McDonald’s Hits Africa

I’d like three Big Mac’s, a 55-gallon drum of root beer–and a very long straw.

from battlecry.com

Posted via email from Lacunae

Thomas Merton on Peacemaking

Instead of hating the people you think are war-makers, hate the appetites and disorder in your own soul, which are the causes of war. If you love peace, then hate injustice, hate tyranny, hate greed – but hate these things in yourself, not in another.

- Thomas Merton,

New Seeds of Contemplation

Posted via email from Lacunae

R.J. Neuhaus on Christian Community

Community clutched is community lost. Our sacramentum, our pledge of allegiance, is not to our self-fulfillment in community but to the beloved community of God's promised Kingdom in which alone we will find fulfillment. Paul is emphatic in his assertion that it does not yet appear what we shall be. Therefore, any community conforming to what we now define as our authentic selves must be inauthentic. Such community is not a provocation to pilgrim venture but an act of closure. Community that is defined in terms of meeting our present needs suffocates in its very success. It does not breathe the air of promise. It denies our ultimate need to subject our needs to Christ.  Incurvatus est.

Neuhaus, R., (1979). Freedom for Ministry. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

Posted via email from Lacunae

Richard John Neuhaus on Reconciliation

Reconciliation, then, is not an adjustment to limitations, nor is it a negotiated settlement. It is not reciprocal in the sense that man and God were enemies and have now worked out terms of settlement by which they can live as friends. The supremacy of God and the priority of God’s initiative in Christ are key to understanding reconiliation. He is not resigning himself to us, he is reconciling us to himself (Rom. 5). This transformation is dynamic and lifelong. True, the foundation that makes reconciliation possible has been laid “once and for all” in the death and resurrection of Jesus. The foundation, however, is not an end in itself but precisely that, a foundation upon which the transformation of ourselves and the world can be constructed. Here the distinction between justification and reconciliation is very important. Justification is accomplished fact, reconciliation is the continuing process. We proclaim justificatlon, we appeal for reconciliation. “We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” This is not to say that justification is God’s work and reconciliation is our work. It is God who justifies and it is God who invites and engages us in the living out of the justified life.

Neuhaus, R., (1979). Freedom for Ministry. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

The distinction Neuhaus makes between reconciliation and justification sheds light, I think, on the current brouhaha between N.T. Wright and John Piper.

Posted via web from Lacunae

Fourth Question – Part 1

Dallas Willard’s fourth question (see below) is “How does one become a truly good person?”

A.  By becoming an apprentice, a student, a disciple of Jesus.

Disciple has lost its luster over the centuries.  Too many associations with 1st century bearded Galilean fishermen, unfortunately.  Student (alas) smells suspiciously of those who cram their heads with facts, pass tests and the promptly forget everything they’ve learned.  Too much in the head, not in the hands and heart.  Apprentice–now that’s getting more to the core of what Jesus was talking about.

Wiktionary.com defines apprentice as “one who is bound by indentures or by legal agreement to serve a tradesperson, or other person, for a certain time, with a view to learn the art, or trade, in which his master is bound to instruct him.”  There is a kind of mutal effort and commitment required to be an apprentice.  It’s not a passive thing.  As Willard is fond of quipping: “Grace is opposed to earning, but not to effort.”

But again, this is not a matter of a rote, wooden replication of the outward forms of the life of Jesus.  This is a learned imitation of the attitude and perspective and motivation of Jesus.

Thus Willard proposes that a “Curriculum of Christlikeness” has two primary objectives, which are to be pursued simulatneously:

“The first objective is to bring apprentices to the point where they dearly love and constantly delight in that ‘heavenly father’ made real to earth by Jesus and are quite certain that there is no ‘catch,’ no limit, to the goodness of his intentions or his power to carry them out” (Divine Conspiracy, 321).

Specifically, the mind is turned toward God.  We must learn to love the lovely.  Willard suggests three basic ways we learn to love God:

1. Through God’s creation.
2. Through God’s public acts on the scene of human history, culminating in his self-revelation in Jesus Christ.
3. Through individual experiences of God by ourselves and others.

I’ll explore the second of the two primary objectives in my next post.

