Decorating with Sleds-Please don't do it.

I have to stop what I normamlly talk about to talk about a problem I'm seeing everywhere.

I don't think too many people decorated with sleds when I was a kid. The main reason was, if a misguided person tried to decorate with an honest-to-goodness winter vehicle of fun, at the first sign of snow, that thing would be a gonner!

This year, I've counted at least 12 decorative sleds. Actually, I've lost count. What I mean is these are REAL sleds adored and propped up on porches for decorative purposes only. People! THIS IS WRONG. I have half a mind to save these poor sleds myself and give them a proper life on snow. I want to wax up their blades with a little candle, like I did when I was a kid, and jump on their backs and whip down a good hill.

You see, these sleds are in no danger of being stolen for purposes of fun. Kids play guitar hero now and get very fat. They text message each other, and stay on Facebook. They don't care about cruising down a fast slope on a blade sled that's just standing out on any number of porches in the neighborhood, looking like it's gift wrapped just for me, I mean them. They probably would have NO SKILLS AT ALL! They would let the pull string go under the blades and grind to a halt, fly off sideways, or wouldn't even know how to steer one very well, and smash into a tree or something. It'd be nothing like a WWii game, so how would they know what they were doing? Well? Well?

What is happening to blades sleds should be stopped. They aren't merely a winter decor option!
Find something else to put a bow on that seems wintery. Try a fake snowman or something.
Ugh.

Reason for the Season - which one?

There are lots of reasons for the season. Right?


Some will tell you it's to get us out of the terrible economy. We almost have a responsibility to SPEND. How else can we put people to work, and help companies, than to buy the goods and services that keep people in the jobs they have? Don't we HAVE TO be consumers at this point?

Some people will tell you the reason for the season is THE CROSS. My mom sent along a song in four part harmony that coaxed us to remember it was not the presents under the tree, but the cross, that was the reason for the season. Jesus' death, not his birth is the reason for the season.

Some will tell you, it's not religious, that's all hype. Jesus was really born in April, and this is all a bunch of pretense. We pretend he was born in December, but it's all just another load of hooey.

Some will tell you the reason for the season is Santa, or the Festival of Lights, or the Winter Solstice, or Kwanzaa, or being with those you love, or you own personal reason.

I think it's just simple. God became flesh. The Incarnation. Yes other things happened, and they were important, but without the miracle of the Incarnation, the glory of this fact, and the grace of it, we don't have as much, in a sense, because so much is left out.

You can weigh in . . . maybe your reasons are different.

Maybe you like Frosty the Snowman, or listening to the Chipmunks this time of year.
Have you found the Reason, reason enough?

ARE YOU A PRAYER NINJA?

We’ve all heard of Prayer Warriors, right?

They are people of prayer. They go to God in times of need. They make intercession for others. They’ve seen prayers answered time and again, and we take our needs to them when we have them. It’s almost like we feel they have a better, or more direct, line to the Almighty. Maybe they’ve gotten some brownie points for putting in major time with God. (if he was that type of God, but he isn't) For some reason, these types are warriors of prayer, and everyone knows it. Maybe you fit in this category? Maybe you know someone who does?

You may have heard of prayer warriors, but have you ever heard of prayer ninjas?

What about prayer aces?
What about prayer paratroopers, or prayer foot soldiers?
Oh, they’re real. They are very real.

A Prayer Ninja is, of course, impossible to spot at first. You’ll be having a conversation with a normal seeming person, and suddenly they will say, ‘Let’s pray about that, right now!” And you will think, “Right here, in the check out line?” And twelve minutes later they will finish their prayer, but you will have only been thinking about how caught off guard you were by their prayer ninja skills.

A Prayer Ace is the type admired by all. One doesn’t want to follow a Prayer Ace at Prayer Meeting on Wednesday nights. Somehow they always have the right things to say, and can use fairly flowery language. Their only weaknesses are going too long, or throwing in a “thee” or “thou” to sound religious. Everyone knows God can’t stand Elizabethan language in Bibles or prayers these days.

