rethinking our interaction...

Over the last week I have watched a handful of documentaries regarding churches and their interactions with society. Two of those documentaries, Hell House (2001) and Lord Save Us From Your Followers (2008), have fueled some thoughts I have been having about the way congregations choose to interact with society (HH is on instant Netflix and LSUFYF can be found here). Further fueling the fire have been a couple of recent blog posts by Dave Fitch, prof at Northern Seminary and all around theological and missiological guru (You find both posts here and here). I suggest if you have the time to watch both documentaries and read both posts. For now here is a quick rundown of each.

Hell House (Full synopsis from IMDB here). It may be because I grew up Lutheran in a suburb of Chicago that I never knew these things existed but regrettably they still do. This documentary depicts the formation of a hell house put on in Texas by an Assemblies of God congregation which apparently draws over 10,000 people a year. A “Hell House” is like a haunted house but it depicts ‘real’ scenes of suicide, date rape, abortions, family violence, driving under the influence, etc. using makeup and props. This is done in an attempt to scare people away from hell, which is apparently where those who commit the sins depicted in those scenes will end up. Of course each tour through the hell house ends with a chance to ‘make a decision for Christ.’ 

Lord Save Us From Your Followers (Full synopsis from IMDB here). This documentary is at times playful but it takes a good look at how some Christians choose to speak to the world in which they live. The director was raised Evangelical, and he wears a suit of bumper-sticker theology, going to major cities and asking the marginalized what they think about Christianity. He also interviews people on both sides of the spectrum to get a pretty fair/balanced view. The film really emphasizes how people are not often willing to have a dialog but would rather yell and argue against a position contrary to their own. It does a good job of showing how Christians are generally perceived, i.e., judgmental and bigoted. 

Fitch Post #1: The Greg Laurie Crusade and 2 Other Signs Christendom Ain’t Done Yet

In this post Fitch discusses three recent attempts by Christians to interact with society. The first was a ‘Crusade’ held by Greg Laurie in Chicago which mirrors the old Billy Graham crusades. The Second was the use of the Alpha Program which invites people to come ask questions about faith which is geared less toward secular folks than it appears. The third is an experience with One-on-One Tract Evangelism he had in a local park. Fitch raises the concern with each instance that these programs might just be the “church talking to herself.”

Fitch Post #2: The Video Venue Farce: Why Video Venue is the Antithesis of Missional

This post revolves around multi-site churches which use recorded videos for preaching rather than an actual person. Fitch expresses his views raising three concerns, 1) Video Venues decontextualize preaching, 2) Video venues draw crowds to a celebrity and this attraction works against (as opposed to helps) the formation of church in mission, 3)Mission requires more than words. Video venues intensify the dependence upon words. His discussion is framed within the context of a video he reposted which features a discussion regarding primarily the positives but also the negatives of video based multi-site churches held by Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill in Seattle), James McDonald (Harvest Bible Chapel in Chicago Suburbs), and Mark Dever (Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington DC). 

First, I want to make a distinction that I will flesh out in another post soon; when I say church I mean Christians and vice versa. If I am refering to a a specific ‘church’ i will use the word congregation. I want to make this distinction because I am increasingly leery about using the word church to refer to a specific group of people located at a specific place, e.g. St. John’s Lutheran Church, because I firmly believe that the church does not exist outside of our flesh. So from now on  church = christian and congregation = name/location of a worshiping community. 

Needless to say my mind has been circling around the theme of how we interact with society. The above are only four examples of a much larger issue that has been documented numerous times and has undoubtedly been experienced by many if not all of you reading this. These examples force us to ask again the question that Dave Fitch asked in that first blog post, are we ending up just talking to ourselves? Does what we do actually impact and transform our communities or does it only serve to stroke our own egos? Is the answer somewhere in the middle?

Society has spoken concerning us whether we like it or not. For decades, the vocal majority of the church has been concerned more about being right than it has been about being compassionate. This has caused more harm than the good that was intended in that through our desire to ‘preach the truth’ we have alienated those to whom we have been called to serve. I know that this is not a new idea or realization but I thought it best to reiterate it. 

We have lost the idea that communication is not what is given but what is received. Even if we have preached the ‘truth’ that doesnt mean we have communicated anything about God’s or our love for our neighbor. The message is important, but equally important is the means because, the means is the message.  A hallowed professor of mine once said, they will never care about what you know until they know that you care. But dont just take his word for it, let us also look at only two instances from our own biblical narrative, consider James 2:15-16 and 1 John 3:18. 

