My blog has moved! http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/
|
 |
Twitter Feed for My Recent Blog Posts and Other Tweets |
My blog has moved! http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/
|
Could Mardi Gras Be for Christians?
By Mark D. Roberts | Tuesday, February 16, 2010
And Nehemiah continued, “Go and celebrate with a feast of rich foods and sweet drinks, and share gifts of food with people who have nothing prepared. This is a sacred day before our Lord. Don’t be dejected and sad, for the joy of the LORD is your strength!” (Nehemiah 8:10)
Today is Mardi Gras. Many of us associate Mardi Gras with lavish and lascivious celebrations in places such as New Orleans and Rio de Janeiro. Not the sort of thing you’d expect to show up in daily reflections on the Bible! (Note: today’s post is based on the Daily Reflections I write for TheHighCalling.org.)
But, in fact, Scripture encourages us to set aside special times for celebration, even doing that which is at the core of Mardi Gras. No, no, I’m not suggesting that there is any biblical warrant for the excesses of many Mardi Gras festivals, which look rather like what happened in Exodus 32 when the Israelites worshiped the golden calf. But the phrase “Mardi Gras” is French for “Fat Tuesday.” The name is derived from the classic Christian practice of eating fatty food on the Tuesday before Lent, in preparation for the Lenten fast from rich, sweet cuisine. (Some people actually refer to Mardi Gras as Pancake Tuesday because of their tradition of eating pancakes on the day before Lent. I was not raised in this tradition, but as a pancake lover, I rather like it.)
Is it ever appropriate for God’s people to enjoy lavish celebrations with rich food? Or are we always to live in frugality and self-denial? Nehemiah 8 provides a surprising answer.
The chapter begins after the wall in Jerusalem had been rebuilt, thus guaranteeing the safety and flourishing of the city. The people gathered together in order to celebrate what they had accomplished by God’s power. On that day, Ezra the scribe stood on a tall platform so that he might read the Jewish law to all who had gathered. As he read, learned Levites helped the people understand the meaning of the text . . . an early example of small-group Bible study. When the people heard the law and grasped its meaning, they were struck to the heart and began to weep.
But then their leaders did a most surprising thing. They urged the people to stop crying and start partying! Nehemiah told the people to “[g]o and celebrate with a feast of rich foods and sweet drinks, and share gifts of food with people who have nothing prepared. This is a sacred day before our Lord. Don’t be dejected and sad, for the joy of the LORD is your strength!” (8:10). The Hebrew phrase translated here as “celebrate with a feast of rich foods” literally reads, “eat the fat” (’ikhlu mashmannim). Nehemiah was, in a sense, urging the people to have a “Fat Tuesday” celebration.
Of course God’s people should also set aside time for repentance and self-denial. We see an example of this in the last verse of Nehemiah 8, as well as in the whole of Nehemiah 9. It would be wrong to conclude from Nehemiah 8:10 that godly life should always be a party. But there is a time to celebrate, to enjoy the good things of life, even pancakes and other rich foods. (Of course some of us need to be careful with this for the sake of our physical health.)
Notice that the celebration in Nehemiah 8 took into account those “who have nothing prepared” (8:10). The people who were blessed with the resources to throw a big party were to share with those who lacked such resources. As God’s people, we are always called to be generous with the poor, even and especially in our celebrations.
Notice also the rationale for the party: “This is a sacred day before our Lord. Don’t be dejected and sad, for the joy of the Lord is your strength!” (8:10). In my tradition, holiness is usually associated with somberness and seriousness. This isn’t wrong, but it can lead to a lack of balance in our experience of God. Sometimes on a sacred day it is absolutely right to celebrate and to experience the joy of the Lord.
Nehemiah 8, therefore, stands as a corrective to two opposing views of life that battle our allegiance. On the one hand, some would argue that the only way to enjoy life is to live excessively, engaging in behavior that is beyond the parameters of decency, not to mention God’s Word. Others, by contrast, would contend that godly living always demands austerity and solemnity. In fact, the Bible reveals that God created the good things in this life to be enjoyed . . . within limits. There is a time to “eat the fat” in celebration even as there is a time to fast in repentance, and plenty of times in between.
So if you’re going to eat pancakes today, or some other equivalent delicacy, enjoy your feast because this day is holy to the Lord. Celebrate his goodness with delight because the joy of the Lord is your strength!
Topics: Holidays | 2 Comments »
Book Review: Connected, by Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler (Part 2)
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, February 15, 2010
In Friday’s post I began reviewing an intriguing new book: Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives, by Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler. Today I want to finish my review, first by putting up some quotations from the book and then by adding a few comments of my own.
Excerpts from Connected:
The Internet makes possible new social forms that are radical modifications of existing types of social-network interactions in four ways: 1. Enormity: a vast increase in the scale of our networks and the numbers of people who might be reached to join them 2. Communality: a broadening of the scale by which we can share information and contribute to collective efforts 3. Specificity: an impressive increase in the particularity of the ties we can form 4. Virtuality: the ability to assume virtual identities. (KL 4335-5341)
MDR: Though we can take for granted the power of the Internet, it is truly amazing to me that around 3,000 people will visit my blog today, representing most continents on earth.
By banding together, the citizens [of Babel in Genesis 11] had been able to do something—build the tower—that they could not have done alone. Other stories from the Bible allude to the power of connections but put a more positive spin on what connected humans can do. When Joshua and the Israelites arrived at the gates of Jericho, they found that the walls of the city were too steep for any one person to climb or destroy. And then, the story goes, God told them to stand together and march around the city. When they heard the sound of the ram’s horn, they “spoke with one voice”—in a kind of synchronization like La Ola [the Wave in stadiums]—and the walls of Jericho came tumbling down. Observations about connection and its implications are ancient, in no small part because theologians and philosophers, like modern biologists and social scientists, have always known that social connections are key to our humanity—full of both promise and danger. Connections were often seen as what distinguished us from animals or an uncivilized state. (KL 4533-4540)
MDR: Yes. God created us as connected people. In fact, Genesis 3 shows a profound connection between human beings and the physical creation. Human sin led to the corruption of the material world.