For now, it might be worth asking  ourselves a few questions:

• When have I last meditated on the beauty, orderliness, the lavish goodness of the created order?
• Is our preaching and teaching ministry (if we have been charged with such) focused on God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Or is it focused primarily on “principles for successful living,” do’s and don’t, or…
• Am I involved in a community (small group, etc) in which I am actively attending to the work of God in the lives of fellow Christians?

Economics

I know very little about economics (”the dismal science”).  That will, perhaps, become very clear as you keep reading.

This is what’s on my mind:  We are being told (and I have no reason to doubt it) that the economy will not recover unless people start spending more money. Lots more money.

This bothers me.  There are people I know who are in credit card debt up to their hubcaps.  They are in trouble (financially, relationally, emotionally)  because they pursued the American Dream…and spent money–as advocated by presidents, both Republican and Democrat.

Okay, I think I know what you’re thinking: Nobody said to borrow money, just spend it.

Now wait a minute.  Yes, borrowing money is frowned on the Bible.  Not forbidden  outright, but not considered a good idea. Foolish. Dangerous.

So what would happen to the economy if people who profess that the Bible is their sole rule for faith and life did not borrow money unless absolutely necessary?

The economy (as it now exists) would collapse.  Totally.

What do you think the new economy  (world, for that matter) would look like?  Please leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Third Question

Dallas Willard’s third question (see below) is “What is a good person?”

A. Someone characterized by agape love; whose deeds, naturally, spontaneously, and easily conform to the law of God.

And, having read The Divine Conspiracy and heard Dr. Willard teach, I’m sure that when he says “deeds” he includes thoughts and words.  This is no external form of righteousness, but the  righteousness of a kingdom heart, a righteousness which “surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law” (Matthew 5:20).

My, my.  Isn’t that simply expecting far too much?

Well, remember, this is a definition, not an explanation of how to become a good person (that’s the Fourth Question).

Let’s unpack this a little bit.

Characterized by agape love.   Agape.  A self-giving kind of love.  A love which values and honors and gives to its object regardless of the ability or intention of the beloved to repay or bless in return.  The kind of love which when experienced even to a small degree astonishes, delights, and thrills us to the core of our being.  The kind of love which when exercised makes not only a good person but the kind of life we instinctively know is “life indeed.”

Naturally, spontaneously, and easily. No gritted teeth here!  That abundance of life we call joy comes to mind.  A self-forgetfulness, a lightness of step, laughter, delight, wonder…

Whose deeds…conform to the law of God. Again, we are taking our cue from Jesus, the apostles, and the prophets.  “Love is the fulfillment of the Law” (Romans 13:10). There is no true goodness which is not rooted in love for God first, and secondly love for neighbor. The apostle Paul’s epigraph in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 sums this up:

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.

In short,  a good person (as Kant says) has a good will.  A good person actually loves what is good, true, and beautiful; and  from a heart of love for God and neighbor, does good.

So..how are you presently defining what a good person is?  Do you think your definition might need some tweaking?

Next question:  How does one truly become a good person?

The Dance of Language: A Poem by Craig Romkema

The Dance Of Language

They were my first entering-point
into life,
not the life of horrifyingly-loud sirens,
or scratchy clothes,
or food too frustratingly-distasteful to touch.
That was only withdrawing from great pain,
from what was forced upon me.
How could I know that others didn’t experience
life this way?

It was the words that showed me.
I don’t know where understanding begins,
but it was there.
I found it in the stories people read to me,
in the rhythms of poetry, and the dance of language,
I found comfort,
and soon the words began to explain
the chaos of my life
and I knew that I was loved.

I figured out that people liked
many things I hated,
that food and clothes were part
of everyone’s existence.
Peter Rabbit and The Runaway Bunny loved them;
I was alone in finding them unbearable.
The stories explained that my experience
was strange,
and in the book, The Beast,
I saw it all.
I carried that book around with me for weeks,
and cried when it was read to me,
Because Robert, Reba, and Raymond thought they
     knew
the Beast.
They thought he was ferocious
and should be killed,
but Anna was the only one,
who knew the Beast at all.
I was the Beast.
All the loving people who
tried to reach me were Anna.

