interested in discussing at some point, but let me point out one thing that I have noticed in this book, in the discussions floating around the internet, in personal conversation, etc.
And it is this: It seems to me that the "emergent church" is one of the few safe places for people to openly discuss anything; whether it be new ideas, doubts, questions, etc., etc. I noticed this when I attended the conferences. I know this from my interaction at school; I know this from my interaction with those more closely involved within the movement.
I think this is a huge attraction for many to the "emergent church." Whereas they are welcoming, those outside of it seem to be either downright hostile or combative to any new thoughts, ideas, questions, doubts, or anything that doesn't configure, or operate within their own theological system.
It is just a little amazing to me how much fear I read in people's comments, or hear in their voice when they talk about anything "emergent." And if it's not fear it's anger or hostility. And sometimes it's just downright ridicule, hoping to belittle either the "emerging church" movement/conversation, or anyone involved with it. I am not going to list any specific blogs, but if you doubt me, just go to Technorati and type in "emerging church" or something to that affect.
I especially love the ramblings where the "emergent church" is accussed of espousing a relativistic truth, based on nothing biblical, while those attacking them ramble on basing their argument on one philosophical foundation after another with no biblical basis whatsoever.
As I mentioned in a previous post. Either you are operating in a modernistic mindset or you are operating in a postmodern mindset. And it seems the two shall never meet. Those in the postmodern mindset seem to be okay with that, and do not seem to be on the offensive at all with their counterparts. But on the otherside, why is it then that those within modernity circles are constantly on the attack?
I was born into, committed my life, was baptized, and raised in non-denominational, bible church, where my father was the founder and pastor after graduating from Dallas Theological Seminary.
I later went to a Southern Baptist college, and attended their campus church during those years. Later working for that university for three years.
Prior to making my move to California, I attended a local Catholic church in Arizona, and later moved to Guatemala for three months, and continued to attend a Catholic church.
Following my move from Guatemala, I attended a multi-denominational seminary (Fuller) in Pasadena, CA. I guess when there are over a 120 different denominations represented on one campus, you tend to learn how to listen to other's ideas, questions, doubts, etc.
And now, I am the college director at a PCUSA church.
My experience has been pretty broad. Denominational and non-denominational bible churches (please don't tell me you aren't a denomination....you are) often consist of certain structures, guidelines, rules, etc., and it may come in the form of a book of order, or from a board of elders. Sometimes these institutions and churches allow for some discussion, some new ideas, some doubts, some questioning, and other times they do not. But my general feeling from my own experiences with the "emergent church" is that one of it's biggest draws is that people are able to put conversation/ideas/thoughts/discussion/theology/worship/etc., etc. onto the table and to openly discuss it without fear of being reprimanded or of being excluded from the group.
Ryan Bolger states:
In many ways, this is a fragile movement that can be marginalized by denominational leaders and killed with criticism by theological power brokers. Whatever reservations people may have, these new voices need to be heard. Many of these innovative leaders are looking for mentors rather than critics. (pp.28-29)
So why all the fear and vitriolic language and comments that I see on the "emerging church" online? I have some ideas maybe why.....but that is for another post.
I believe one of the things that makes our college ministry successful (it would be interesting to stop and define success here as well....Because Bolger points out that in modernistic churches success is often gauged by numbers, conversions, and other things that are more related to corporate and business practices than anything else...while postmodern/emerging churches define success more on spiritual formation and the upholding of relationships within a community) is that my students know that the college ministry is a safe place for them to ask questions; express doubts; talk about their fears...and they can do this without any repercussions from myself of the community.
People need space to openly talk, and they need to believe the space is a safe place where their comments are valued and not ridiculed. They want to know that there are people who will come alongside them on their journey.
I wanted people to hear this from me. From someone who is a "card carrying member" of the evangelical/non-denominational bible church. From someone who is orthodox. From someone who pastors a group in a mainline denomination.
I appreciate what Bolger's and Gibbs' book is openly discussing, and for those who are a part of that journey. You give space to many, especially many in ministry who have questions, doubts, new ideas, etc., etc. Thanks.
Posted by rhett at 03:08 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Here's your pop culture meets politics news for the day....50 Cent wants to meet President Bush.
and
50 Cent blasts Kanye West and his remarks
Don't think that I don't keep you informed of all the important news...
Posted by rhett at 12:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 26, 2005
"emerging churches" continues....what do you think?
This post is a continuation of this post and book from a few days back
I know that as soon as some read the quotes below they will state that, "Isn't this already what we are doing in churches and as Christians? This doesn't seem new to me." But that would be to misunderstand the entire approach with how "emerging churches" are doing these things differently from what they consider to be churches that go about these things through the lense of modernity.
The approach to how one does church, or how one evangelizes, or how one looks at the kingdom, etc., etc., is quite different depending on whether you use a modern or postmodern hermenuetic. This is just one of the places where "emerging churches" part ways with other forms of church. Either you are living in and acknowledging a postmodern world, or you are living in and acknowledging a modern world. This will determine as well if you are open to discussion, willing to listen, etc.
...., we are now ready to offer our definition of emerging churches: Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses the nine practices. Emerging churches (1)identify with the life of Jesus, (2)transform the secular realm, and (3)live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4)welcome the stranger, (5)serve with generosity, (6)participate as prodcuers, (7)create as created beings, (8)lead as a body, and (9)take part in spiritual activities.
As I have mentioned....how these things are accomplished are quite different within "emerging churches." The voices within this book would reject the hermenuetic, or praxis of how this takes place in other forms of church. So I think that both modern and postmodern churches might agree on some of the things they are about, but that is about it...how they will set about to accomplish these things will set them apart.
Continuing....
At the risk of creating more questions than offering answers, it may be helpful to compare emerging churches (as defined above) with existing forms of church. Against all stereotypes, coffee and candles do not an emerging church make. As already mentioned, Gen-X megachurches are not emerging churches, and neither are Gen-X/young adult services. Indeed, they may meet the criteria for creativity, but they fall short in regard to the other eight categories. Their approach to ministry is modern, with their dualistic/spiritualized/interiorized understanding of Jesus, their embrace of the sacred/secular split, and their focus on the church meeting as opposed to community life. The same is true for their parents, seeker churches that may feature a creative service but do not display the other eight categories. Purpose-driven churches may meet the creativity aspect as well, but that is all. The Vineyard might meet one category, that of Jesus, but it is a spiritualized and powerful Jesus--not a social/political one. Calvary Chapel does not meet any of the categories as defined in this book (with Calvary Chapel Dana Point as an exception).