The networks we create have lives of their own. They grow, change, reproduce, survive, and die. Things flow and move within them. A social network is a kind of human superorganism, with an anatomy and a physiology—a structure and a function—of its own. From bucket brigades to blogospheres, the human superorganism does what no person could do alone. Our local contributions to the human social network have global consequences that touch the lives of thousands every day and help us to achieve much more than the building of towers or the destruction of walls. (KL 4555-4559)
MDR: Connected challenges us and encourages us to pay much closer attention to our networks if we want to make a positive difference in the world.
But on a more human level, social networks affect every aspect of our lives. Events occurring in distant others [that is, in other people who are physically distant from us] can determine the shape of our lives, what we think, what we desire, whether we fall ill or die. In a social chain reaction, we respond to faraway events, often without being consciously aware of it. (KL 4805-4807)
MDR: This reminds me of what Paul writes about the church as the body of Christ: “But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honored, all rejoice together with it” (1 Cor 12:24-26).
Recognition of this loss of self-direction [because we’re influenced so much by our social networks] can be shocking. But the surprising power of social networks is not just the effect others have on us. It is also the effect we have on others. You do not have to be a superstar to have this power. All you need to do is connect. The ubiquity of human connection means that each of us has a much bigger impact on others than we can see. When we take better care of ourselves, so do many other people. When we practice random acts of kindness, they can spread to dozens or even hundreds of other people. And with each good deed, we help to sustain the very network that sustains us. (KL 4814-4818)
MDR: So, Jesus tells his disciples that we are the salt of the earth. We will make a difference in the world because of our connection to the world and its people. There isn’t a question of whether we will make a difference or not, only of what sort of difference we will make. Connected shows that we make this difference, not only in actions that obviously impact others or in persuading others, but simply in living in networks of relationships.
Conclusion
Connected is a book that confirms with sociologically responsible data what many of us already believe about the power of relationships. But it goes well beyond what is obvious, showing how much our connections can impact the world. I recommend Connected especially to leaders in church, business, government, education, art, music, and other contexts of influence.
Moreover, I would recommend Connected to people who are tempted to think that they really don’t matter. This book demonstrates that your ability to influence others is much greater than you have imagined.
Topics: Book Reviews | No Comments »
Sunday Inspiration from The High Calling
By Mark D. Roberts | Sunday, February 14, 2010
A Life of Integrity at Home
I will be careful to live a blameless life—
when will you come to help me?
I will lead a life of integrity
in my own home.
In Psalm 101, David pledges to live an exemplary life. He will praise the Lord, not only with his songs, but with his character and behavior. In particular, David promises: “I will be careful to live a blameless life—when will you come to help me? I will lead a life of integrity in my own home” (101:2).
The phrase translated here as “I will lead a life of integrity” could be expressed more literally as “I will walk with integrity in my heart.” This refers to a profound consistency between one’s inner life and one’s outer lifestyle. It is the opposite of hypocrisy, where the inner and outer don’t match, or incongruity, where we act one way in one setting and a completely different way in another.
David mentions explicitly that he will walk with integrity “in my own home.” He means more than that he will live rightly when he is physically in his place of residence. David’s home is the place of his most intimate and important relationships, the place where he interacts with his closest friends and advisors, the place where he spends time with his children, the place where he draws near to God in prayer.
How easy it is for those of us who are in positions of leadership to squander our integrity at home. We appear to be people of high ethics in our workplace or public endeavors, but are altogether different when we’re with our family and friends, or when we are alone. Psalm 101 challenges us to live whole lives in which all the parts fit together, forming a mosaic of witness to God’s love, justice, and truth.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION: Are you living a life of integrity in your own home, in your closest relationships, in your private life? Where do you find it hard to experience the wholeness God wants to give you? Have you confessed your failings in this area to the Lord? Have you asked him to help you be a person of consistent integrity?
PRAYER: Dear Lord, thank you for this stirring reminder from Psalm 101. I want to lead a life of integrity in my own home. Yet so often I fail. Forgive me, Lord. Create in me a clean heart so that I might live for your glory in every moment.
Help me, by your grace and through your Spirit, to walk with integrity in every path of my life. When I’m with those who are closest to me or when I’m with nobody else but you, help me to honor you and those you have put in my life.
In the name of Jesus I pray, Amen!
_________________________________________________
Would you like to receive a Daily Reflection like this one in your email inbox each morning?
Here’s how . . . .
This devotional comes from The High Calling of Our Daily Work (www.thehighcalling.org), a wonderful website about work and God. You can read my Daily Reflections there, or sign up to have them sent to your email inbox each day. This website contains lots of encouragement for people who are trying to live out their faith in the workplace.
Topics: Sunday Inspiration | No Comments »
Book Review: Connected, by Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler
By Mark D. Roberts | Friday, February 12, 2010
I recently finished a fascinating book: Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. It was written by two top scholars, Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler. Christakis is a medical doctor and sociologist who teaches at Harvard. Fowler is a political scientist who teaches at the University of California, San Diego. Christakis and Fowler wrote Connected for non-specialists, and, as non-specialist, I was able to follow their argument. At times, however, I felt a bit swamped by academic studies and details. I wish their editor had put about a hundred pages into the footnotes.
Having said that, I must add that Connected is mostly quite readable and engaging. At times its conclusions are rather obvious. I didn’t need two sociology professors to tell me that my choice of a spouse was greatly influenced by my social network. Yet Connected demonstrates in considerable detail that much of our life is impacted by our networks of relationships, much more than we might realize.
To give you a flavor of the book, I’ll quote some significant passages.