A Prayer Paratrooper is the type to add noises, words, and comments while others are praying. They say things like, “Thank you, Jesus,” or “Yes, Lord.” Sometimes they mummer, sigh, or make other affirming sounds, or audible signs to show they are involved or profoundly moved by what is happening.

A Prayer Foot Soldier will always be willing to take a personal hit for the team. Often at their own social peril, for lack of gifting or preparation, they will sort of bungle their way through a prayer when asked to do it on the spot. Often they pray rather quietly because this sort of thing has happened before. Nevertheless, they will do it time and again because they are good people.

You might be one of these people, and that’s okay.

It’s good to remember that when it comes to prayer it’s not up to you or me. Prayer is not voodoo. It’s not magical. Prayer, in itself, is not even what changes situations. It’s the God we pray to that makes the difference in our lives. It is God that helps us live with what ever the situation turns out to be.

I’m writing a book on prayer right now, so stay tuned for many more ideas, (including ones like these that aren't going to be super serious) about prayer.

Now it's your turn:
Which prayer person would you admit to being sometimes?
Can you think of other types? (be creative)

What prayer have you seen answered recently?

"The World is God's book"

I am putting my Outsourcing Jesus book on the back burner to simmer for the moment, and fast-tracking a shorter but more paradigm shifting book, to the fore.

Using the life of Brother Lawrence as a motif, I want to show how life can be "changed into prayer."

I'm in the process of building some networks to help me with the material, garnish support, and endorse this project.

If you are interested in the subject of prayer, growing closer to God, or like Brother Lawrence, "practicing the presence of God" (being aware that he is with you all the time and communing with him continually) please be in touch.

Then, you can be in the loop for sneak peeks, specials, and updates. We can also dialogue together. That makes it all more interesting for everyone.


Lawrence had a beautiful way to see the world, blending the sacred into the secular. He saw God and his glory just about everywhere, and the joy and love of God overflowed in his life, lowly as it was.

He was famous for saying that the world is "God’s book” that may teach us many things, if we have the eyes to see it. (42 Practicing the Presence of God, Lawrence)

I can't wait to share more with you!

What about you?
What have been your thoughts about "praying continually"?
How has it worked or not worked for you?


Stayed tuned for more on prayer, and seeing life from a different vantage point.
thanks.
Lisa

Crimes for which we cannot pay (all of them)

(this was pilfered from a facbook entry of mine and edited a little...)

Taking a person's life is a crime for which one can never repay or compensate. Imagine! I think that is why only God can atonement for that, and why the OT atonement sacrifices didn't cover those. Temple infractions (ceremonial/ritual), court issues, and national sins are lumped up and confused sometimes by most people who don't study the bible. That's what sacrifices were for, never for individual sins.

Eye for eye stuff, was a court issue and dealt in money (an eye's worth, of course) It was to curb revenge as well. Crimes against others (which are against God) It seems they cannot be repaid once something is taken.

This is why Love trumps karma (there is a book with this title) --karma meaning cause & effect, as we know and experience it/ or sow & reap, some call it. Forgiveness, or grace can cancel debt. That is what is at stake- or true, I believe, when it comes to us and God. The eternal Mind, the Source of Good, and Justice and Truth, is not compatible with us (bridged to) until something is reconciled.

Being very simple

It seems to me that if you keep things very basic you stand a much better chance at survival.

The plans of expansion, or conquering some domain, a big organizational process, and so forth all fall to realize the simple relationships that hold these sorts of things together.

In the end, it is people that make up and carry out the complicated ideas in ministry, or anything else, so the simpler the better. The break can often be chalked up to people not getting along. It's just a simple thing, though they are caught in a complex web of structures. We get lavish ideas sometimes thinking that the more sophisticated they are, or even the more efficient, the more our problems will be eased. The systems are not, in fact, the true problems, it mostly boils down to people getting along well, or not getting along well. No matter which template you plop into place, when things go wrong, or not the best mainly you have people you do not know how to behave well, and love well, and do well together.