We do not exclude the possibility that churches within these movements could become emerging churches or that some indeed are. However, at this time, we see little evidence of the nine patterns. Because Gen-X, seeker, new paradigm, and purpose-driven churches are forms that are imbedded in particular cultures, these churches would need to change their practices dramatically (i.e., their church culture) to communicate clearly within a postmodern world. The question is whether these movements could remain true to their tradition while making the transition to an emerging church.
Both fundamentalist and mainline churches will also face numerous challenges in becoming emerging churches, as both of these forms of church are imbedded in modern culture as well. Those churches that preceded the Reformation (Catholic and Orthodox), and to a large extent Anglicanism, have many practices that resonate with those of emerging churches. Likewise, churches outside mainstream culture, such as the various minority and a few free church traditions, strongly resemble emerging churches (modernity was not friend to communities outside the mainstream, and therefore these more marginal communities have lived in opposition to aspects of modernity during the entire existence). Similar to their fundamentalist and liberal counterparts, evangelical churches, also born in modernity, face numerous challenges if they are to embody their way of life within postmodern culture...........
The chapters in this book are full of stories about dismantling and rebuilding rooted in the Kingdom of God. Any non-kingdom reconstruction, after the tearing down process, will prove dehumanizing and fruitless. We share common cause with the postmodern philosophers who revealed the oppressive nature of the master stories (metanarratives) of modernity. But our shared journey ends once the deconstruction is complete, for we do believe there is one metanarrative, one master story that redeems our material reality, welcomes the outsider, shares generously, empowers, listens, manifests in a myriad of local expressions, remains the singular "missio Dei", the kingdome of God, the gospel. With this in mind, we do well to follow Pete Rollins's (ikon, Belfast, UK) advice to hold loosely our reconstructions, for 'whatever we put in the void of the divine darkness will end up as a grand conceptual idol if we do not view it with humility.' Let us now look at what is built after the dismantling process is complete. (pp. 45-46)
Posted by rhett at 11:27 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
can't sleep right now....
It's late, and I can't sleep. I have been trying. Been to bed, but I'm back up because Ryan Bolger's new book is making me ask too many questions right now.
Ever since I started reading this book about a week ago I have been tossing and turning at night.
Stay tuned....
Posted by rhett at 12:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 24, 2005
Happy Thanksgiving....
I hope everyone has a wonderful Thanksgiving, and may it be a joyous and fun time with friends and family.
Posted by rhett at 09:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Munich...Spielberg's best movie yet?
This trailer for the soon to be released movie, Munich, is intense.
Some are saying this could be Steven Spielberg's best film yet.
Posted by rhett at 09:42 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 23, 2005
Holiday Humor....
Amazing, Amazing, Amazing, especially during the Thanksgiving Holidays
Turn up your volume
Posted by rhett at 03:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 22, 2005
If you have any opinions on "emerging churches", well then you need to read this book so that you are better informed.
There is a new book out that I have been waiting for several months to read. It is co-written by Fuller Theological Seminary professors Eddie Gibbs, whom you many know from his
CT Award for his book Church Next,and Ryan Bolger.
The book is Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures, and is a compilation of their five years of research on "emerging churches" in the United States and the UK.
I am not very far into the book at this point, but it is definitely the most comprehensive treatment that I have read on "emerging churches." They have spent the last five years compiling data, doing research, visiting churches and speaking to those in ministry. So if you are looking for a book on "emerging churches" that is more than just someone's thoughts or opionions, this is it, as it reads more like a Ph.D dissertation (though not dry like some of those can be). Though Gibbs and Bolger probably have their personal opinions on "emerging churches", the book at this point is rather their unveiling of what their research has turned up, and what it is pointing to.
What I have found most interesting so far in my reading is that "emerging churches" are nothing new, but rather what we are seeing now is the fruition of conversation and movement that has been happening since the early 90's, if not earlier. But most of that has gone undetected my those in mainstream churches. So why most of us are running around crying out "fad" or "trend", or wondering what this is....well, it has been in process for years.
As I read through this book I will be commenting on some of the things that I come across, and I hope it will stir discussion.
I have a lot to say, but I will leave you with this extended quote from Chapter 2 of their book, concerning the dismantling or deconstruction of modern church structure:
Because of this essential dismantling work, some outside of the movement have said that those in emerging churches do not love the church or that they are full of negativity because of their propensity for dismantling church structures. This is to misread the movement entirely. What to some may appear to be pointless complaining is part of a larger process of dismantling ideas of church that simply are not viable in postmodern culture. Neither the gospel nor the culture demands these expressions of the faith. Emerging churches remove modern practices of Christianity, not the faith itself. Western Christianity has wed itself to a culture, the modern culture, which is now in decline. Many of us do not know what a postmodern or post-Christendom expression of faith looks like. Perhaps nobody does. But we need to give these leaders space to have this conversation, for this dismantling needs to occur if we are to see the gospel translated for and embodied in twenty-first-century Western culture. In many ways, this is a fragile movement that can be marginalized by denominational leaders and killed with criticism by theological power brokers. Whatever reservations people may have, these new voices need to be heard. Many of these innovative leaders are looking for mentors rather than critics. (pp.28-29)
Closing ruminations:
Is not the current structure that you are part of, whether it be political, ecclesiastical, business, etc....are they not the fruition or the outcome of something that had been previously dismantled?
I wonder if denominational leaders or "theological power brokers" are interested in conversing or mentoring those in "emerging churches" or rather, they see them as a threat to their own sense of control and power?
We can discuss and question whether or not something can and should be dismantled....but I wonder if we ever reflect on our own theological traditions and ponder how much dismantling occured for us to be where we are....and then, are we at the right place, or does more dismantling need to occur in this process.
Posted by rhett at 11:37 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
November 21, 2005
August 9, 1976 by Charles Shultz
Posted by rhett at 11:52 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
November 18, 2005
My brain is fried....therefore, I can offer you no new and original material of my own this Friday...but here is some good stuff for weekend reading!
Mark Roberts has got a great post over at One True God Blog on MTV and the Formation of the Soul.