Passages from Connected:
The key to understanding people is understanding the ties between them; therefore, it was to the ties that we turned our focus. (KL 67-68, KL = Kindle location)
Seeing ourselves as part of a superorganism allows us to understand our actions, choices, and experiences in a new light. (KL 81-82)
This book focuses on our ties to others and how they affect emotions, sex, health, politics, money, evolution, and technology. But most of all it is about what makes us uniquely human. To know who we are, we must understand how we are connected. (KL 95-97)
Humans deliberately make and remake their social networks all the time. The primary example of this is homophily, the conscious or unconscious tendency to associate with people who resemble us (the word literally means “love of being alike”). (KL 308-310)
. . . the spread of influence in social networks obeys what we call the Three Degrees of Influence Rule. Everything we do or say tends to ripple through our network, having an impact on our friends (one degree), our friends’ friends (two degrees), and even our friends’ friends’ friends (three degrees). Our influence gradually dissipates and ceases to have a noticeable effect on people beyond the social frontier that lies at three degrees of separation. Likewise, we are influenced by friends within three degrees but generally not by those beyond. (KL 485-488)
Social networks have value precisely because they can help us to achieve what we could not achieve on our own. (KL 532-533)
Because we are so sure of our individual power to make decisions, we lose sight of the extraordinary degree to which our choice of a partner is determined by our surroundings and, in particular, by our social network. (KL 1049-1050)
Whether influential people can exercise influence at all may depend entirely on the precise structure of the network in which they find themselves, something over which they have limited control. (KL 2126-2128)
A Theological Reflection
Connected is not a book of theology, though it does invite theological reflection. I want to offer a bit of this in response to a passage cited above. Here it is, once again:
This book focuses on our ties to others and how they affect emotions, sex, health, politics, money, evolution, and technology. But most of all it is about what makes us uniquely human. To know who we are, we must understand how we are connected. (KL 95-97)
Christakis and Fowler argue that what makes us uniquely human has everything to do with our connections, our relationships. One could make this same argument from Scripture. Consider the creation of human beings in Genesis 1 and 2. In Genesis 1, “man” is created in God’s image as “male and female.” Man is, essentially, in relationship. Then, in Genesis 2, the creation of people is described from a different perspective. First, God creates a male being, the man. But then God says that it is not good for the man to be alone. So God creates a woman as a partner for the man. If the author of Genesis were a sociologist, we might rather have read, “To know who we are, we must understand how we are connected.”
There is more in Connected upon which I wish to comment, and will do so in an upcoming blog post.
Topics: Book Reviews | No Comments »
Kathy Hastings and the By/For Project
By Mark D. Roberts | Thursday, February 11, 2010
One of the unusual features of Laity Lodge is our interest in and excitement for the arts. At the Laity Lodge retreat center we have The Cody Center, an art gallery that doubles as a concert hall. The Cody Center includes two art studios in which retreat participants can do art and not just look at it. We always have an artist in residence who provides guidance for those who visit the studios, which are fully stocked with top-notch supplies, and which are available to our guests at no additional charge. (Photo: Inside of the Cody Center art gallery.)
At the most recent Laity Lodge retreat, our artist in residence was Kathy Hastings. She is, among other things, an amazing photographer. Here is a photo of one of Kathy’s masterpieces. It’s called “Stone Wave. Maestoso.” It is a photo of one of the canyon walls at Laity Lodge, along the Frio River.
Kathy’s art has to be seen in person to be fully appreciated. But you can enjoy her work by visiting her website. If you take some time to explore this site, you’ll be glad you did.
Kathy has recently been involved in the By/For Project. This endeavor seeks to create works of art “by the church and for the church.” By/For has featured works by such leading artists as Michael Card and Makoto Fujimura. The artists who are involved with the By/For Project are giving away what they produce. That’s the “for the church” part of the By/For vision.
Topics: Recommendations | 4 Comments »
Proof That Even Brilliant Professors Can Lack Common Sense?!?
By Mark D. Roberts | Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Last week I visited one of the leading universities in the United States. It is especially famous for its outstanding research faculty. Academic brilliance flourishes in this place.
I was meeting with a member of that faculty, and spent a few hours in his office. On his floor were a couple dozen colleagues in his field. When I went to use the men’s restroom, I was impressed by a sign that had been carefully taped above a toilet’s flushing mechanism. It read: PLEASE FLUSH AFTER USE!
I had to wonder why this sign was there. Surely the professors knew that they’re supposed to flush after use, not beforehand. So I expect the problem was that some of them weren’t flushing at all, not that they were flushing too early. In this case, the sign could have read more simply: PLEASE FLUSH!
Why, I asked myself, would highly educated people, leaders in their academic field, writers of recommended books, need this sort of sign? Didn’t their mommies teach them to flushing after use?
Perhaps the non-flushing professors were trying to save water by not flushing. Or, perhaps they’ve become so used to automatic flushers that they don’t remember to do it themselves. Or, perhaps this sign is proof that professors can be brilliant in one thing and rather dull in others. I was reminded of the time when I observed one of the most celebrated Harvard professors stuck in front of an ATM machine, unsure how to make it operate.
The sign in the men’s room of the university reminded me of a similar sign I spotted last year while visiting Epcot Center in Disneyworld, Florida. I think I posted a photo of this sign on my website last year, but it’s worth another round. This most helpful sign was not a reminder to flush, but rather a set of instructions concerning what to do afterwards. It guided one through the steps of hand washing. I noticed that these “hand washing tips” were provided by Brawny, makers of paper towels. Thus I was not surprised to discover that the thrid step read: “Dry hands thoroughly using paper towels.” Notice, not just one paper towel, but paper towels, in the plural. I guess the Brawny people want you to use plenty of their product. Can’t figure out why . . . .
I guess nobody every told Epcot or Brawny about the downside of using paper towels to dry one’s hands after using the restroom. This downside can be found on electric dryers in public restrooms. Consider, for example, the sign that appears on the World Dryer: “Dryers help protect the environment. They save trees from being used for paper towels. They eliminate paper towel waste. They are more sanitary to use than paper and help maintain cleaner facilities.”