I would wish for a tiny budget and simplicity over a big budget, big plans, and complicated systems that overlook the nature of the basics, and the nature of people, any day.


That is why less is more.

I won't give up on you

Today our pastor (Jeff Byerly) said one of the traits of God's family is that it says "I won't give up on you."

God, though fully Other (not a human being, though once incarnated) manifests all the traits of the perfect parent.

The community of believers has the chance to be the prefect functional family of God. Not that this really happens, or can because we all fail, but through our imperfections, and God's love, his power and love is perfected in our weakness. Our brokenness can be mended, our hurts healed or lessened.

I believe "community" is a work in progress. You can haggle over the part of speech that it is formally, of course. But I think 'COMMUNITY" can take the form of a verb, noun, or adjective in how people that follow Jesus seek to do good to each other. Not giving up on each other plays into this.

My post from Jim's blog

I posted this at a friend's blog and I thought I'd like my readers to take a peek too.
He posted a great question about suffering. I encourage you to check out his site and his books. Jim is an amazing human being.
(Jim Palmer divinenobodies.com)


My response:
what a fantastic question.

I doubt the answers are easy... not simple...

In an abstract sense, from my purview of reality, I think it becomes painful to realize we live in a world where great suffering exists. We have a chance to be "the hands and feet of Jesus", but the structures that cause evil do not get fixed. We also participate in our own injustice each time we fail to be kind, or we pass judgment, or we, even in a small way, participate or support unfairness. As we continue in the spiritual stages of development (see E. Liebert's "Changing Life Patterns") slowly we learn to integrate the contradictions and competing truths, not enjoy them, but learn to balance them in tension, so we can live in hope, and do our best in Love.

In a practical sense, I believe, the council of God's Work as narrative, seen in four parts speaks, to this terrible conundrum as well. Within most of the narratives, but in the whole biblical work, the themes surface of Creation, Fall, Redemption, and Consummation. Creation is perfection and goodness and beauty. It tells us how good we are to God, and also how things were once, before they broke. Fall tells us the "why" of all that has and will go wrong in the world, the suffering. It does NOT excuse it, but it helps account for it. Redemption is seen right away in Scripture, in the garden in fact, we don't even need to wait long. God redeem us and loves us, and likes us. He wants to be with us.

Consummation helps us understand that there is hope to come. Redemption does solve all the problems of this world. It may not remove our suffering, and heal every wound we may encounter around each bend. A new physical earth is promised in which wrongs will be righted, all justice will reign. Sometimes this may help us bear the horrors of this world. I think this dependence on God, this faith and giving our heart to a good God in the mist of competing realities can make the difference between hope and despair.

Love to all of you.

(this is still a messy situation. but it does give a little context that can be helpful. I think it's a journey, not a destination)

spiritual development

I've been reading the very academic book by Elizabeth Liebert "Changing Life Patterns: Adult Development in Spiritual Direction".

She speaks of the phase that happens once you realize that two contradictory statements can be true. Or, a statement can be true and not true at the same time. Living with paradoxes sets a person into a "more advantaged" (though not necessarily more holy) spiritual stage, and this can be disorienting for a while. For some, they are filled will doubts and they resist growth, or lapse in some way. Other struggle badly and come out into a new spiritual stage, after a bit. It helps to have a spiritual director or guide at times like these who is there to walk with you.

When one understands the world differently then before a "meta-logic" is needed for understanding contextual situations. old answers, simple ones, don't work any longer. Life is more nuanced and requires understanding of a differently reasoned sort.

Liebert notes 6 stages of spiritual development. Most overestimate their stage. Christians, stack up overwhelmingly in stages 3 and 4, and remain there, rarely making forays beyond in a permanent way.

behavior modification and God

In reading the writings of John Wesley ("A Plain Account of Christian Perfection") I can see how much his heart, mind, and strength was directed to serving God. For Methodism, he developed methods for this to play out in others, most times in groups.