I am quite positive that watching Beavis and Butthead, The Real World, or MTV Spring Break during my formative college years was not very soul forming in the way that I would have liked. Mark just doesn't look at MTV here, but also talks about those who may watch too much Fox News, talking heads, etc.
Tod Bolsinger has got a great series right now on the Sermon on the Mount. I have particularly liked reading The Problem with Narrow and Do you trust me?
Rudy Carrasco is the executive director of the Harambee Christian Family Center in Pasadena, CA, and he has a great post titled Ethnic Diversity Within the Church That is Emerging. This article begins with this paragraph:
I get asked a lot about whether the emerging church discussion is just something for white guys with two books under the arm and a budget to travel around to conferences. Of course, rarely does anyone ask it in precisely that way, but that's not far from a composite question. The answer is no. To be sure, there is dialogue happening at national events, in books and magazines, and on prominent blogs that often looks like the aforementioned caricature. But people who are familiar with Emergent and interested in the questions about church and culture, fixing what is broken, and epistemology, are diverse by geography, theological tradition, and ethnicity. You just may not be familiar with them.
Rudy goes on to link about 24 different bloggers from a diversity of backgrounds. Good stuff.
Craig Wiliams who blogs a lot about CS Lewis, has a great post here called, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe: A Question of Tactics. This is a good post, especially as we get closer to the movie premier of this book.
Posted by rhett at 11:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 17, 2005
More fuel for the fires.....
Just in case you didn't already have enough to think about, discuss or debate, I give you How Emergent Are You? McClaren's Seven Layers of the Emergent Conversation, which I found over at Rich Kirkpatrick's site
Posted by rhett at 04:18 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
If you are wrestling with identity, vocation, calling, or something similar to that, this is a must read......
If you were in college group last night, this is the book that I highly recommended and told everyone that they must read.
Let Your Life Speak: Listening for the Voice of Vocation by Parker Palmer.
And if you are not a student, nor in the college ministry I oversee, I recommend this book to you as well. I will say more about this book later, but I believe it to be a must read if you are wrestling with "calling" and "vocation." I read this book four years ago and it changed my perception on these ideas very drastically. I am again reading the book and it is again revolutionizing the way I think about "calling", "vocation" and how my identity is wrapped up in those things.
Palmer makes the point early on in the book that the vocational question we should be asking ourselves is not "what ought I to do with my life," but rather, "Who am I?" Because "vocation" is not a goal that we pursue, but rather a "calling" that we hear...according to Palmer.
This book is a must read, and I believe now that I should read it every year. It will both make you feel uncomfortable and free you at the same time. Uncomfortable because you will realize that there are limits to what we can do and uncomfortable when you realize that maybe your false identity has allowed you to pursue, or hear the wrong things or the wrong "calling." But it is at the same time freeing, knowing that God has placed us in the tension between our strengths and our limits.
Posted by rhett at 12:45 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
November 16, 2005
Learning Hard Lessons in Blogging....
Yesterday I received this comment from Steve York on my website. If you don't know who Steve York is I won't go into detail rehashing the issue. But this is his posted comment below, with the post that he commented on.
Rhett-
A week after the fact and you still can't help but mentioning me.
Do you have an attraction to my name? A blogging fetish? Well? I won't judge you based on what thoughts you have on me; let's get it into the open and take it from there.
-Stevie Why/Steve York
Blog post that Steve commented on
This posted comment led me to write a short email to him. I won't get into details, but it has led me to think about a few things. These thoughts are not necessarily fluid and completely cohesive, but nonetheless I owe them to you and to Steve.
Thought One:
We sometimes go about the task of blogging, posting comments or emailing, I believe, without really taking into consideration that who we may talk about is a real person at the other end. Technology has allowed us to depersonalize many things, including. So when I blogged about Steve and the UCSD incident, it is quite possible that I thought less of Steve as a real, tangible person, and more about my own thoughts on the issue. I honestly believe that whether it was Steve or someone else, we all tend to do this. I know I do. Question: How many of you blog without really thinking that that person you are criticizing or judging or condeming, may actually be reading this? Maybe that's what you want. But I think most of us, especially if our audience is small, don't expect many people to read our stuff. But that doesn't happen anymore when you can type in your name at Technorati.
Thought Two:
Hugh Hewitt did the right thing by bringing Steve on the air and voicing concern about the incident. Hugh could have just as easily aired hiw own thoughts about him, but Hugh seemed more concern about him as a person, and giving Steve a chance to talk.
This is evident from the opening statement from Hugh in the interview:
HH: Good. Steve, I'm not really interested in debating you so much as getting some facts about this that are just not out there. So let's start with you. How old are you and where are you from?
later on Hugh says this:
HH: So, no one's come up to you and said Steve, what you're going to do is change your life, you're going to mark yourself forever as the guy who did the show at UCSD.
then this about going back:
HH: Well actually, there is. There is going back. There's always...you don't have to do this, right?
then this about the porn industry:
HH: Okay, because this industry destroys a lot of people. And I actually don't want to argue with you so much as just to let you know it's okay to later on say you know what? I really screwed up, because I think you really screwed up here.
then this, which I really think affirms Steve as a person, though Hugh disagrees with the incident:
HH: Okay, Steve. I'm out of time. Maybe I'll have you back. But hear me say this. You don't have to stand where you are right now. You can go back. You can say I made a mistake. And I'll pray that you come up to that decision. Thanks for joining me.
This exchange is interesting to me. If I had to do it over again, I wish I would have tried to make contact with Steve. But I didn't, because it's much easier to talk about someone than it is to actually make contact with someone, whether it's forming a relationship, friendship, or just having a conversation.
Thought Three:
Jesus always seemed to be concerned about relationships, and making that priority over someone's sin, brokeness, mistakes, etc. Both in John 4 where Jesus confronts the woman with multiple husbands, and then John 8, when Jesus confronts the woman caught in adultery, what seems to be at the forefront of Jesus' interactions is a restoration of relationship; of valuing a person for who they are, not for what they have done. I think it is much easier for Christians to devalue a person, and to elevate one's wrong doings over them as a person. This gets even easier in the age of cyberspace. There is little accountability and relationship building.
Thought Four:
If I had to do it over, I would go back and make sure that if someone were reading my posts on this issue, that they would know that I can strongly disagree with what what Steve did, and I can strongly believe that the porn industry is dangerous; but they would know that I still value Steve and care about Steve as a person.