There are studies that indicate that the use of hand dryers is, indeed, better for the environment, even though they use electricity. But, alas, this may not be the end of the story. In November 2008, scientists on the faculty of the University of Westminster, London, conducted a study comparing paper towels, warm air dryers, and jet air dryers in terms of efficiency and hygiene (download PDF of study). Here are some of their conclusions (italics added):
The results of all parts of this study suggest that paper towels should be used in locations where hygiene is paramount, such as hospitals, clinics, schools, nurseries, care homes, kitchens and other food preparation areas. Warm air dryers and jet air dryers should be carefully considered for these types of location because of their poorer hygiene performance and the increased likelihood of transmission of bacteria, including potentially pathogenic types, via the fingerpads and palms of the hand and their air flows. The performance of both the warm air dryer and the jet air dryer was inferior to paper towels in all respects (drying efficiency, bacterial numbers on the hands, bacterial contamination of the air flow and surfaces of the devices, and transmission of bacteria in the washroom) with the one exception that the jet air dryer is equal in drying efficiency.
So there you have it . . . or not. I wonder if the professors of the University of Westminster flush after use?
Topics: Fun | 4 Comments »
NY Times: “Microsoft’s Creative Destruction”
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, February 8, 2010
Last Thursday I read a striking op-ed piece in the New York Times. It was written by Dick Brass, a former VP for Microsoft. Brass argues that Microsoft has become a place where genuine innovation is discouraged. Here are a few excerpts:
. . . Microsoft is no longer considered the cool or cutting-edge place to work. There has been a steady exit of its best and brightest. . . .
What happened? Unlike other companies, Microsoft never developed a true system for innovation. Some of my former colleagues argue that it actually developed a system to thwart innovation. Despite having one of the largest and best corporate laboratories in the world, and the luxury of not one but three chief technology officers, the company routinely manages to frustrate the efforts of its visionary thinkers. . . .
Internal competition is common at great companies. It can be wisely encouraged to force ideas to compete. The problem comes when the competition becomes uncontrolled and destructive. At Microsoft, it has created a dysfunctional corporate culture in which the big established groups are allowed to prey upon emerging teams, belittle their efforts, compete unfairly against them for resources, and over time hector them out of existence. It’s not an accident that almost all the executives in charge of Microsoft’s music, e-books, phone, online, search and tablet efforts over the past decade have left.
As a result, while the company has had a truly amazing past and an enviably prosperous present, unless it regains its creative spark, it’s an open question whether it has much of a future.
Of course it’s possible that Brass has been chewing on sour grapes, especially given current excitement over the iPad and the fact that Brass had tried to develop similar technologies at Microsoft, but failed. Nevertheless, his op-ed does raise the question of why Microsoft, once the king of innovation, seems to be coming up with so little that is new and exciting. Or coming up with debacles like Windows Vista.
Those of us who are in positions of leadership of organizations in which innovation matters – and that’s just about every organization in the world, including families, schools, churches, governments, businesses, and you-name-it – would do well to consider whether our corporate culture encourages innovation. Is competition among people and departments healthy or toxic? Do we work well together? Do we support the efforts of others? Are we willing to share the glory, or to cheer when others get it and we don’t? Do we allow for failure? Do we even encourage the sort of innovation that will inevitably lead to failure?
I hope Microsoft can get its act together. I say this as an Apple afficionado (MacBook Pro, iPhone) who nevertheless roots for Microsoft. I have been a long-time user of Microsoft’s Office suite. And I’ve always felt a certain connection to Bill Gates. If he had finished his undergraduate career at Harvard, he and I would have lived in the same dorm during his senior year (my sophmore year). (Photo: Currier House at the Radcliffe Quad, when I spent three years while in college, just missing Bill Gates.)
But, more importantly, I’m a big believer in the value of competition between companies. For example, we need Microsoft to keep Apple on its toes and vice versa. Similarly, I have cheered the announcement of the iPad, not because I’m planning to run out and buy one when it’s available, but because it will push Amazon to improve the Kindle. I’m a happy Kindle user, but would hope for certain improvements in this product (page numbers, easier ways to share information, etc.).
I am also intrigued by Brass’ op-ed because I am part of an organization that seeks to be innovative. Foundations for Laity Renewal, the parent organization of Laity Lodge, encourages creativity and vision. But, like any established institution, we wrestle with a measure of inertia. The example of Microsoft challenges us to foster innovation and, in particular, to minimize unhealthy competition between people and departments.
Topics: Cultural Commentary | 4 Comments »
Sunday Inspiration from The High Calling
By Mark D. Roberts | Sunday, February 7, 2010
A Time to Be Quiet and a Time to Speak
Then the high priest stood up before the others and asked Jesus, “Well, aren’t you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?” But Jesus was silent and made no reply. Then the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
After Jesus was arrested, he was taken to the home of the high priest, where he was interrogated by Jewish leaders from Jerusalem. Many witnesses offered testimony against Jesus, but their stories were not sufficient to condemn him. As he was being accused, Jesus remained silent.
After a while, the high priest stood up and asked Jesus, “Well, aren’t you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?” (14:60). Jesus said nothing. Then the high priest asked, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” (14:61). Jesus finally spoke: “I AM. And you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God’s right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven” (14:62).
On Monday, I’ll reflect upon the meaning of Jesus’ answer, and why it got him into such trouble. For now I want simply to note that, for Jesus, his trial was not a time to fill the room with words. It was as if he was living the line from Ecclesiastes 3:7: “[There is a] time to be quiet and a time to speak.”
We don’t know exactly what motivated Jesus to be so quiet, and then to speak so bluntly. He may have sensed the inadequacy of words to communicate in such an unfriendly context. It may be that Jesus felt no need to defend himself when he knew and had accepted the outcome of his trial. But, no matter Jesus’ exact motivation, his example reminds us that there is a time to be quiet and a time to speak.