James 2:15-16 Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?

1 John 3:18 Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.

Even divorced from their context I could make a case for my point but to do so would be to ignore their context which is essential. The passage in James piggybacks a discussion concerning showing favoritism which is capped off with the phrase, “Mercy triumphs over judgment.” It is then followed with a discussion concerning faith and works and the necessity of both. In this context this verse speaks even more volumes than if was simply plucked as a proof texted passage. It is not enough to have words, to speak, but we must work toward meeting physical needs even if it is at the expense of our voice. The 1 John passage emphasizes this point. This passage is within the context of the redemptive work of Christ. It is the capstone to a discussion regarding how Christ loved us and how we are to love our neighbor and it is followed in John 4 by a discussion about what love looks like. This is the point, to love with actions not with words. 

We need to come up with new ways of interacting with society. The great thing is that this is totally dependent upon context. There is no one specific way this can be achieved by congregations because the cultural context of each congregation is different. The church can no longer be hemmed in, afraid of society, because the only way we can interact with society in meaningful and impactful ways which will communicate not only our message but more importantly the love of God for all people is by being integral parts of society. By being part of the community in which we live. We have been empowered by the Spirit, we need to live like it. 

I feel that the answer to the original question is that most of what we are doing is stroking our own egos. To borrow from Fitch, its the church speaking to herself. It doesn’t have to be. We have the ability to change not only how society perceives us but how we communicate God’s love to people. To do so we must be willing to change. I want to close with a quote, “This is not a time to protect what we have and long for the good times to come back. It is a time to review what we’re doing and how we’re doing it—our heart for all our activity, our love for God and people—and find better ways to be Christ’s people in this world.” Alistair Brown - President Northern Seminary. 

discussing practice...

Regrettably it has been just over a week since my last post. However, that last post has generated some mild discussion via facebook message. Here is the post if you have not read it.  Below is that back and forth, please weigh in…

rmschroeder: I appreciate the attention to the word practice. I think that your so-to-speak call-out on those who reach back to God's consistency is fair - but can we agree to this:

As God is consistent, the theological task then is to be faithful signposts - pointing to where he reveals himself. Being 'faithful' then ought to be rooted in careful speech and definition (articulation) to the accounts and realities Christians hold true, according to the eye-witnesses in Scripture.

With that being said, I see your intent to sound an alarm that actually matches the danger of our current context. I know you and I agree that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So then, do we necessarily have to redefine theology, or simply reframe it? (I do not believe reframing necessitates redefining.) I would posit that reframing is the bridge between our theological task and the context. To do so, we ought to emphasize that we are practicing discipleship, not necessarily theology.

I hope this contributes to the conversation, and I would love to hear your thoughts!

God's Peace,

Ryan aka rmschroeder

Me:Your question of agreement: "As God is consistent, the theological task then is to be faithful signposts - pointing to where he reveals himself. Being 'faithful' then ought to be rooted in careful speech and definition (articulation) to the accounts and realities Christians hold true, according to the eye-witnesses in Scripture."

I agree, but to a point. I would yes the theological task is to be faithful to how God has revealed himself, but I do not know how faithful we can actually be to the scriptural witness.

First, if we believe in concupiscence then we admit that we are now and will always be flawed. Granted, this does not preclude us from reading and interpreting scripture but we have to be able to admit that our inability to be perfect beings inhibits our ability to be faithful to the eye-witness of scripture. 

Second, the scriptural witness cannot be divorced from the context in which it was written. Perspective and context need to be paramount when we are trying to ascertain the faithful reading of a text. Furthermore, our own context is not the same as the context of scripture. Therefore we should be diligent in attempting to ascertain the present day reality which the scriptural witness declares concerning God. 

Third, we need to admit that we dont know as much as we think we do. Humility I guess is the word but I dont want to use it. There are certain things for which Christians need to make a stand, however, I think that list is different than most conservative Christians. What I mean is, I dont think abortion and gay marriage should be sticking points. When something concerns Christ and His atoning work, then yes, we need to voice our concerns. But for some reason many Christians feel like they know what God cares about better than God. To those people I would ask if God really cared about abortion and gay marriage as much as you think why did he talk about helping the poor in 2000 more instances than those two combined. 

I guess in the end what I am trying to say is that I dont think reframing and discipling should be the focus, but our perception of truth. Jurgen Moltmann once said, "Truth must be practicable. Unless it contains initiative for the transformation of the world, it becomes a myth of the existing world." So much of what Christians claim to be truth is nothing more than their own myth.