The words fascinate me, terrify
and excite me.
In their black-and-white patterns they capture
life, love, hatred, empathy,
all the great stuff of our emotions.
I collect words in my mind,
like jewels on a silk cord.
I bring them out for display, then hide
them again.
Words were my answer to sensation’s questions.
They are my delight, to share with you.
For your questions.
For your answers.

—————————————————————-

Craig Romkema lives with his family in a log house in the Midwest. He types his poems on a computer, with physical support to stabilize his body.  After graduating from high school with honors, Craig spent a year writing, and is now attending college part-time.  He is the author of Embracing the Sky: Poems Beyond Disability. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2002.  Craig is a personal friend of my daughter, Charis, and he has given me permission to publish this poem on my blog.  I haven’t met Craig, but I hope to someday soon.

Second Question

Dallas Willard’s second question (see below) is “Who is well off?”

A.  Even the spiritually bankrupt, when they trust in Jesus, enrolling as his apprentices.

Obviously, Dr. Willard is taking his cues from the Beatitudes.  From Matthew 5:

³“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
⁴Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
⁵Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
⁶Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
⁷Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
⁸Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
⁹Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
¹⁰Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Unlike some interpreters, Willard does not teach that the Beatitudes are pre-conditions or requirements for being “blessed,” or as I worded it above, “well off.”

This is good news, in my estimation.  In other words, one doesn’t have to fit into one, some, or all of these categories in order to follow Jesus.  We are thus free to stop gazing at our navels, wondering if we are poor enough in spirit, merciful enough yet, sad enough, etc. in order to know the blessing of God.  Whew!

So, we may begin where we are.  To be sure, there is no entrance into the eternal kind of kingdom-of-God life Jesus gives without faith and repentance.

Nonetheless, if we do find ourselves irreligious and ignorant of the ways of God (”poor in spirit”), or fussy, critical perfectionists (perhaps that is one way to read “hunger and thirst after rightness“) we are welcome to follow Jesus and put on his easy yoke and carry his burden, which is light.

Now, didn’t you always know deep in  your heart that blessedness was not reserved for a special sort of person?  Isn’t that what grace means?

First Question

After almost a month since I last posted, I’m ready to get back into the blogging scene–at least a little bit.

Dallas Willard’s first question (see below) is “What is reality?  What is really real?“

Not too surprisingly,  Dr. Willard’s answer is “God and the kingdom of heaven”  Or, to  use Dr. Willard’s translation of “kingdom of heaven,” the “kingdom of the heavens.”  “The heavens,” in Scripture mean  (a) the atmosphere, (b) the heavens above the sky, and (c) heaven, the dwelling place of God.

In The Divine Conspiracy, Willard discusses the implications of the phrase both theologically and spatially.

Theologically, the kingdom of the heavens is the range of God’s effectual will, i.e. where “what God wants done gets done.”  Thus the kingdom of God is not something which Jesus initiated.  It has always existed.  The Jews of Jesus’ day (his compatriots) would certainly have understood this, steeped as they were in the Hebrew Scriptures.  See, for example, Psalm 103:19, Psalm 145:12, Daniel 4:3.

Spatially, the phrase “kingdom of the heavens” (a literal translation of Matthew’s “kingdom of heaven”), implies that Jesus viewed the earth as bathed in God’s presence–all around us, closer than the air we breathe, filled with the presence, grace and power of the Almighty.

So far, nothing particularly new or insightful.  Any orthodox Jew of the 1st century CE (and today) would “hear” this meaning when Jesus (in the pattern of his forerunner, John the Baptizer) proclaimed the reality of the kingdom of the heavens.

But…and this is the astonishing thing, Jesus didn’t simply preach that we ought to repent and prepare for the future arrival of the kingdom of God.  Instread, he came preaching, “The time has come.  The kingdom of God is near.  Repent and believe the good news of God” (Mark 1:15).

Thus, Jesus came to proclaim that the kingdom of God is available right now, right here, for all who will humbly receive it.

In the words of Eugene Peterson (from his introductory comments for Mark’s Gospel), “God is here, and he is on our side!”

That’s reality as defined by Jesus.

Everybody has a definition of reality that they live by.  You can’t get out of bed in the morning (or trust the bed to hold you up off the floor) without some view of reality.

Who are you trusting to define what’s really real?

Next question: Who, according to Jesus, is really well off?