The desire was to help others love God and be holy.

But what struck me is that many of the methods involved the outward modes to reach what he called "Christian Perfection". (fasting, prayer, bible reading, chastity, church attendance, group attendance, and more) What struck me was how this could degenerate into religion made up of mainly behavior modification, albeit well-intended. At worst, it could be very oppressive, legalistic, and judgmental. In other words, not God-like.

We can still see traces of this in Christianity, and in what atheists rile against.

God isn't trying to modify our behavior. He is trying to love us. No, wait! He DOES love us. Sin bars that. But not behavior (that's not the whole picture). That process means we get cleaned up, but loving him is really the true aim. We think it could be about performing suitably. It's sad to see things misplaced, especially Love and reconciliation.

poisoned God language

Christians sometimes tend to push their agendas. People with bad experiences with Christians and church have poisoned views of church, religion, Christians, and God. But really we all long for love, beauty, truth, justice. In our attempts to dialogue, I contend we should builds bridges, and realize our common longings, not pick at other's wounds, or pound them with apologetics.

Here is some interesting dialogue I encountered.
Weigh in with your thoughts.

------
from x:
lisa—you’re absolutely correct that [certain] reality is in the eye of the beholder. Seeing a perfect rose one day might impress upon me the beauty of the world at large one day and the next depress me because of the shallowness of what is accepted as “beauty”.

I don’t read Craig as being any less insistent upon his version of reality than anyone else, but perhaps I’m wrong. Each of us experiences the world and crafts our own reality from it. The dinner I just ate was “okay” to me but “great” to my husband. These are, I suppose, competing versions of reality and neither of us will be able to change the other’s mind. There may be no “neutral standpoint”, but that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss our experiences and both come away richer for it.

I’m not sure that science produces elitism any more than any other discipline (talk to any theologian, philosopher, or historian—or their armchair varieties). I’m not certain that science & religion are so at odds, I just think they describe vastly different matters. Just as philosophical logic is ill-suited to maths, mathematical logic is ill-suited to philosophy. Religion and science are similarly compatible but separate. I think a scientific approach to the Divine is idiotic—and a religious approach to science is criminal.

So we’re left with experiences. My experience of the Church of my parents is one of oppression, violence, and hatred. I’ve met wonderful people whose experience of that same religion is uplifting, peaceful, and holy. I’m baffled by that, but I respect it. My experience of atheism has been a community of disaffected ex-religionists who, in community, find solace, comfort, and safety away from the violence that religion has done to us.

Personally, I think it’s irresponsible of AA to preach God as a way to get over addiction. That’s not getting over addiction, that’s replacing a physically damaging addiction with a mentally damaging one.

I agree that there probably isn’t an “absolute truth” or definite answer to life, the universe, and everything (unless it’s 42), but I also think that you can touch truth, beauty, and perfection to know it exists. Sometimes, knowing that Justice is out there is the only thing that gives me hope. But I don’t pray to her, or worship her. I find it difficult to believe that any god needs my worship and adoration, or cares enough about my puny human problems to intercede & change the universe so that I’m happy. I think meditation/prayer are useful tools for me to get a grip on my own psyche and that ritual serves a need for routine. Just about every other aspect of religion (besides community) seems inherently dangerous, disingenuous, and, for want of a better word, evil.

26Craig // Nov 2, 2008 at 8:51 pm

x, it’s actually “47″.

But other than that, I agree completely.

27lisa // Nov 3, 2008 at 6:29 am

I just loved your post x. I totally agree with your “touch truth” sentence.

I’m surprised that you say that your atheist friends are made up of people who are just people who been hurt by religion. I should say I’m not surprised, too. I’ve been hurt by Christians too, and churches. Not good ones, though. Problem ones. It is a broken world. Free choice = potential problems, but also opportunity to do good freely as well. It so sad when people fail the God they supposedly love. It does much damage, I agree very much.

