Holy Comments, Batman!

I just realized that I haven't actually posted anything for a week here. I've been so busy with school, work, family, life -- not to mention the marathon record-setting number of comments on last week's post -- that I haven't had time to gather my thoughts and write...

I do want to express to all those who have repeatedly dropped by and offered comments, stories, struggles, etc., my thanks for your input, and also for the respectful way that the majority have interacted with each other. Yes, it gets "hot" here a few times, but I really appreciate the efforts people have made to make this a "safe place to be dangerous".

The other day in my Synoptic Gospels class, we were looking at the temptation of Jesus -- right after His baptism, when the Spirit drove him into the wilderness for forty days to be tempted by Satan (now maybe we know why we pray "lead us not into temptation but deliver us from the evil one"!).

Anyway, what really stuck out to me was that in answering Satan's three recorded temptations, Jesus didn't assert His divine authority -- instead, in each case, He acted as the Son of Man, God in the flesh, and answered as an obedient Servant of God. He could easily have asserted His Divinity as the Son of God, but for some reason, He chose instead to come at it as the Son of Man, an obedient Son to the Father -- identifying with us as humans?

And then to read that this take-the-humble-road Carpenter, just a few chapters later, is described by the crowds as one who has "authority" in His teaching. Interesting to note that Jesus seems to have chosen to not parade His divinity as a calling card for His ministry, and yet people saw this humble rabbi from Galilee as having "authority".

There's a sermon illustration in there somewhere, methinks. Maybe I'll do my research paper on Jesus & authority in the Gospel of St. Matthew...

DA-A-ANG!!

My buddy Paul Vieira emailed me this morning with some comments and a question. For the sake of brevity, I'll just post the part that was the question (the rest of the email was words of encouragement -- thanks Paul!):

"You're the guy that got me thinking differently about holding onto these "labels". Why do you hold onto the label of "Vineyardite"? You talk openly about being "vineyard" at heart and in your values. I'm not sure I understand why groups need to pull out a list of values of the kingdom and make a secondary identity out of it. Is it "vineyard" to love to worship and feed the poor, or is it Christian? Is it pentecostal to speak in tongues, or is it just a gift of Grace? By finding identity in being "vineyard", is that any different than what I was doing with the label of "Gen X"?

The only thing I can think of in response is:

DA-A-ANG!!. You're completely right, Paul. I missed the log in my own eye (Matthew 7:3-5). Thank you for pointing it out to me, and especially thank you for the gracious way that you did it.

It also got me thinking more on "labels" -- generational or denominational -- and I think the reason that we tend to like them is because we're all looking for a "brand identity" that says that we're the cutting edge, or the artistic elite, or the radical passionate worshippers (implying that others aren't, right?). It's all about pride, if you want to put it baldly.

And the Vineyard, which we were a part of for over a decade, was very helpful to us in deepening our understanding and experience of worship, ministry to the poor, spiritual gifts, community, etc., but these things aren't inherently or exclusively "Vineyard", as you so rightly pointed out. Ironically, when Todd Hunter was the National Director of VineyardUSA, he was advocating exactly this change of mindset in the 'Columbus Accords':

Our focus should not simply be what is Vineyard? It should be:

• What is biblical and consistent with Kingdom theology?
  
• What is righteous and ethical?
  
• What facilitates the Vineyard mission of church planting, evangelism and renewal?
  
• What is in harmony with our values, priorities and practices?

While we don't currently attend a Vineyard church, our history with that movement is something I value and thank God for. But ultimately, Vineyard was only the seasonal vehicle that God used to teach us and give us a place for ministry -- Jesus was the one doing the changing, the challenging, and the transforming. Thanks for the reminder, Paul!

This is one of those "iron sharpening iron" kind of things, isn't it? :)

No Jargon, Just Jesus

I've just discovered the blog of another Vineyard ecclesiastical anarchist, "What is Church?", which I've added to the list of Journeymates links. While we don't currently attend a Vineyard, I'm still Vineyard at heart and in values, so I'm excited to discover other anarchy-minded Vineyardites who blog.

We keep trying to get down to the South Vineyard here in Winnipeg, but something seems to keep coming up every Sunday evening, which is when they meet. Spiritual warfare or lack of priorities -- you decide.

My good friend and fellow Guinness-imbiber Phogan the Former Intern had one of those off-the-cuff but simultaneously funny and thought-provoking comments the other day. Phogan has been a part of Winnipeg South Vineyard since the 20th century, and when we were talking about the Clan McAlpine perhaps throwing our lot in with the South (while continuing our involvement at our current church), he laughingly observed:

"I hope you don't mind that we don't talk about 'pomo' stuff much -- we're too busy following Jesus and doin' the stuff."

And I thought to myself, wouldn't that be great? A group of Christians so busy with Jesus and doing the words and works of the Kingdom in a house church setting, that there's no time left over for pomo angst and our seemingly unending theological hand-wringing about the state of the church...

We will get down there soon, Phogan, I promise!

Warning: Brainstorming Ahead

This is a quote from Todd Hunter that really excites my thinking. I thought it would be cool to try and generate some corporate insights and wisdom in how we'd answer this one.

Todd wrote:

"It seems lately everybody is talking leadership and how in works/doesn't work in our cultural transition and in the emerging church...

"This is what I think is the right question regarding spiritual leadership: 'What does it mean to lead a group of people who are supposed to be following someone else (God)?'"

I like the way Todd gets us off of our focus on what's wrong with church, and gets us looking creatively at how we will structure/restructure something healthy.