Thought Five:
I think we often fail as Christians because we spend a lot of our life removed from the really difficult and tricky issues of life. Meaning, we remove ourselves from people or places where life is messy or broken, and instead stick with a very safe and sanitized way of living, removed from tough relationships. We are fearful of entering into other people's lives and situations, for fear of how it may look, or fear of being pulled into it, etc. It reminds me of the the scene in the Lion, the Witch and Wardrobe in the Chronicles of Narnia, when asked if Aslan (the lion figure who is God) is safe. Lucy responds, that no He is not safe, but that He is good. Jesus was not a person who played it safe, and that seemed to be the scandal surrounding him when it concerned the "religious order."
Closing:
I think the UCSD incident was a mistake, and I think pornography is dangerous. I have seen too many lives affected by pornography, and I work with many students who struggle with it. That being said, I would hope, like Hugh, that Steve York could move on from this incident and head down a different path and away from pornography. I would hope that Steve could look at someone like Hugh, and know that Hugh does care, and will be praying for him. I would hope that Steve would look at the actions of other Christians and know that there are other options in life...other healthy, creative outlets. That we can be forgiven and transformed by Christ. I would want Steve to know, that though I don't agree with the choices he made, that I still value him as the person that God created and loves.
This is what I am learning about blogging and how it can affect the communities and relationships that we are a part of, or talk about. I think that all of us who blog, or write a lot of emails, should think twice before we send out that post. We should be asking ourselves questions like does this do more good than harm? What is my relationship to this person? And if there is not relationship, do I need to form one? Do I have the right to say this? What am I trying to accomplish? Does this build up, or tear down the community of God? Etc., etc.
Posted by rhett at 03:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
November 15, 2005
A novel you need to read.....
"A novel you need to read....." Those were the words spoken to me by someone who recommended this book, Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. Trusting this person, and knowing they had reasons why I would resonate with this book, or enjoy this book, I went out and picked it up. Since I didn't even know the book or its author, has shown me to be a little ignorant, especially since this book made the Top 100 Religious Books of the 20th Century list (see post below).
I am not going to say much about this book because I don't want to spoil it, or give away too much. But the title does reflect the premise and theme of this book. Things do fall apart. Sometimes life falls apart. Sometimes the things that we think will bring us security, or happiness or fame, will actually do the opposite, causing things to fall apart. Sometimes life is messy and things can not always be resolved, or put back together, or organized the way we would like them. Sometimes there is not storybook ending. Things just fall apart.
This was a much needed novel for me, as I sometimes expect everything to make sense, and for life to always work out the way I want it to. Maybe sometimes the things I chase after are not what I always need.
This book will leave you wrestling with many things, and you will have many questions in the beginning, during, and at the end of it. And you will have even more questions about the overall view of Christianity that is reflected in the novel.
It is a short, easy read, that will make you think and that may make you feel uncomfortable. At least it did that for me.
Posted by rhett at 04:02 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Top 100 Religious Books of the 20th Century According to Christianity Today.....What do you think?
In 2000, Christianity Today asked more than 100 of its contributors and church leaders to nominate the The Top 100 Religous Books of the 20th Century.
Why am I posting a blog entry about a book list that is over five years old? I guess because I'm interested in what people read, and what they think about these books. And I am more interested in what looking at such a list can do to us. It can a) make us realize how we limit our reading to our own little sphere of thought, and read only those we want to agree with; b) it can challenge us to step outside of our reading realm, and be exposed to some other great thinkers; c) it provides us with a good list to measure our own reading as compared with some people who have put some thought into it.
We all have our biases and theology, but check out the list for yourself, and see where you are.
Here is their top 10:
THE TOP 10
1. C. S. Lewis
Mere Christianity
The best case for the essentials of orthodox Christianity in print.
David S. Dockery
2. Dietrich Bonhoeffer
The Cost of Discipleship
Leaves you wondering why you ever thought complacency or compromise in the Christian life was an option.
Mark Buchanan
3. Karl Barth
Church Dogmatics
Opened a new era in theology in which the Bible, Christ, and saving grace were taken seriously once more.
J. I. Packer
4. J. R. R. Tolkien
The Lord of the Rings (trilogy)
A classic for children from 9 to 90. Bears constant re-reading.
J. I. Packer
5. John Howard Yoder
The Politics of Jesus
Some 30 years after this book was published, the church has found itself culturally in a more marginal position, and this book is making wider and wider sense.
Rodney Clapp
6. G.K. Chesterton
Orthodoxy
A rhetorically inventive exposition of the coherence of Christian truth.
David Neff
7. Thomas Merton
The Seven Storey Mountain
A painfully candid story of one Christian soul's walk with grace and struggle, it has become the mark against which all other spiritual autobiographies must be measured.
Phyllis Tickle
8. Richard Foster
Celebration of Discipline
After Foster finishes each spiritual discipline, you not only know what it is, why it's important, and how to do it—you want to do it.
Mark Buchanan
9. Oswald Chambers
My Utmost for His Highest
A treasury of daily devotional readings that has fed the souls of millions of Christians in the twentieth century. Future generations of Christians must continue to draw from this treasury.
Richard J. Mouw
10. Reinhold Niebuhr
Moral Man and Immoral Society
Introduced a breathtakingly insightful, shrewd, and cunning realism about human sin, especially in its social expressions, rooted in biblical theology and a penetrating appraisal of the dark era into which the Western world had entered.
David P. Gushee
How do you fare? Have you read any of these books? If so, do you agree? If you have not, then why do you agree or disagree? It's a pretty good list. Since you will find Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Karl Barth and CS Lewis in my left column as being some of the most influential thinkers in my life, I am glad to have them on this list. Scanning down the list I have either read, or partly read, or studied about 60% or more of the books listed. I have a lot of reading still to go but this list is a good start.
Here is the remaining 90 in alphabetical order:
THE OTHER 90
in alphabetical order by author
Chinua Achebe
Things Fall Apart
Alcoholics Anonymous
(The Big Book of A.A.)
Roland Bainton
Here I Stand
Karl Barth
The Epistle to the Romans
Ernest Becker
The Denial of Death
Robert N. Bellah, ET AL.