I guess to me it just seems like an emotional reason to not believe in God, not a very logical one, though the logical reason I guess get thought of later. I thought your group would be more thoughtful, coming from a more neutral spot. That’s so sad to hear, and my heart goes out to you and your friends. That totally sucks. If I had the chance I would love to speak to those who hurt you and tell them a few things.

I’m so sorry those things happened. They did the opposite of Love. In a community of love, those things are fought against. I experience the best and closest, most beautiful friendship you could imagine. My family was screwed up, but now I get to experience true Love, and I can tell you it’s very life changing. It’s not based on a rejection of another group for bonding and solace though. I truly hope you can find healing for the evils done against you.

Have you forgiven them?

28
x // Nov 3, 2008 at 3:20 pm

I guess I wouldn’t say that my atheist group is “just” people hurt by religion but that, having been hurt by religion, these people left it. My husband, as I often say, is the most a-theistic person I know, having been raised in an environment that never mentioned God. He’s also one of the most well-adjusted when it comes to religion. But he has no need of the atheist community like I do.

The apology on behalf religionists who cause injury is something that I come across rather frequently and I respect the place from which it comes, but I have to say that I find it rather disingenuous, since I would bet money that the people who apologize participate in the same hurtful actions that those who should apologize do. And as a sister once told me, an apology means nothing if there is intent to do it again.

Forgiveness is a very religious concept; one of many I’m trying to get out of my psyche. I can say that they acted in the way that they thought was right and that, when they stand before their God in the Court of their Heaven, they will have nothing to answer for. This does not make my wounds any shallower, but it helps me in my daily interactions with those who caused them.

Religion as a thing of beauty can exist only in the mind of one of its adherents. As soon as it enters two minds, its beauty is destroyed and it seeks only to cause pain. Jesus once said that he is there, wherever two or more are gathered. I think the real Truth of religion is that the Divine is only there in the silence of our hearts—in Beauty, in Love, and in Truth. But never collectively.

29lisa // Nov 3, 2008 at 6:57 pm

Well, x, you bring up an interesting point, and I also think a contradiction.

You said, “I think the real Truth of religion is that the Divine is only there in the silence of our hearts—in Beauty, in Love, and in Truth. But never collectively.” You also spoke of Justice in a similar way earlier. I think you are speaking of ideals. Yes? I think that you understand these to be something that you consider to be real, not fictitious. Yes? Things to give hope, to aspire to, and these things actually point “off the map.” Really they are not just found within. For instance, if you extinguished human life and creation, in an instance, Beauty and Truth and Justice and Love would not cease to be real.

Many people consider this to be spiritual language for that reason. If these things are beyond us, and infinite, perfection, and not fictitious, what are we really speaking of?

To know of these things and then to box them down as only infinite, and not powerful enough to be both infinite and also personal, smacks as ironical.

Beside that, I think people do share these ideals between others, not just in the silence of their hearts, but also within them as well. Part of loving someone can involve a deep shared love for these things and increased intimacy that grows between the two. My experience reflects the unity of community toward the divine, I believe, enacting the Trinity, in fact, if done properly.

To forgive really only means to cancel a debt. I’m not sure I understand why you think it is religious. Do you think people should not forgive each other? people should not apologize or offer others forgiveness for wrongs? Maybe you could unpack that for me, I guess I don’t understand your take on that one. I think, “Why carry a grudge? It’s like carrying around poison, no? Forgiving never validates an offense, but it does release the victim from more pain.”

---

There is a lot of hurt out there. christians and church has done a bunch of it, too I've heard the pain first hand. What are ways we can reach people with God's love, in ways that really matter?

NOV 4: what it can't solve

I'm excited for the election!!!!!! .... to be over.

But I think it'll degenerate into dismay and lawsuits. I hope not...but this time things have gotten very weird. Obama is not the Messiah. McCain is not who we've all ben waiting for either. The answers don't come quickly. The people in office are not magicians, and they can't keep their promises, and by can't, I mean are not given that power. And also, they often don't expect to keep them all. This is reality. Nov 4th can't solve too much.