These days, our world is filled with anything but quiet. Endless words pummel us from sources human and electronic. And we can add to the empty, oppressive chatter. I’ll confess to doing this way too often. I need to learn to wait upon the Lord, to listen well before I speak, and to use my words judiciously. Perhaps you do too.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION: Do you tend to be a person of quiet or a person of speaking? When do you use too many words? Why? What helps you to be quiet, to listen, and to speak wisely?
PRAYER: O Lord, I don’t really know why you were so quiet during your trial. Honestly, a part of me wishes that you had spoken up, that you had defended yourself. I wish you had called up a battalion of angels in self-defense. But you knew better. You knew what was right at that time. You knew it was a time, mostly for quiet, and then for blunt speech.
Help me, Lord, to be wise even as you are wise. Help me to know when to be quiet, as well as when to speak. Teach me to listen deeply to those around me, to honor them by my receptive silence. And then, by your Spirit, help me to speak words of truth . . . not too many, but just the right numbers.
In your name I pray, Amen.
_________________________________________________
Would you like to receive a Daily Reflection like this one in your email inbox each morning?
Here’s how . . . .
This devotional comes from The High Calling of Our Daily Work (www.thehighcalling.org), a wonderful website about work and God. You can read my Daily Reflections there, or sign up to have them sent to your email inbox each day. This website contains lots of encouragement for people who are trying to live out their faith in the workplace.
Topics: Sunday Inspiration | No Comments »
Rereading a Classic: Christian Mission in the Modern World by John Stott, Part 3
By Mark D. Roberts | Friday, February 5, 2010
Today I finish sharing some quotations from John Stott’s classic book Christian Mission in the Modern World. Toward the end of his chapter on mission, Stott focuses on the question of vocation or calling.
I begin with vocation, by which I mean a Christian’s lifework. We often given the impression that if a young Christian man is really keen for Christ he will undoubtedly become a foreign missionary, that if he is not quite as keen as that he will stay at home and become a pastor, that if he lacks the dedication to he a pastor, he will no doubt serve as a doctor or a teacher, while those who end up in social work or the media or (worst of all) in politics are not far removed from serious backsliding! (KL 354-357)
This much then is certain: if we are Christians we must spend our lives in the service of God and man. The only difference between us lies in the nature of the service we are called to render. Some are indeed called to be missionaries, evangelists or pastors, and others to the great professions of law, education, medicine and the social sciences. But others are called to commerce, to industry and farming, to accountancy and banking, to local government or parliament, and to the mass media, while there are still many women who find their vocation in homemaking and parenthood without pursuing an independent career as well. In all these spheres, and many others besides, it is possible for Christians to interpret their lifework Christianly, and to see it neither as a necessary evil (necessary, that is, for survival), nor even as a useful place in which to evangelize or make money for evangelism, but as their Christian vocation, as the way Christ has called them to spend their lives in his service. (KL 359-364)
Can we now liberate ourselves from the manmade bondage (for that is what it is) of supposing that every really keen Christian will devote all his spare time to some soul-winning enterprise? Surely the biblical doctrine of the body of Christ, with different members gifted to fulfill different functions, should be enough to give us this larger freedom? (KL 379-381)
If we can accept this broader concept of mission as Christian service in the world comprising both evangelism and social action-a concept which is laid upon us by the model of our Savior’s mission in the world – then Christians could under God make a far greater impact on society, an impact commensurate with our numerical strength and with the radical demands of the commission of Christ. (KL 399-401)
Final Comments
Of course there are ways in which Stott’s piece is dated, as you would expect. He speaks of the “modern” world without any mention of postmodernism. And his language is not inclusive with respect to gender. But, still, John Stott’s statement of Christian mission, and within that broader discussion, his notion of vocation, is absolutely right on.
Topics: Mission, Book Reviews | 2 Comments »
Rereading a Classic: Christian Mission in the Modern World by John Stott, Part 2
By Mark D. Roberts | Thursday, February 4, 2010
Yesterday I began sharing some quotations from John Stott’s classic book Christian Mission in the Modern World. Today I’ll add a few more:
Let me return now to the Great Commission. I have tried to argue that its Johannine form, according to which the church’s mission is to be modeled on the Son’s, implies that we are sent into the world to serve, and that the humble service we are to render will include for us as it did for Christ both words and works, a concern for the hunger and for the sickness of both body and soul, in other words, both evangelistic and social activity. (KL 322-325)
Note: The Great Commission is usually cited in the form that appears in the Gospel of Matthew: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (28:18-20). The Johannine form of the Great Commission appears in the so-called “high priestly prayer” of Jesus in John 17: “As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world” (v. 18).
The Great Commission neither explains, nor exhausts, nor supersedes the Great Commandment. What it does is to add to the requirement of neighbor-love and neighbor-service a new and urgent Christian dimension. (KL 333-334)
The Great Commandment is found in Matthew 22: “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
“Mission” describes rather everything the church is sent into the world to do. “Mission” embraces the church’s double vocation of service to be “the salt of the earth” and “the light of the world.” For Christ sends his people into the earth to be its salt, and sends his people into the world to be its light (Matthew 5:13-16). (KL 349-351)
The salt-and-light passage appears in the Sermon on the Mount: “You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot. You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid. No one after lighting a lamp puts it under the bushel basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven. (Matthew 5:13-16)
Topics: Book Reviews | 1 Comment »
Rereading a Classic: Christian Mission in the Modern World by John Stott
By Mark D. Roberts | Wednesday, February 3, 2010
I make it a practice to read classic literature on a fairly regular basis. These days, I often read the classics my children are reading in high school. Thus, in the last year, I’ve read F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby and Ernest Hemmingway’s Farewell to Arms. Sometimes I’m re-reading, as in the case of Gatsby. Sometimes I’m reading a classic for the first time, as in the case of Farewell.
I also try to read or re-read classic Christian literature. Often, this happens when a friend mentions or recommends some fine book. I think to myself, “I need to take another look at that book.” And so I do. These days, the Amazon Kindle often makes it easier and cheaper to find and read classics. (Will the iPad help?)