Habits of the Heart
Georges Bernanos
The Diary of a Country Priest
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Letters and Papers from Prison
David Bosch
Transforming Mission
Walter Brueggemann
The Prophetic Imagination
Emil Brunner
Truth as Encounter
Albert Camus
The Plague
Edward John Carnell
The Case for Orthodox Christianity
Willa Cather
Death Comes for the Archbishop
Dorothy Day
The Long Loneliness
Annie Dillard
Pilgrim at Tinker Creek
Documents of Vatican II
W. E. B. Dubois
The Souls of Black Folk
T. S. Eliot
Four Quartets
Ralph Ellison
Invisible Man
Jacques Ellul
The Technological Society
Shusaku Endo
Silence
Anne Frank
The Diary of Anne Frank
Victor Frankl
Man's Search for Meaning
Sigmund Freud
Civilization and Its Discontents
The Fundamentals
Langdon Gilkey
Shantung Compound
Carol Gilligan
In a Different Voice
Graham Greene
The Power and the Glory
John Howard Griffin
Black Like Me
Gustavo Gutiérrez
A Theology of Liberation
Philip Paul Hallie
Lest Innocent Blood Be Shed
Stanley Hauerwas
A Community of Character
Václav Havel
Living in Truth
Richard Hays
The Moral Vision of the New Testament
Carl F. H. Henry
God, Revelation, and Authority (six volumes)
John R. Hersey
Hiroshima
Abraham Heschel
The Prophets
Aldous Huxley
Brave New World
William James
The Varieties of Religious Experience
Franz Kafka
The Trial
Martin Luther King, Jr.
A Testament of Hope
Thomas S. Kuhn
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Harper Lee
To Kill a Mockingbird
Aldo Leopold
A Sand County Almanac
C. S. Lewis
The Chronicles of Narnia
(especially The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe) and The Screwtape Letters
J. Gresham Machen
Christianity and Liberalism
Alasdair C. MacIntyre
After Virtue
Malcolm X and Alex Haley
The Autobiography of Malcolm X
George M. Marsden
Fundamentalism and American Culture
François Mauriac
Viper's Tangle
Jürgen Moltmann
The Crucified God
Richard John Neuhaus
The Naked Public Square
Lesslie Newbigin
The Gospel in a Pluralist Society
Reinhold Niebuhr
The Nature and Destiny of Man (two volumes)
H. Richard Niebuhr
Christ and Culture
Kathleen Norris
The Cloister Walk
Henri J. M. Nouwen
The Wounded Healer
Anders Nygren
Agape and Eros
Elizabeth O'Connor
Journey Inward, Journey Outward
Flannery O'Connor
A Good Man is Hard to Find and Other Stories
Rudolf Otto
The Idea of the Holy
J. I. Packer
Knowing God
Alan Paton
Cry, the Beloved Country
Jaroslav Pelikan
Jesus Through the Centuries
Josef Pieper
The Four Cardinal Virtues
Michael Polanyi
Personal Knowledge
Chaim Potok
The Chosen
Walter Rauschenbusch
Christianity and the Social Crisis
Dorothy L. Sayers
The Mind of the Maker
Albert Schweitzer
The Quest of the Historical Jesus
Nevil Shute
On the Beach
Ronald J. Sider
Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger
Alexander Solzhenitsyn
The Gulag Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
John R. W. Stott
Basic Christianity
Paul Tournier
The Meaning of Persons
A. W. Tozer
The Pursuit of God
Barbara Tuchman
The Guns of August
Evelyn Underhill
Mysticism
Miroslav Volf
Exclusion and Embrace
Gerhard von Rad
Old Testament Theology
Andrew F. Walls
The Missionary Movement in Christian History
Max Weber
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
Simone Weil
Waiting for God
Elie Wiesel
Night
Charles Williams
Descent into Hell
Walter Wink
Engaging the Powers
Philip Yancey
The Jesus I Never Knew
Posted by rhett at 03:41 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
November 11, 2005
The Question of Idenity in Life Transitions: And what is going on in the transition from college, to post college, to young adult.
(This is a rant, a critique, and a revealing of myself as well; it is a post that I am writing as I am asking myself the same questions as others are; it is a post that reflects my own thinking that is in process)
There seems to be a lot of confusion these days in the 18 to early 30's population. This is nothing really new, but there is a growing trend to identify what is going on. Because issues and questions are arising that weren't present in previous generations. Now they might have been present, but how these issues were resolved were different. But in the United States and in other Western industrialized nations, the process of transition has taken on new dimensions.
Are these new dimensions in transition healthy? Unhealthy?
One of the things that has really interested me is how I combine my Master of Divinity degree in theology with the Marriage and Family Therapy degree that I am currently working on. And one of the points of contact between these two areas of study that keeps arising is the issue of identity. It is one question that can be addressed in many different ways. When it comes to theology the question is usually answered by looking at identity in terms of "calling" or our relationship with Jesus Christ. Who are we in Christ? When it comes to psychology it is usually addressed in terms of life stages, and how one answers the question of "Who am I?" in each stage of life. This is a very elementary way to look at this issue, as there is much more complexity involved, but I think it is helpful.
It is helpful because I believe that some of the transitional problems in the college to post college to young adult age demographic revolve around the issue of identity, and these transitional issues can only be properly answered by how we understand ourselves in each stage of life, and more importantly, how we view our identity in Christ through these transitions.
As a Christian I cannot properly resolve my questions, and transition from each life stage without having a life that is properly rooted in my relationship with Jesus Christ. Without Jesus Christ I cannot properly understand my identity and who I am. Knowing these things helps me properly live in, and move on from each stage of life that I find myself in.
Why have I decided to write on this topic? Because for the first time in my life I am having to really answer these questions for myself in ways that I have not previously had to. And because I cannot recall a time in ministry where I have fielded more calls and emails from students asking questions about who they are, and what is okay or not okay for the stage and age they find themselves in. It is a time of confusion, which often raises up fear as people wrestle with the question of how normal the feelings, doubts, questions, emotions, etc. that they are experiencing are.
This topic is not really new as I mentioned before. You probably became very aware of it over the last year from this article They Just Won't Grow Up in TIME Magazine.
This article focused on the topic of Twixters : (source of definition: Wikipedia)
The word Twixter describes a new generation of Americans who are trapped between (betwixt) adolescence and adulthood. They are young adults (18-29) who jump from job to job and mate to mate but still largely depend on their parents. The conventional wisdom is that they are not lazy, just immature (it seems possible that they could be both, but apparently their immaturity is more important here). Time Magazine has recently done a thoughtful exposé on Twixters, putting this largely forgotten demographic in the spotlight.