Politics runs by the engine of $, power, and fear, really. If you get people afraid of something, they can vote for you, and calm themselves.

I remember hearing one of the best things ever... "Perfect love casts out fear." That's what I'm taking to the polls. Yes, I'm voting. I'm not endorsing. I'm not confident about how this election cycle is going, or how this country is thinking. There are a few crisis 'out there", not least of which is that we think the President should solve our problems. I read a bunch of 4th graders essays tacked to the wall, and they all said what the would do if they were President. Most of them would "be kind", "help the earth", "lower taxes", and "give people money"... but are they learning what the job entails? No. Most of us don't know all it entails. We find it's easy to complain though.

Bigger than that, what is our "job", our mission, in our corner of the world? I really think we don't get beamed up to heaven once we become reconciled to God because we are the hands and feet of Jesus. God uses us to get things done.

The New Book

I just bought this image (over there) for the book I'm working on called "Outsourcing Jesus: Culture, Emerging Christianity, and the Stained Glass Ceiling".

It's about the nature of how we come up with an understanding of reality...how it unfolds, and why we all tend to pair off the unpleasant things of Christianity, and other aspects of life. In what ways does our experience help to love and understand our Creator, and in what ways may we attempt to "study" such a mysterious Being? How does the Narrative of God express his uncompromising goodness and love, and the ongoing longing and cry of our heart, which is, in reality, God's longing for us, (since he loves us first). And what has Christianity (on the left and on the right sides of things) failed to take into account about what is very crucial to living our spirituality, namely, redemption?

Maybe Hilary Clinton and Sarah Palin aren't the only ones who should shatter glass ceilings, I'm ready to weigh in.

Stay tuned for many more bits of info coming. And please, I welcome your thoughts!

Thought on spiritual formation

thought for the day:

" We would not be so prone to self-deception if we did not hope that by that means to avoid shame."

(pg 87. Spiritual Direction and the Care of Souls. Moon and Benner, InterVarsity Press 2004)

Interview / Dialogue with Ed Cyzewski author of "Coffeehouse Theology"

Thanks for taking the time for this interview and dialogue Ed!

As I mentioned before, feel free to post additional comments, or respond to comments. The nature of this medium is great for this sort of fluid exchange.



me: What was your main purpose in writing Coffeehouse Theology?

Ed: I took a swing at this one at the Emergent Village blog, but I'll swing again here. You don't have to read a lot of theology books to know they're not accessible for average people in the church, even the emergent books that claim to be easy reads. So I set out to pull together the various ideas out there for theology, but to also make them as accessible as possible. In addition, I wanted to help Christians move toward greater unity in the midst of theological diversity because we are united in our common love for Christ our Savior.



me: As a means of knowing God, Scripture isn't minimized in your book, it's given primacy. In postmodern times, where authority in general is seen with suspension, why do you posit to view Scripture with such authority, over experience, and other means?

Ed: Ha! I'm glad you asked the question that way. I use the word "primacy" to avoid the word authority. Scot McKnight just gave a great talk at Biblical Seminary on October 10th where he spoke about scriptural authority contrasted with the centrality of relationship, stating that God wants us to obey out of relationship, not out of authority. So scripture is primary, but it's primary because it leads us to a relationship with God. As we discover the love of God and love God as well, we'll obey scripture and we won't need an authoritarian view of scripture because it's leading us to obedience through a relationship with God.

I start theology with God at the center because the Holy Spirit is the one who teaches us from scripture. So we ultimately look to God, though scripture is primary over our traditions and other Christians. Our traditions and fellow Christians provide insights to guide our readings of scripture, meaning that scripture is primary and connects us with God, but we always need to interact with perspectives outside our own. As we interact with other perspectives and the Holy Spirit empowers us to live in the truth of scripture, we are better able to stand up under the suspicion of postmodern times.



me: Your take on lived out theology seems to be that a number of factors play into how we live out our belief and knowledge of God, and that’s it's important to see several things well to love God, understand him better, and live out our calling. How do you think we should rate their importance? (i.e. Scripture, culture, tradition, church, and so on.)