My friend Steve recently mentioned a book I haven’t thought about for a couple of decades, though it made a major impression on me when I first read it. Near as I can remember, I read John Stott’s Christian Mission in the Modern World when I was in college. It profoundly impacted my thinking about the mission of God and his people, including me. In fact, it may be true that no other book, besides the Bible, has had a greater influence on my understanding of mission than Stott’s classic.
Today this book retains its profound relevance, even though some if it is dated. Stott wrote Christian Mission in the Modern World at a time when there was a raging debated about whether mission was primarily (or exclusively) a matter of evangelism, or primarily (or exclusively) a matter of social actions. In the late 60s and early 70s, the church was strongly polarized in this matter. Today, in the “postmodern” world, there are still Christians who see mission only in terms of evangelism, and others who see it only in terms of seeking justice. But vast numbers of Christians have come to reject the either-or that was so common four decades ago. The fact that so many of us have a more wholistic view of mission, especially those who are in the evangelical wing of the church, is due, in no small measure to the influence of John Stott.
Today and tomorrow I want to put up some excerpts from Stott’s classic book. The references will be to Kindle numbers, not pages. (This is one of the biggest, in my view, the biggest flaw in the Kindle. But I’ll save this rant for a different day.) I hope you will read these quotations seriously, because they are well worth the effort. Better yet, read the book.
Quotations from Christian Mission in the Modern World:
Life is a pilgrimage of learning, a voyage of discovery, in which our mistaken views are corrected, our distorted notions adjusted, our shallow opinions deepened and some of our vast ignorances diminished (KL 104-105, “Kindle Location”)
From the traditional view of mission as exclusively evangelistic and the current ecumenical view of it as the establishment of shalom, we ask if there is a better way, a more balanced and more biblical way of defining the mission of the church, and of relating to one another the evangelistic and social responsibilities of the people of God. (KL 206-208)
All of us should be able to agree that mission arises primarily out of the nature not of the church but of God himself. The living God of the Bible is a sending God. (KL 222-223)
The primal mission is God’s, for it is he who sent his prophets, his Son, his Spirit. Of these missions the mission of the Son is central, for it was the culmination of the ministry of the prophets, and it embraced within itself as its climax the sending of the Spirit. And now the Son sends as he himself was sent. (KL 234-236)
Now he sends us, he says, as the Father had sent him. Therefore our mission, like his, is to be one of service. He emptied himself of status and took the form of a servant, and his humble mind is to be in us (Philippians 2:5-8). He supplies us with the perfect model of service, and sends his church into the world to be a servant church. Is it not essential for us to recover this biblical emphasis? (KL 268-270)
It comes more natural to us to shout the gospel at people from a distance than to involve ourselves deeply in their lives, to think ourselves into their culture and their problems, and to feel with them in their pains. (KL 279-280)
More tomorrow . . . .
Topics: Book Reviews | 2 Comments »
Allen Levi!!
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, February 1, 2010
This past weekend at Laity Lodge I got to know Allen Levi. He was the musician for our retreat. And what a musician he is!
I expect that some of you know Allen already. He has a strong reputation as a solo artist, and he has teamed up with the likes of Bebo Norman and David Wilcox. Before last weekend, I had heard good things about Allen Levi from people I respect. But I had never listened to his music. That was my loss.
Allen is a 53-year-old lawyer from Georgia, though some years ago he put aside his law practice in order to focus on music. According to his website, Allen once took a sabbatical from his law practice in order to get a master’s degree in English literature from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. That may help to explain his extraordinary gifts as a poet and storyteller.
I don’t remember when I’ve heard a more engaging musician/storyteller. I could listen for hours to Allen’s description of everyday life. Like the best of poets, he sees the world differently. He makes connections and discovers ironies that are there for all to see, but are usually discovered by the poet.
Allen is also an excellent guitarist and vocalist. His concert at Laity Lodge was a pure delight. It was one of the most intimate, funny, and touching concerts I have ever been too. It was as if Allen was a friend sharing his life with me and helping me to see my life with new eyes.
Allen is a Christian, and his faith shines through his music, even songs that aren’t obviously Christian. He’s one of those artists who doesn’t need to say the word “Jesus” in every one of his works because they are so profoundly filled with Jesus.
I thought I’d share with you the lyrics from one of Allen’s songs called “Refrigerator Art.” You’ll enjoy reading this song as a poem. But hearing him sing it is ten times richer than reading it. (You can hear a short clip of the first verse here.)
Your little kid comes home from kindergarten,
He says: “Mom, I drew a picture just for you.”
A masterpiece on green construction paper,
Though what it is you haven’t got a clue.But you love those little scribbles just because of whose they are.
Just what they mean you really do not care.
You just kiss your little Rembrandt and you say,
“When we get home, we gonna tape it up of the Frigidaire.”‘Cause you’re a collector of refrigerator art.
You’re a collector of refrigerator art.Little kids create their world with their Crayola.
To some it might just look a colored mess.
But beauty’s in the eye of the beholder,
And moms can be so easy to impress.They are collectors of refrigerator art.
And no mother worth the keeping,
Would chastise or deplore.
She would open up a gallery,
Right on the freezer door.We try to do the best of which we’re able.
But every time you know we fall so short.
Compared to true perfection we all fall outside the lines.
At best we’re just refrigerator art.But the one who put the stars up in the heavens,
The one who made the wings of the butterflies,
He will take us with our awful disproportion.
Somehow we’re all still lovely in his eyes.He’s a collector of refrigerator art.
He’s a corrector of refrigerator art.
He’s the protector of refrigerator art.Well a little kid comes home from kindergarten,
Says “Happy Mama’s Day. I drew this just for you.”
It’s hard to convey the experience of hearing Allen in a blog post. No, it’s impossible. So let me say that if you ever have the chance to hear him life, by all means go for it.