So, whaddaya think?

Who's reading who?

Another thought on my read-through-Matthew observations:

The point of the exercise was to get inside Matthew's head and discern what the Spirit was motivating him to write, and what that might say to us.

I read it (the first time, anyway) and what stuck out -- while valid -- was partly from my own grid (agenda?) of leadership models. So in a sense, I was reading Matthew through agenda-coloured glasses, not letting the Holy Spirit "read" me through the Gospel according to St. Matthew.

Although even recognizing that I did it, is something that I think the Spirit is showing me -- I'm looking forward to the successive reads (we're only allowed one read per week) to see how less of me is in the mix and more of what the Spirit is trying to say to me comes clearer.

Another comment on the "essence of legalism"...

A prophetic type prayed over me once, about eight years or so ago, that "you've never liked 'religiosity', and the Lord say that in the future, you'll dislike it even more". At the time, I thought that if I disliked legalism and religiosity any more, I'd become homicidal.

But in the years since, I've discovered he was right. When I was younger, I despised legalism & control (which are really the same thing) because I was fed up with people trying to manipulate me with it, but now I hate it even more because I am fed up with seeing what it is doing to others.

NOW the test is to find a loving way to respond to it, so that I don't become just like the thing I'm against! As U2 sang, "You become the monster, so the monster doesn't get you." Gotta learn more about "sowing in the opposite spirit"!

I am scum...

I am lower than the dung of the fleas that crawl on the camel blankets of the lowest of the nomadic trailer-trash tribes...

I missed last night's IndieAllies meeting here in Winnipeg. My wife was working, my eldest was in night school, and I was babysitting the rest.

Anyone who was there, do not -- I repeat DO NOT -- read anything into my absence other than an over-busy schedule.

Is there some kind of pomo penance I should be doing?

Essence of Legalism

I just finished my first "read-all-of-Matthew-in-one-sitting", and strangely, what stuck out the most was when Jesus went postal on the Pharisees just after He cleared the Temple of the money-changers.

We're all used to labelling legalistic people "Pharisees", and most of us think we're pretty good at spotting them -- they love rules and they always seem angry. The bad fruit is a dead give-away: they're angry and controlling, and everyone under their influence is angry as well, or beaten-down and vision-less.

Then I got to thinking about how to define the essence of legalism. Many people have differing convictions in some areas, and to be honest, most of us label them "legalistic" only if they infringe on our set of standards -- which we know are the truly correct ones. :)

A few years ago, I came up with this:

"The essence of legalism is taking something God has revealed or convicted you of, and trying to force others to live by your revelation."

The "essence and evidence" of legalism is control. You don't need a list of nit-picky rules to be legalistic -- at times, we put up with controlling, shaming, angry people who want to hold everyone "accountable" to their convictions, but we don't recognize the trap of legalism that has taken hold because we've bought into a caricature of legalism: drinking, dancing, make-up, body art, etc.

But the bad fruit is still in plentiful evidence: angry, controlling and manipulative leaders, and a mixed congregation of angry disciples ("When a man is fully taught, he will be like his teacher." Luke 6:40) and beaten victims.

These are the kind of people Jesus got in the faces of.

We just change churches.

Let the games begin!

First two days of seminary have been really cool! One of my teachers was a sem student at Prov while I was in college, and she recognized me immediately when I walked (late) into her classroom. The class is on adapting apologetics to a postmodern society -- although I'd like to stop calling it 'apologetics' (because it implies a defensive, "I'm going to prove you wrong and me right" dynamic -- see "Jargonese" in the Drydock); I think I'd like to refer to it more as "exploring" our faith, or perhaps "inviting into" our faith, rather than "defending" it.

One of my other classes (Synoptic Gospels) has the following written into the syllabus:

"Read through the gospel of Matthew 8 times during the semester. Try to read it each time all in one sitting... Be patient, make yourself comfortable, relax, don't be demanding. The Book might show you how to live. The Bible evades those who hurry, and frustrates those who are greedy. Get inside Matthew's head -- what view of following Jesus has the Spirit put there?"

Yes, we'll be wrestling through the inerrancy question, source criticism, etc., but I was really excited to read this and see that the heart of the professor of this class is so pastoral -- he's no slouch on the academic side, but he's creating some of the assigments to have no purpose other than to affect the hearts of his students.

I think I'm going to really like this part of the journey!

Back to School

Must be fall. All the neighbourhood kids are back at school, and yesterday I enrolled not-quite-full-time at Prov Sem. Yes, that's right, I've gone back to the same school I did my bachelor's degree in, and I'm taking courses once again.

One of which is "Pre-Reformation Christian Thought", which I'm really looking forward to. If you HAVEN'T read "The Celtic Way of Evangelism", repent. It's got all the things that make a great book: good research, practical and en-visionating ideas, and it's a readable length (meaning: short). Anyway, that book has whetted my appetite for more study on ancient Christianity. Plus, a friend of mine from Prairie Vineyard in Portage La Prairie is going to be in my class, which will make it more fun.

Wow. Being in my old school is interesting. This time around, I'm not the only guy with an earring, but I'm still "the guy with the hair" only this time it's morphed to "the OLD guy with the hair"...

I've been "conditionally accepted" to do a Doctorate degree in postmodern ministry models at Leonard Sweet's school, but I have to upgrade a few deficiencies in my original Master's degree, which is why I'm at Prov again.

And why I haven't blogged in a couple of days, and also why this blog is pretty mundane. :)

Stay tuned...

Man, textbooks are waaaay over-priced!