It's hard to really rate these things since it's an ongoing dialogue where we're always learning, interacting, shaping, and then reshaping our theology. I begin the book with culture not because it's most important, but if we don't understand culture and how it influences us and how we need to fulfill our prophetic calling in the world, then we are severely limited in our theology. So I wouldn't say culture is more important, but it can be a problem if not understood. Having said that, I'd say that we being theology with a relationship with God, then follow that with scripture, and then the traditions and global church.

me:
I appreciate your perspective about an "ongoing dialogue" which is involved in continually reshaping our theology. It seems these are dynamic, not stagnant, factors, and their interplay is what causes growth and lived out faith.

One common view of our times is that we can't arrive at truth solidly, (this occurs in Christian circles too). As we live out our theology (with the factors you’ve mentioned) what can we know?

Ed: As far as truth goes, we can know quite a bit. However, there have been shifts in the way we know, and the amount we think we know. Instead of digging into the Bible with an ahistorical approach seeking out absolute principles that are always true (I'm painting with broad strokes for the sake of brevity), we face the challenge of entering the Bible as participants in a theological conversation over 2000 years and across continents. We're not the only ones doing this, and our perspectives face the limitations of our context. Therefore, I'm interested in understanding my context, and the ways it shapes me so I am prepared to be relevant and prophetic, but also so I can seek out the perspectives of Christians throughout history and the world in order to bring balance and help sharpen my ideas. Perhaps my take on the truth will change, maybe it will not.

All that to say, to say we need to be humble about our take on the truth is not giving up on truth. If anything, I'm affirming what the Bible says about seeing only in a glass darkly and God's ways being higher than what we can conceive. God sees the big picture of truth, and so we seek out the Holy Spirit's lead within our Christian communities as we seek out God's life-changing truth. We don't give up because we can't be 100% certain, but rather we live by faith and continue to read, study, converse, and embody God's revelation.


me:
Can you explain briefly what you mean by "global church" how this plays into contextual theology?


Ed: [I mean] Christians throughout the world who offer different perspectives that we should consider for our theology. For example, Christians throughout the world opposed the Iraq War, while many Christians in America supported it. That strikes me as a situation where Christians in America need to ask why Christians throughout the world didn't support the war.

me:
To you, what things determine integrating global church perspectives to our own?

Ed: We look to Christians outside our own context because we'll never get the whole picture of the truth on our own. They will inevitably see things we will not. For example, in the book I talk about a study of Christians in Eastern Europe who made some striking observations about the famine and xenophobia in the parable of the prodigal son, points that Americans missed. I could read that story over and over again, but probably miss out on the nuances picked up by these Christians. Now I can see that Jesus is addressing fair wages, our treatment of foreigners, and feeding the hungry. How I live out my theology changes radically once I interact with these Christians, even if the core of Christian orthodoxy has not.

However, as we interact with Christians outside our own perspective, we should be careful to keep our central creeds in mind and always run our findings by trusted Christians who can help us process these perspectives. It's not a matter of simply dropping the evaluations of another context into our own, but rather comparing our theologies and letting these other theologies sharpen our own beliefs. Perhaps they'll merely affirm some of our beliefs, while in other cases we'll find ourselves needing to broaden some of our understandings or narrow them. This is always a matter of conversations, not a matter of making American theology win over Asian or Latin American theology. We all have limitations and have something to teach one another.

me: What one nugget of wisdom or vision would you hope to pass along from your book, if nothing else?