I hope my words aren’t too harsh. Id love to hear your thoughts.

Peace,

Matt

practice, practice, practice

My wife and I watched a documentary today called Fall From Grace. It chronicled the hateful and ignorant ideals which are spewed out by Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church. Although the documentary was enough to make me want to move to Topeka and have a few words with the Phelps Clan, it made me stop and think about theology. It wasn't just the theology which they were espousing, but the theological task in general.


One scene during the documentary showed an interview with a lawyer where he said the Phelps had lost his license to 'practice' law. It was that word 'practice' which caught my attention. Now, to be honest I cannot remember if what I am about to say I once heard from someone else, in fact I think it was but I can't remember. Either way, whether this thought is original or not, it got me thinking. People 'practice' law, they 'practice' medicine. This implies an inherent need to continually refine and rethink strategies and assumptions. The same is true for sports. Practicing is what refines skills and prepares an individual to compete. Why don't we call it 'practicing' theology when we espouse something?


Now to be sure there is a line of thinking which leads one to think that because God spoke through the scriptures that one does not need to 'practice' or refine one's theology because God has already spoken the truth. However, in light of the fact that sin has completely corrupted humanity and has made it apparent that one can read the bible and come out with some pretty off kilter theology you cannot say for certain the former idea is true. The way in which we define the theological task needs to be changed. Why? Because the way we define it has a direct impact on how we carry out the theological task.


Life is contextual. Even if we think we have arrived with some truth that is worth sharing we need to be continually refining the way in which we present it. But beyond the obvious need to be contextual, we need to be continually refining our theology. We need to ask again questions from the past and try and determine a contemporary answer to them. I think practice is a good way to describe our task. Continually rethink. Continually redefine. Always working toward an answer but never settling for one. In the end it is Christ who is the same yesterday, today, and forever, not our theology.

flesh and blood

This post was written about two weeks ago. I hope that you still find relevancy in what was written. 


As cliche as it sounds, I will always remember where I was on September 11th, 2001. It was a Tuesday and I was in high school. A mere 16 years old, trying to sleep in because I didn’t have to be at school until 9:30 that morning. I remember waking up to someone yelling at me to turn on the TV. I wasn’t too happy about it, After all, it was my day to sleep in. Begrudgingly I woke up and turned on the TV just in time to see the second plane hit the towers. I was in a state of shock. For those of us who were old enough to remember what happened the rest of that day and the following weeks and months, the images we saw and the feelings we experienced are ones that are forever etched into our consciousness.

What sets my experience apart is the fact that I watched it on TV, hundreds of miles away from danger in a suburb of Chicago. But for others, the events of that day are too horrible to recall. They are too real to ever forget; too painful to deal with. It is no wonder there is opposition to the building of a mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero. For some, it is a direct insult to those affected by the tragic events of that day.

However, one must not forget that it was more than just white God-fearing Americans who were lost that day. People of all races, creeds and colors became the victims of the attack of those few extremists. Perhaps the greatest forgotten victims of the events of Sept. 11th are Muslims all around the world. In a brief moment, an entire belief system was thrust upon the world stage with a tag that read, terrorist. The ensuing persecution of Muslims throughout the US was fueled by fear and was nothing short of cowardice hiding behind a veil of nationalism and religious conviction.

It’s nine years later and what can we say about mending that divide? Not much. To be sure there are those who have moved on, those who know how to separate a group of extremists from an entire religious system, but still there remains ignorance and intolerance. What does not help the situation are the articles appearing on the web and in newspapers about strict muslim countries and how people within those countries are forced to live.

One example of this is an AP article from Tuesday Sept. 7, 2010 entitled, “EU calls ‘barbaric’ plans to stone Iranian woman.” The article was about a woman being held in prison awaiting execution because she was convicted of committing adultery. It is almost laughable for most Americans to consider execution the punishment for adultery. Lets face it, if adultery were punishable by death in this country, there would be a lot more prisons with an innumerable amount of people awaiting executions.

Before we laugh this off as Muslims being intolerant, we Christians need to look at our own Bibles. In Leviticus 20:10 God’s law commands the death of those caught in adultery. It is not surprising then in John 8 when the woman is brought before Jesus by the Pharisees who are trying to trick Jesus into going against the law. But Jesus, being the sly fox that he is, eludes their trickery and the woman walks away, uncondemned. As great of a story as it is, it should serve as a reminder about judgment. Before we start looking to poke holes in someone else’s religious system, lets not forget about our own. Before we start talking about September 11th, lets remember the Crusades and the Inquisition.