This demographic can also be referred to as:
Etc.
There is definitely many more terms that is often applied to these people who now find themselves in college, post college and young adult demographic. There is also some flux in the age. Usually going as low as 18, and sometimes as high as the early to mid-thirties. Relevant Magazine talked about this in the article, Get This, Are You A Twixter.
This is a pop culture phenomenon in many ways. But there is also some serious research on this issue. Probably the most helpful research and information is being done by Jeffrey Arnett, and a couple of his books,
Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens Through the Twenties
and
Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood: A Cultural Approach
In a document titled Emerging Adulthood: The Risky Years, Ages 18-25 he lists some characteristics of this demographic:
What is emerging adulthood?
--Lasts from about age 18-25; for many, lasts through the twenties
--Begins with the end of secondary school; ends with the attainment of full adult status--?
--Exists mainly in industrialized societies, but growing in developing countries.
Social Changes leading to emerging adulthood
--Later ages of marriage and parenthood
--Longer and more widespread education
--Birth control, fewer children
--Acceptance of premarital sexuality, cohabitation
Five features of emerging adulthood
--The age of identity explorations
--The age of instability
--The self-focused age
--The age of feeling in-between
--The age of possibilities
Top Criteria for Adulthood
--Accept responsibility for one's self
--Making independent decisions
--Become financially independent
Those are some basic statistics and ideas. Depending on who you read, and what you read, some of the ideas, theories and statistics will vary. But what I find fascinating is the five features of emerging adulthood:
--The age of identity explorations
--The age of instability
--The self-focused age
--The age of feeling in-between
--The age of possibilities
All of these things combined can tend to make people confused, doubt, ask questions and produce a certain amount of fear. Think about it. If you are in age where identity is explored, and there is instability, and you are feeling in-between, but there is also a lot of possibilities, but you are also self-focused. Wow!
What does this mean for us? These are some of the things I am seeing in my own ministry and in the communities that I am a part of, read about, and observe.
Identity Explorations:
Students are leaving college, and they are wondering what am I going to do? What they decide to do will form a lot of their identity. So they explore all the options, wrestling with what their job says about them. They also explore multiple relationships, some traditional, and some not so traditional, wrestling with what this person, or these people, or this community says about who I am. Does this community or this relationship give me a sense of success; of popularity; does it make my appearance more attractive to those around me; etc., etc. What about where I live? If I live on this side of town than I must be successful, or run in the right group. Exploration of identity is being explored in many ways from the right career, to the right friends, to being seen in the right places.
Age of Instability:
This stage is causing a lot of instability because there really is no rooting of identity in something that is solid. The exploring moves one away from stability, as they move in and out of different groups; move to different places in the city, state or country, to pursue a different job to gain identity, etc. And it feels so much more unstable because our parents didn't seem to wrestle with this as much. Though they might have, there seemed to be more social norms and constraints that helped transition people into each stage in ways that we do not experience.
Self-Focused Age:
This is an age that seems to be all about "me." In this stage there doesn't seem to be much concern necessarily for others. This is not a malicious thing, but the question doesn't really arise of how what "I" do benefits others. The question is more about how this benefits "me." The concern is more about how what a person does can benefit them. This makes sense in many ways and is nothing unique to this stage, but there seems to a more self-indulgent sense of self, a more self-indulgent focus on "me." This self-focus keeps people in this stage from properly moving on. Why? Because transitions into other stages such as marriage and having kids and raising a family are not self-focused endeavors. Being married, having kids, and raising a family require sacrifice of a person, and require a person asking the question "What is better for my wife/husband, kids, family, etc." And since this stage is so self-focused, people often have a fear of moving onto other stages because they don't want to give up what they have, or give up their lifestyle, or give up their life being about them. Often a person will try to transition into a new stage trying to do the same things that were a part of the previous stage, and they realize that this doesn't work. Transitioning from one stage to the next often requires a giving up of things. Saying yes to one thing, necessarily requires saying no to other things.
Age of Feeling In-Between:
This stage is a weird place to be because one is leaving a community such as college, and then moving onto adulthood. But the transition often seems to large to make all at once. So often a person moves little by little, with one foot in each place, and maybe a hand or two in other places. There is usually not a full-committment to anything, but rather a watching and waiting to see what should be next. We see this in ministry all the time. In fact, about two years ago, our church started a post college ministry that would fill in the gap between the college group and the young adults. So you have a college ministry of 18-22 year olds. Then you have young adults which is like 25-35. And in-between is 23-24. Very small age group. It is a great ministry, but it speaks of what is going on in our culture.
Age of Possibilities:
This could be one of the more difficult factors. As the saying goes the world is your oyster seems proper here. There are so many possibilities, and no one wants to choose one, and then find out they made the wrong choice. This creates a sense of paralysis which keeps this age group from often making any decisions; from committing to anything. What if I choose the wrong spouse to marry? So instead I will not committ at all, and just date, and hook-up and maybe co-habitate. What if I choose the wrong career? Then I won't feel fulfilled, and I will have missed out on my dream, etc. What if I choose the wrong church? Instead I will hop around, going to the church that is cool for the moment, but I don't want to committ in case another church becomes the place to be. This endless option of possibilities is both a very difficult and paralyzing thing, but I also think it can be a good thing. People can believe they can do anything, and often pursue their dreams with passion because there are so many opportunities.
I think that one of the underlying factors that arises out of these things is fear though. People are afraid to committ, to take the focus off self, to make the wrong decision, to be in-between, to not have answers, etc., etc. This article says Twixters fear making decisions and making mistakes. And obviously they go hand in hand. So no one makes a decision, so there is no mistake to be made. And instead, in this stage we often float carelessly around, doing what we want to do, and what makes us happy, because that is what matters. Because that is who we are, that is our identity.
My Own Wrestling
I am 30 years old and I can resonate with a lot of what is being said about this generation and age demographic. The possibilities seem endless to me at times. I am a pastor, but I am also in school studying counseling. I want to write a book, and I would love to have a radio show someday. I also want to live abroad for a year or more at some point in my life, with my family, doing missional work. And on and on and on. Tons of possibilities. But now that I am married also, I have had to transition out of my previous life stage and into a new one. This has required me to take a lot of the focus off myself, and to think about my wife, and a future family, and on and on. And I know in this transition that God is still showing me, and asking me to become less self-focused than I am. To die to myself, and carry my cross, and follow him (Luke 14:27). He is asking me to learn what it means to not only submit to him, but to mutually submit to my wife (Ephesians 5:21).
