Several events today worthy of reflection: Monasticism, the great spiritual formation debate, National Coming Out Day, a super charged chapel message, and a pointed discussion at lunch.
Today's topic in church history (yes I've yielded to the imprecise title used for the class) was early monasticism. It's an alluring topic for me because I, like so many others, have had plenty of moments where I didn't want to be bothered by society anymore. But the point of isolation was secondary to the overall lifestyle of these ascetic men (and some women) in the third and fourth century. The whole idea started with one man hearing a sermon on Matthew 19:21, taking it very literally, and after having sold all his possessions ran off into the woods. Later other monks would reform the process to make it more useful to the mission of the church by building monasteries closer to towns where the committed members of the order could serve the poor continuously. It was the Celtic monks that I most appreciated. They would wander to an area, build a church, copy a few bibles for the local people, and then migrate on to do it again. There is a small voice inside me leading me in that direction but I fear that a frustration with my current situation does not make a call from God. It's not a call to serve, just a desire to run off, not a call to teach and bring others to Christ but a desire to delve deeply into the mysteries of the faith for my own sake in a place that is silent 20 hours a day. I'd be more likely to join the Marines.
Tuesday means spiritual formation lecture, and that always means there is some fun for the weblog reader. This day is no different. In fact, this day might be the most incredible yet. Today it finally occurred to Dr. Robbins that many students in her class weren't paying much attention. She caught someone passing a note (junior high, anyone?) and then reading it and laughing. The laugh came right as she was in the middle of what, to her, was a very profound story about being convicted of one's own sinfulness while reading Psalm 51. Without missing a beat (this phrase should be taken relatively with her because one could say there is a "beat" between each of her words) she began to berate the people involved and as she did a dozen laptop solitaire games disappeared at once. She began to use 'not paying attention' as her example of sin. Six hands went up at once. She actually acknowledged the hands this time and dismissed them saying she'll have time for questions later. After she had continued along her path of reasoning for a minute she began to travel away from the earlier incident. A woman who sits in the back row with me (and watches the laptops) decided she didn't want to wait to be recognized. Begging forgiveness she said outright that more needed to be discussed about the issue of not paying attention. (The recently reopened solitaire games vanished again.) Now, keep in mind, there are TWO reasons only why no one pays attention to this lecture: 1) There is no coherent theme, just amorphous comments in a monotone voice, and 2) anything of any substance or value that happens to be said is taken directly from one of our required readings. Upon further discussion folks suggested several things like we need more time for questions or that some of us are not spiritually prepared to take on the deep reflections involved. All of these are abstractions, variations on the truth that, if important at all, are secondary. Dr. Robbins may be a fine one-to-one counselor but lecture is not her forte at all, I didn't have the courage to say that to her, neither did anyone else, but when 80% of the people in your class are paying no attention to you at the graduate level, there’s only one reason why, she's just incapable of holding our attention by being in any way relevant.
The chapel message was on Ezekiel 37:1-10, the valley of bones. Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones...
The message was very well constructed though not entirely agreeable. Every major conflict in the world was painted as a valley of dry bones with Christians standing at the edge saying "I don't know" while looking over the desolation and hearing God tell us to breath life into the evil. His illustration culminated in a booming crescendo as he petitioned us to build up the body: the ribs of forgiveness, the thigh bone of justice, the shoulder blade of peace, and finally the head as Christ. It was an impressive show, but I walked away from it just as that: theatrics. We can't simply watch a black man get shot in a drive by and accept it, we can't look at the horror following natural disaster and think we don't know what to do, and we can't make homosexuals uncomfortable in our congregations by condemning their lifestyle. One of those things is not like the others and we have one more verse misinterpreted as a support for full and unqualified support of homosexuality
Of course the homosexuality bit is in there because today is National Coming Out Day. Students in support of homosexual rights were asked to wear purple (or tie-dye, which I guess has something in common with a rainbow) to chapel. Three folks wore purple one wore tie-dye. Now there are dozens of different backgrounds here, black, white, rich, poor, educated, liberal, scientific, progressive, republican, democrat, American, African, European, ... but none of these folks find any support in scripture for homosexuality. There simply isn't a positive word to be said about it that doesn't come from a post-modern, non-biblical train of thinking. I'm sorry to be blunt about a sensitive issue, I really don't mean to alienate, but this is the unapologetic view (and the candid tone) of every professor I've spoken to and just about everyone else on the campus. I've heard it from a medical standpoint, a sociological standpoint, an ethical standpoint, and of course a biblical standpoint (more than just Lev 18:22) and it all comes out the same. Coming out day seems to have brought out an unmitigated negative from many on the issue.
The final point was supposed to be about Dr. Sunquist's question to the table at lunch about how we view our responsibilities as pastors to guide the thinking of the congregation on matters that seem more political than religious. The government says a non-profit church can't tell you who to vote for, but other political stances aren't off limits and really, it's not that hard to say "Vote Biden" without actually saying it. Does scripture tell you that the war in Iraq is unjust? Does that mean you should lead your congregation in protest or in counter-protest? There is plenty I could comment on here, but I'll leave it for another post.