In the meanwhile, you can listen to his music via recording. You can purchase several of Allen’s albums from iTunes. Amazon.com is also a source for his music. Just search on “Allen Levi.” You can learn a whole lot more about him and his music, as well as purchase CDs, from his website.
Topics: Recommendations | 3 Comments »
Sunday Inspiration from The High Calling
By Mark D. Roberts | Sunday, January 31, 2010
Above All Gods
For you, O LORD, are supreme over all the earth;
you are exalted far above all gods.
In 1977, as the praise and worship wave was just beginning to crash on the beaches of the American church, Pete Sanchez, Jr., took Psalm 97:9 in the King James version and wrote a simple song: “For Thou, O LORD, art high above all the earth; Thou are exalted far above all gods. I exalt Thee . . . .” For years, this song was one of the most popular in the world, as it was sung by tens of millions of people every week.
But did this song, and the verse upon which it was based, teach us to believe that there are gods besides the Lord? How could God be greater than all gods if he is the only true God?
These questions can be answered in two different ways. First, the word in Psalm 97:9 translated as “gods,” ’elohim in Hebrew, can also be rendered “divine beings.” So this verse could mean that the Lord is greater than all the angels. This is true, of course, yet most English translations prefer “all gods” rather than “all angels.” The translators are not suggesting that we become polytheists, people who believe that there are many gods. Rather, they see Psalm 97:9 as claiming that the Lord is greater than all the false gods of the nations. Alternatively, they might see Psalm 97:9 as a poetic statement of God’s greatness that doesn’t require us to believe that other gods actually exist. The point of this verse is to testify to the Lord’s superlative greatness. God is greater than anything in all creation, even other heavenly beings, even all other gods (if there actually were other gods).
When we use Psalm 97:9 in our worship, or when we sing songs like “I Exalt Thee” by Pete Sanchez, Jr., we are not confessing the existence of other gods. Rather, we are emphasizing the all-surpassing greatness of the one, true God. Moreover, we are saying that God is greater than everything we value in this life, our “gods,” if you will. When we worship God, we acknowledge his greatness and his number one position in our lives.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION: What other “gods” compete for honor in your life? How do you honor God in your life apart from church and your devotions?
PRAYER:
O Lord, you are high above all the earth. You are greater than all that would compete for my allegiance. . . .
You’re greater than my family.
You’re greater than my desire for security.
You’re greater than my home and possessions.
You’re greater than my work.
You’re greater than my country.
You’re greater than my accomplishments.
You’re greater than the wonders of creation.
All praise be to you, O God, for you are greater than everything! Amen.
_________________________________________________
Would you like to receive a Daily Reflection like this one in your email inbox each morning?
Here’s how . . . .
This devotional comes from The High Calling of Our Daily Work (www.thehighcalling.org), a wonderful website about work and God. You can read my Daily Reflections there, or sign up to have them sent to your email inbox each day. This website contains lots of encouragement for people who are trying to live out their faith in the workplace.
Topics: Sunday Inspiration | No Comments »
An Unexpected Agreement on Church and Politics
By Mark D. Roberts | Friday, January 29, 2010
I’ve just finished reading a fine article in Christianity Today: “Carl Henry Was Right” by Richard J. Mouw. In this article is discovered that my views on the role of the church in partisan politics are largely the same as those of Carl Henry and Richard Mouw. That doesn’t mean we’re right, of course. But it does encourage me to believe my perspective on this issue has some strong supporters.
In case you’re unfamiliar with the players, let me say that Carl F. H. Henry was, until his death in 2003, one of the leading evangelical thinkers in the world. He was instrumental in the founding of the National Association of Evangelicals and was the founding editor of Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelical Christian thought.
Richard J. Mouw is the President of Fuller Theological Seminary where he is also a professor of philosophy. He is a prolific author and engaging speaker. Mouw has been on the forefront of evangelical Christian efforts to engage our culture in a meaninful way. You can find many of his writings at his blog, Mouw’s Musings.
In his article, “Carl Henry Was Right,” Mouw tells the story of his first effort to publish an article in Christianity Today. The topic was Christian social ethics and how Christians ought (and ought not) to be involved in society and politics. At that time, Mouw believed that churches ought to take stands on specific political issues, whereas Henry believed that churches should not take such stands except in extreme cases (like Nazi Germany). For Henry, the church did not have a mandate to speak beyond the clarity of biblical truth. For Mouw, the church as called to be more specific, even if this involved endorsing positions that went beyond what Scripture clearly teaches.
As Mouw describes it, he and Henry had a series of conversations, as Henry tried to get Mouw to edit his article enough so that it could be included in Christianity Today. In the end, the two men found a compromise, though Mouw wasn’t altogether happy with the conclusion.
Now, more than forty years later, Mouw has fessed up and agreed that Henry was right. In his article, he cites positive Henry’s five principles that had guided his editing of Christianity Today when it came to politically sensitive issues:
1. The Bible is critically relevant to the whole of modern life and culture—the social-political arena included.
2. The institutional church has no mandate, jurisdiction, or competence to endorse political legislation or military tactics or economic specifics in the name of Christ.
3. The institutional church is divinely obliged to proclaim God’s entire revelation, including the standards or commandments by which men and nations are to be finally judged, and by which they ought now to live and maintain social stability.
4. The political achievement of a better society is the task of all citizens, and individual Christians ought to be politically engaged to the limit of their competence and opportunity.
5. The Bible limits the proper activity of both government and church for divinely stipulated objectives—the former, for the preservation of justice and order, and the latter, for the moral-spiritual task of evangelizing the earth.
Today, Richard Mouw agrees with Henry’s view, for the most part. He would see things in a little more nuanced way, however. Where Henry viewed Christian activism in terms of church and individual, Mouw sees room and need for something in between. He writes:
Christians must form a variety of organizations that focus on specific areas of cultural involvement, in order to engage in the kind of communal reflection necessary to develop a Christian mind for the area in question.