So I find myself in-between as well, like many of my students and friends. And things seem very unstable at times.
But for me I think the question revolves around the issue of identity. And for you I believe it does as well.
Finding Our Identity in Relationship with Jesus Christ
Henri Nouwen likes to point out that Jesus' identity rested in his relationship with his Father. That before Jesus did any "ministry" that we know of, he knew who he was. He knew that he was loved by his Father, and that his Father was well pleased. In Mark 1:11 at Jesus' baptism the text reads: "And a voice came from heaven, 'You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.'" Jesus' idenity didn't rest in the fact that he could heal people, and cast out demons, perform miracles. It didn't rest in his actions or doing. But it rested in his being. My professor made the comment the other night that Western cultures, especially in Christianity, often form their identity on doing, rather than being. I think he is right.
As a college pastor my identity often rests in the students I work with and how they see me, and what they say about me. It rests in what kind of influence I have, and the sermons I can preach, and the people I can minister to. Do, do, do. I am often not content, or never content in just being a child of God. My identity is formed, thrives, and is affirmed in what I can manufacture and say and do. Sabbath is a reminder to me that God is pleased with me when I do nothing; when I create nothing. But I am not always content with that. That does not make sense to me. That can not be right I want to say at times.
Not Forming Our Identity Around the Wrong Things
I believe that the trouble that most people in the "emerging adulthood" demographic have, and wrestle with, is the issue of identity. They buy, do, consume, all in an attempt to form and stabilize their identity. The only problem with this. Our identity rests in things that have no eternal value, and when we soon realize that clothes, houses, money, cars, popularity, etc., can't fulfill us, then we realize we have been chasing the wrong things. But that's often all we know how to do. In Matthew 6:19-21, Jesus says, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." When we do things and wrap ourselves in things that we hope bring us a sense of worth and identity, and it is not Christ...we feel very unstable.
Being Content, Regardless of Circumstance
In Philippians 4:11-13, Paul says, "Not that I am referring to being in need; for I have learned to be content with whatever I have. I know what it is to have little, and I know what it is to have plenty. In any and all circumstances I have learned the secret of being well-fed and of going hungry, of having plenty and of being in need. I can do all things through him who strengthens me."
This may be simplistic, or seem that way, and that is because it is. It is very simplistic, yet so hard to do. Paul knew what it was to be content, regardless of circumstance. Jesus knew that his identity was in the relationship with his Father, not in his doing.
When you and I learn to have an identity which finds its place in Jesus Christ, and the relationship we have with him, rather than in the things we do, I believe we are in the right place. When we learn what it means to be content, regardless of circumstances, our identity is secure, because it is not based on, or circumstanstial to the things we surround ourselves with, or try so hard to do and be. Identity is never stable when it is based on circumstances or circumstantial things.
Concluding Thoughts
In the "emerging adulthood" demographic we are in a time and place in our life when we are forming a better sense of identity, and we are searching for the things that will bring that to us. But instead of searching for the things that do not fulfill, we should learn what it means to cultivate a relationship with Jesus Christ, and what it means to have an identity formed in him. This helps us learn to be content in each stage of life, or wherever we may find ourself, which will help minimize our trouble transitioning from one stage to the next.
As a college pastor I talk to many students about this issue, as I work through it myself. And the best thing that I can come up with is to allow students and people space to ask questions, and to always point them towards a relationship with Jesus Christ. To be content in Him. To make them aware that circumstances don't shape who we are, but relationships do.
I am all over the place, so I will stop now. But thanks for reading this post if you have even gotten this far. It is not a post that I have said all that needs to be said, but rather it is a post that I wrote while exploring these issues myself.
Posted by rhett at 02:54 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
November 10, 2005
A new book to read.....
Christianity Today magazine, in this article, highlights the new book by Ben Witherington III titled, The Problem with Evangelical Theology: Testing the Exegetical Foundations of Calvinism, Dispensationalism, and Wesleyanism.
Here are some excerpts from the interview:
In the end, his book, The Problem with Evangelical Theology: Testing the Exegetical Foundations of Calvinism, Dispensationalism, and Wesleyanism (Baylor University, 2005), makes a positive argument for how biblical interpretation should be done in an increasingly postmodern setting.
and
The Calvinist system links the ideas of predestination, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints. Each of those has its own exegetical weaknesses, especially perseverance of the saints.
But the same can be said about the distinctives of Arminian theology, especially when you start talking about having an experience of perfection in this lifetime. There are problems matching that up with what the New Testament says about perfection.
The same can be said about Pentecostal theology, with its teaching about a second, definitive work of grace, and about dispensationalism, with its teaching on pre-tribulation or mid-tribulation rapture. I show in my book that all of these evangelical theological systems are exegetically vulnerable precisely in their distinctives.
and
Part of the problem is the temptation to form our theology almost independently of doing our exegesis. We run to the biblical text to shore up or find proof texts for things we already believe.
In addition, we are all children of the Enlightenment, so we've tended to treat the Bible as if it were a history of ideas, where topics like soteriology, justification, the new birth, sanctification, going on to perfection, and glorification were the main themes, and our job was to link one idea to another. But in Scripture, we're not talking about a history of ideas but about spiritual realities in people's lives, about people who have stories and encounters with God. If you read the Bible carefully, on or below the surface of all of these texts is narrative, especially the story of Christ, but also the Old Testament stories of Adam and Moses and Abraham, and the story of Christians as recounted in Acts and elsewhere in the New Testament.
I think part of the problem is that we are still doing theology in an Enlightenment frame of mind, as if it were a string of ideas that we should logically link together, and once we've produced a nice logical circle, then we're home free. The truth is that life is a lot messier than that, and the Bible is more about stories than the history of ideas that are embedded in the stories.
Posted by rhett at 02:59 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
3 Amazing USC students....
If you have not seen the movie Invisible Children, than you are missing out on what three USC students have done in trying to make a difference in this world.