<><
Today's topic in church history (yes I've yielded to the imprecise title used for the class) was early monasticism. It's an alluring topic for me because I, like so many others, have had plenty of moments where I didn't want to be bothered by society anymore. But the point of isolation was secondary to the overall lifestyle of these ascetic men (and some women) in the third and fourth century. The whole idea started with one man hearing a sermon on Matthew 19:21, taking it very literally, and after having sold all his possessions ran off into the woods. Later other monks would reform the process to make it more useful to the mission of the church by building monasteries closer to towns where the committed members of the order could serve the poor continuously. It was the Celtic monks that I most appreciated. They would wander to an area, build a church, copy a few bibles for the local people, and then migrate on to do it again. There is a small voice inside me leading me in that direction but I fear that a frustration with my current situation does not make a call from God. It's not a call to serve, just a desire to run off, not a call to teach and bring others to Christ but a desire to delve deeply into the mysteries of the faith for my own sake in a place that is silent 20 hours a day. I'd be more likely to join the Marines.
Tuesday means spiritual formation lecture, and that always means there is some fun for the weblog reader. This day is no different. In fact, this day might be the most incredible yet. Today it finally occurred to Dr. Robbins that many students in her class weren't paying much attention. She caught someone passing a note (junior high, anyone?) and then reading it and laughing. The laugh came right as she was in the middle of what, to her, was a very profound story about being convicted of one's own sinfulness while reading Psalm 51. Without missing a beat (this phrase should be taken relatively with her because one could say there is a "beat" between each of her words) she began to berate the people involved and as she did a dozen laptop solitaire games disappeared at once. She began to use 'not paying attention' as her example of sin. Six hands went up at once. She actually acknowledged the hands this time and dismissed them saying she'll have time for questions later. After she had continued along her path of reasoning for a minute she began to travel away from the earlier incident. A woman who sits in the back row with me (and watches the laptops) decided she didn't want to wait to be recognized. Begging forgiveness she said outright that more needed to be discussed about the issue of not paying attention. (The recently reopened solitaire games vanished again.) Now, keep in mind, there are TWO reasons only why no one pays attention to this lecture: 1) There is no coherent theme, just amorphous comments in a monotone voice, and 2) anything of any substance or value that happens to be said is taken directly from one of our required readings. Upon further discussion folks suggested several things like we need more time for questions or that some of us are not spiritually prepared to take on the deep reflections involved. All of these are abstractions, variations on the truth that, if important at all, are secondary. Dr. Robbins may be a fine one-to-one counselor but lecture is not her forte at all, I didn't have the courage to say that to her, neither did anyone else, but when 80% of the people in your class are paying no attention to you at the graduate level, there’s only one reason why, she's just incapable of holding our attention by being in any way relevant.
The chapel message was on Ezekiel 37:1-10, the valley of bones. Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones...
The message was very well constructed though not entirely agreeable. Every major conflict in the world was painted as a valley of dry bones with Christians standing at the edge saying "I don't know" while looking over the desolation and hearing God tell us to breath life into the evil. His illustration culminated in a booming crescendo as he petitioned us to build up the body: the ribs of forgiveness, the thigh bone of justice, the shoulder blade of peace, and finally the head as Christ. It was an impressive show, but I walked away from it just as that: theatrics. We can't simply watch a black man get shot in a drive by and accept it, we can't look at the horror following natural disaster and think we don't know what to do, and we can't make homosexuals uncomfortable in our congregations by condemning their lifestyle. One of those things is not like the others and we have one more verse misinterpreted as a support for full and unqualified support of homosexuality
Of course the homosexuality bit is in there because today is National Coming Out Day. Students in support of homosexual rights were asked to wear purple (or tie-dye, which I guess has something in common with a rainbow) to chapel. Three folks wore purple one wore tie-dye. Now there are dozens of different backgrounds here, black, white, rich, poor, educated, liberal, scientific, progressive, republican, democrat, American, African, European, ... but none of these folks find any support in scripture for homosexuality. There simply isn't a positive word to be said about it that doesn't come from a post-modern, non-biblical train of thinking. I'm sorry to be blunt about a sensitive issue, I really don't mean to alienate, but this is the unapologetic view (and the candid tone) of every professor I've spoken to and just about everyone else on the campus. I've heard it from a medical standpoint, a sociological standpoint, an ethical standpoint, and of course a biblical standpoint (more than just Lev 18:22) and it all comes out the same. Coming out day seems to have brought out an unmitigated negative from many on the issue.
The final point was supposed to be about Dr. Sunquist's question to the table at lunch about how we view our responsibilities as pastors to guide the thinking of the congregation on matters that seem more political than religious. The government says a non-profit church can't tell you who to vote for, but other political stances aren't off limits and really, it's not that hard to say "Vote Biden" without actually saying it. Does scripture tell you that the war in Iraq is unjust? Does that mean you should lead your congregation in protest or in counter-protest? There is plenty I could comment on here, but I'll leave it for another post.
<><
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home