But still, some clamor loudly against Muslims whether they understand Islam or not. It is because of American, and especially Christian, intolerance that Muslims have been forced to curtail their pious expression of the faith they possess. In a Washington Post article entitled, “Muslims toning down Eid festivities in honor of Sept. 11,” Tara Bahrampour explains how Muslims are working hard not to offend Americans on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks. For those of who do not know, Eid is a celebration which marks the end of Ramadan, a holy month in the Islamic faith. It is their equivalent to our Christmas. Because Muslims go by a lunar calendar, the exact date of Eid changes each year. This year marks the first in which it coincides with Sept. 11.

In an effort to show sensitivity and compassion toward Americans, many Muslims around America are curtailing their celebrations by toning down the revelry and holding the celebration on days other than 9/11. I highly doubt Christians would be as sensitive if the proverbial shoe were on the other foot. For so many of us we think that because have the truth it means we can wave around like a flag in the face of anyone. For example, one church in Florida, The Dove World Outreach Center, was planning on burning copies of the Koran, the Muslim holy book, on September 11th. (See CNN.com for article.) Why is it that we cannot show the same compassion, sensitivity, and tolerance that is shown to us?

I can already hear the voices crying out how we shouldn’t have to be tolerant. How tolerance is weak because it forces us to hide the truth. How we are being persecuted by the government forcing out the Ten Commandments and “under God” from the pledge of allegiance. I can hear the outcry of those who want to “Restore Honor” to America and restore the Christian ideals upon which she was founded. To these voices I simply reply, let it go.

I say this for two reasons. First, Jesus said it would happen. The whole New Testament but if you want a quick reference, John 16:33. Read it. Second, Christianity is not now, nor will it ever be about an ideal, a piece of knowledge, or some abstract notion. It is and will always be about flesh and blood. It wasn’t an ideal that came down because the world was suffering, it was flesh and blood. It wasn’t an ideal that died on the cross, it was flesh and blood. It wasn’t an ideal that rose again and told us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us, it was flesh and blood. It was Jesus the Christ.

Perhaps nobody better understood the flesh and blood aspect of our faith than Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. His work during the Civil Rights movement was always about people. Flesh and blood people. People he saw suffering, rejected, and forgotten. It was King who audaciously believed that, “Peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality, and freedom for their spirits.” His legacy should inspire future generations to act when they see injustice, no matter where it perpetrated.

But why should we care? What does it matter if a woman in Iran suffers? Because we are all part of a brotherhood known as humanity. Whether we like it or not we live in a diverse world. As King reminds us, “We must learn to live together as brothers, or perish together as fools.” Or perhaps more aptly put, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

It is about people, not belief systems. It doesn’t matter if a woman is oppressed by a Muslim because people have been and are oppressed by Christians. It doesn’t matter if she herself is a Muslim. Sometimes its hard to look past the faith of a person because we see their belief as a sin. Why is it we claim we can love the sinner and hate the sin but end up hating both? It is because we have forgotten that the details are not what matters, the person is. Our brother or sister. Our Muslim brother who is forced to curtail an important part of his faith walk. Our Muslim sister who is going to be stoned.

Instead of isolating ourselves and creating spheres of false piety and purity we should be called to action by our faith. Paul succinctly puts it this way in Galatians 5:6, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” In other words, outward signs of pious Christianity does not count for anything, what counts is love. 1 Corinthians 13 echoes that point emphatically. Jesus takes it to the extreme saying we should love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. Love is not a state of mind or feeling, it is known only through the action of another. You know your wife loves you not because she says so but because of what she does. The same is true for everyone. I don’t mean to downplay the role of truth or theology. Those things matter a great deal. But they do not and will never matter more than the person who is afflicted and forgotten about. Issues never supersede individuals.

In the end the voices will still clamor. Hatred will still exist. Intolerance and ignorance will always be heard. People will still be put to death under heinous regimes. Terrorist attacks will still happen. Some people will not be able to move on. But you and I can. We can take a step forward. Empowered by the love of the one who came down for us we can enter into the lives of others and help. We can bring an end to one persons suffering if we are willing to take the step. It doesn’t matter what they believe. What matters is that they, like us, are flesh and blood.

 – Matt