UCLA will be hosting two screenings of the lengthier version of this film next week. There will be a Tuesday and Wednesday night screening. I will make the details aware to you as I get more information.
If you don't know what the movie is about then go here, or check the trailer out at their site above.
I've seen the film a couple of times and am so impressed with what these three college students decided to do; and I was challenged as it made me question what I am really passionate about.
Within one week, you have read about the headlines regarding Steve York, the 22 year old UCSD student who filmed a porn film and aired it over the school's television. And now I am telling you about these guys. What a distinct difference in what college students are capable of doing.
Posted by rhett at 02:20 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
A must read by Summa Aesthetica
Summa Aesthetica has an amazing, and well written post on Making an Idol of Jesus.
It's a must read. My favorite paragraph:
For the same reason, I often flinch when God or Jesus float carelessly in and out of people's conversations, hauled in to support whatever idea suits the agenda of the speaker. The problem is the careless nonchalance with which people are inclined to treat the divine. God, baseball and apple pie: the American trinity, coequal in mystery, nostalgia and devotion. (And no, the facts that many Americans think baseball is boring and many more have long since given up baking, were not overlooked in this analogy.)
Posted by rhett at 02:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 09, 2005
It has to begin somewhere...it just doesn't start in college.....
Even though I am focusing on the positive aspects of college students for the next couple of days...I can't help but post this article from Slate, called Take Back the Prom. Last week we were talking about the issues and temptations on college campuses, but here we can move backward and look into high school, and what some parents promote. Next week I will be expecting to find an article about Jr. Highers.
The most telling section of the article:
These days, the prom signals, if anything, a regression to an immature mean. It is an orgy of consumption that entails abandoning the pretense to policing sex/booze/drugs, sustained over four previous years by parents, kids, and school administrators. High school-at least in middle-class places-occasions no end of hand-wringing by boomer parents and educators about that trifecta of perils (which boomers themselves of course sought out as teens and survived). Given their own wild pasts, parents find themselves trapped in the pose of earnest worriers, shying away from the hypocritical role of scourges. And so they lay down the law by citing the medical (not the moral) dangers of drink, etc., and their kids roll their eyes and break the rules. Come prom time, however, the compact is out the window. Then—to cite Eichner and Hoagland-"fathers [sign] the contract for Captain Jim's booze-cruise out of Huntington for an after-prom adventure," while mothers make motel reservations. And kids eagerly buy into the whole business.
Posted by rhett at 04:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
College Students: The Ways in Which They Reach Out to Their Communities/ Part 2, ps check out the cool music video at the bottom...
As I mentioned yesterday, I am really wanting to write about, and reflect the amazing ways in which college students live their lives, and to testify to some of the amazing things that I have seen them do.
1 John 1:1-4 (New International Version)
The Word of Life
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched-this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We write this to make our[a] joy complete.
I absolutely love this passage of scripture. I think it speaks boldly and plainly of what it means to share with others the Good News of Jesus Christ. It is the simple act of passing on, of testifying to, what God has done in our lives. What we have seen him do...What we have touched, etc.
I see this take place day in and day out with the college community that I work with, and in many other college communities. I see students reaching out to others in their community, whether they know these people or not, and making a difference. I see students testifying to what God has done in their lives. Sometimes it's done in a more structured setting where someone shares a testimony, and there is an obvious attempt to evangelize. But more often that not, I just simply see college students sharing their lives, and forming relationships with many different people.
I do not know if it is the stage of life, or it is a time issue, but it seems that college students, more than any other group tend to get really involved in community outreach. Sometimes it is because it is an empasis put on by their school; sometimes they are wanting it to boost up their grad-school resume; but more often than not, I believe they genuinely care, and what to help others out.
And as for the time issue. Well, I just don't see students anymore who aren't invovlved in a million things with school, work, outreach, etc.
But this is one of the reasons I love working with college students. Watching them serve others. Tonight in our college group we are focusing on outreach, both here locally, and globally. Each quarter we try to have one night where we make outreach the focus so that students will know where, how, what, and why to get involved in their community, and the communities around them. It is something we have to cement into our conscious, otherwise we know that the giving of our time doesn't always come that easy.
Every year the students at The Quest, and many other college ministries and campus give of their time, and work with many organizations. Tonight we want to focus on only a few, because when we overload with too many groups, then we can too easily at times become overwhelmed.
This year we have decided to really focus on two urban/inner city organizations, and one global outreach organization.
Tonight, we are inviting these groups to be with us. If you are in the Los Angeles area and are interested in getting plugged in, these are two great groups for you to get plugged into:
Both of these groups do amazing work, and we hope that we can join them, and serve with them in their efforts.
If you are interested in going on a great mission/outreach trip with college students, or you want to take your college group, this group is amazing. We have been taking this trip for about 8-9 years here at Bel Air, and last year was my first experience taking a team down to Mexico City, Mexico, through
and
This is a trip that will transform college student's thinking regarding the gospel message, especially in a setting like Mexico City, Mexico, and the surrounding communities.
Thanks to all the college students out there who have made a difference in their communities, and the communities around the world by selflessly giving of their time, money and talents.
And for a really great video on what it looks like to juxtapose what we spend our money on, and what we can put it towards, check out Sara McLachlan's video, World on Fire.
Posted by rhett at 03:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
College students continued
Recent college grad, Kelsey Kreider, posts a great article titled, Mentoring: Join the Herd.
This is found over at Relevant Magazine
And....more recent graduates who are up to good things and wanting to make a difference Mere-Orthodoxy
Posted by rhett at 12:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Good college blogger...
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am going to be focusing on a lot of the positive aspects of college ministry, and college students, less you think the world is falling apart by the way the media most often portrays them
She posts more frequently than almost anyone I know, and blogging has been a great way for her to interact with the community that she was a part of for four years. And a great way to expand her community as well through dialogue.
Awesome job Ashley. Always thinking, reflecting, challenging.
Posted by rhett at 12:37 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Andrew Jones has a new philosophy on blogging....and living.
Andrew Jones had decided to blog less, and live more.
Andrew, if you are reading this post, then you are obviously tracking the conversation.
Here is my favorite excerpt:
And blogging, (writing a post, following the conversation and interaction, tracking it on technorati, defending it from the critics, etc) which should have a balanced place in my life as one of those things, can be addictive for me and is therefore an idol.
Posted by rhett at 12:25 PM | Comments (1) |