Ed: I think we can't overestimate the importance of making God the center in our theology. Jesus said the scriptures testified about him, so while scripture is important and even essential, scripture's main role is leading us to Christ. However, many churches make the Bible their foundation or starting point, which means disagreements on the Bible can divide churches. It's been this emphasis on pure doctrine derived from scripture over the person of Jesus that has caused so much division--we have a hard time dealing with doctrinal diversity because we have made the Bible our foundation, not Christ. While doctrine is important, and I would never leave behind the doctrines passed down throughout history in the creeds, it is the triune God we meet in the Christian faith. That means we cannot have any other starting or ending point than Christ Jesus.

me: Thanks for expounding a bit more on your book, and some ideas about knowing God. I hope the dialogue continues.

UPCOMING -Exclusive Interview with Ed Cyzewski on "Coffeehouse Theology"

I'm really enjoyed going through Ed Cyzewski's ideas in Coffeehouse Theology", and I think you would too.



Ed is open about his vantage point as being post-conservative and emerging. He approaches the topic of the lived-out knowing of God, or as he puts it contextual Theology (i.e. Coffeehouse Theology) not with the pre-fab answers Christianity, (read: evangelicalism) has grown accustomed to. He understands the post modernity cultural purview, admits the vast mystery of God, but also appreciates and unpacks the vehicles helpful for greater understanding and growth in Christian spiritually.

A graphic he uses called "a web of theology" illustrates how interconnected the sources of Christian sources and context are. They comprise, God (as a revelatory source and guide), Scripture (the primary source of God's revelation), Tradition (informs and add insights...), and the global church (informs and add insights...), and these resides within the cultrual/context and also within the purpose of the Mission of God. The Mission is the reason we do theology.

I may argue that the primary source of revelation is Jesus, the Incarnation, and scripture is the revelation revealed through the Holy Spirit, and the record of the revelation of God's revelation, and primary only in the sense that we access in this way, and not Christ in flesh. But this minor point is hardly an area of contention.

Ed gives us a lot to think about, and a ton of further reading resources. For those with little understanding of how culture effects belief, his book can be eye-opening. It also helps to better know and use the various spheres that enable us to better understand what is difficult to fully know-God. Surely we can love and know God, but fully comprehending him, that is a life long journey that won't end until the veil is gone. This entire effort is our practical theology that builds the framework for our life and mission when we are lovers of God aware of his love for us.


Instead of just typing up a review of this book, or a fully-orbed summary, I thought if I could actually pick Ed's brain with some questions, it might be more fun and interesting. If you have questions about the topics, the book, or anything discussed, chime in.

Stay tuned for the interview!

Object of affection

Even love unrequited has an entity of affections. A beloved in fantasy and imagination, though supposed, is still an object that is other.

We can never forget that to love, we cannot be alone. God, then must be One and also three persons. Before creation, the One could be recipient as lover and beloved as such. And with creation that love could continue should the creation be aware of love bestowed, and indeed, even better, give it back.

Is love the greatest thing? Yes. St. Paul says... "The greatest of these (faith, hope, and love) is love." It may be the single thing that proves we are not alone.

It is the sole thing of communal relationship-unity and harmony.

In the case of God, TRI-UNITY.

brief thoughts on theological/philosophical matters

Given, of course, that God created us and exists:

If God is bad, then we are here for badness-sake.
(who, but the pathological, think we are here for that?)

If He is good, then we are here for goodness-sake.

If He is ambivalent, then it shouldn't matter why we are here (for what sake). And we shouldn't care either.
(but it does, and we do)

If He is absent (to our experience), then we are the ones who are lost.
So, if he is good but absent (to our experience) then we will become found.

life is like a prayer

lifted

breath

offering

beautiful

painful

sweet

bitter

transient

life

... back to God

Catherine of Siena

She said discernment helps to perceive self not as central, but as a gift we can abandon to love others properly. The learner is the "light" for the eye, needed to illuminate so we love with God's love, and not be blinded by our self love.

It's an idea of ministry not in keeping with our times.

-Edited from "discernment and truth" , Mark McIntosh, herder & herder 2004