This means that it is important, say, for Christians who are deeply involved in policies and practices relating to concern for the poor to develop specific proposals building on the general principles proclaimed by that church, by deliberating on these matters in groups that have the expertise to struggle with them. And it is even appropriate to present those policy proposals as Christian-inspired specifics, even if they move well beyond what the church—as church—has a right to say.
So, according to Mouw, the church as the church should not get involved in political matters that depend on specific, extra-biblical convictions. But individual Christians do not have to act alone in such matters. Rather, they can and should get together with others of like mind to make a difference.
The Henry-Mouw view of church involvement in politics is very similar to my own. I did not get it from these two thinkers, but formed it through years of study Scripture and pastoring a politically-diverse congregation in Irvine, California. If you’re interested in how I see the church’s role in politics, you might read this blog series: The Church and Politics in America. In that series, I used the example of the church’s concern for the poor to illustrate my basic thesis. I’ll close today’s post by citing three paragraphs from that earlier series:
What accounts for the difference between Christians who are united in their concern for the poor, but divided in their understanding of the best political solution to the problem? Often it has nothing to do with theology. Rather, the difference has to do with personal political and economic theories, as well as with personal experiences and observations about what actually helps overcome the problem of poverty. So a solidly evangelical faith can lead you to support either the Democrats or the Republicans, depending on your ideas that have little to do with the core of Christian belief and practice.
When I preach about poverty, therefore, I call all people to open their hearts to the poor, to care personally for the poor, and to work for social and global change to eliminate poverty. But I do not tell my people that they should do this in either Democratic or Republican forms. Why not? Because I don’t believe I have the expertise or authorization to draw out these implications as a preacher. Now of course I have my own personal views on these matters, and I express them when I vote in private or when I argue politics with my friends. But when I preach, I’m called upon to deliver God’s truth as it is revealed in Scripture, not to share implications that depend upon my pet economic or political theories. I know very well that some of my members will take what I hand off to them from Scripture and run in Republican directions, while others will run in Democratic directions. This is just fine with me, just so long as they run in some positive direction. I happen to believe that if both Democrats and Republicans would care more and do more to end poverty, the world would be much better place for all people, especially those who are now poor.
The role of the church is not unlike mine as preacher. Rather than telling people, “You must care for the poor, so support Democratic causes” or “You must care for the poor, so vote Republican,” the church’s task is to teach and proclaim biblical truth, including biblical truth concerning poverty. The church’s job is to call our members, and, indeed, all people, to care for the poor. It is to point out the distressing reality of poverty, both in America and throughout the world, and to inspire action that will lead to the alleviation of poverty. Moreover, our task is to work for the transformation of human hearts, so that people might be less materialistic, more generous, and more compassionate. This last task, one that the church uniquely embraces, is perhaps the most important of all.
Topics: Christianity and Politics | 3 Comments »
The Way of Jesus: When Good Confronts Evil
By Mark D. Roberts | Thursday, January 28, 2010
Last Sunday I preached at Westlake Hills Presbyterian Church in Austin, Texas. A couple of days ago I blogged about this fine church.
Today I’m putting up the text of my sermon. The biblical passage and title were given to me. (This makes it a whole lot easier for a guest preacher!) So, with no further ado, here is the biblical passage and the sermon.
“The Way of Jesus: When Good Confronts Evil”
Sermon for Westlake Hills Presbyterian Church
Text: Mark 5:1-20
Preached on January 24, 2010
Introduction to the Scripture Reading
Our Scripture text today is Mark 5:1-20 as we continue to study the Gospel of Mark, investigating “The Way of Jesus.” Last week, your pastor, Dr. Peter Barnes, focused on Jesus’ stilling of the storm on the Sea of Galilee. Today we take the next step forward in Mark as Jesus and his disciples get to the other side of the sea, where they confront evil in a most unsettling form.
Listen now to God’s Word from Mark 5:1-20.
Scripture Reading
Mark 5:1 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. 2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him. 3 This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. 4 For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.
6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won’t torture me!” 8 For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you evil spirit!”
9 Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”
“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.
11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12 The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” 13 He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.
14 Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. 15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man — and told about the pigs as well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.
18 As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him. 19 Jesus did not let him, but said, “Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.” 20 So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.
Amen.
Introduction
First of all, I want to thank you for the honor of being your preacher this morning. I appreciate the invitation and the chance to share with you in worship today.
I also want to thank you for the long relationship that you folks have had with Laity Lodge. We are deeply committed to renewal in churches, and have been glad to partner with Westlake Hills for many years.
I am excited to see what God is doing in your church. Along with you, I’ve been glad to welcome your new pastor, Peter Barnes, to Texas. Now I must confess to you that my first experience with Peter was not all that positive. We met at a pastors’ retreat in Minnesota about 15 years ago. During free time one afternoon, we played some basketball together. For a while, I was responsible for guarding Peter. Never, let me say it again, never volunteer to guard Peter Barnes. He proceeded to “clean my clock,” as they say. It was embarrassing. So I didn’t begin with the warmest feelings for Peter. It’s a male ego thing, you understand.
But, when he moved to Texas, Peter joined a covenant group of Presbyterian pastors of which I am also a member. In this last year I’ve gotten to know Peter on a much deeper level, and that has been a delight. In spite of his ability to devastate his opponents on the basketball court, Peter is a bright, thoughtful, passionate, prayerful man, a person of deep integrity. I am thrilled that God called him to Texas to be your pastor. I just won’t guard him on the court ever again!
Jesus Encounters a Demonized Man
You know, Peter on the basketball court is a little like the man we meet in the first verses of Mark 5. No, no, I’m not suggesting your pastor has a legion of demons. But, like Peter, the man in Mark 5 was very hard to guard! Even when his neighbors chained him up, he broke free and “no one was strong enough to subdue him” (5:4). This poor soul lived among the tombs, more at home with the dead than the living. He would repeatedly cry out and hurt himself. This was a profoundly broken man, one who was terrorized by the demons that were destroying his life. Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Sermons | No Comments »