Have you ever seen a big school of fish swim? They all swim together, making the slightest turns in perfect unison. They can do this because they have a sense organ called the lateral line that detects vibration and movement in the water. This way, fish avoid collisions and orient themselves with the flow of the current.
I've been in Turkey for the last 2 weeks, and have lots of interesting blog-post worthy thoughts and questions from time there. This post relates to something my sister said while walking down a hot and crowded street in Istanbul.
"Why can't people walk more orderly?! I hate it when everyone is bumping into one another. Can't people be more like fish, you know, have lateral lines or something. This is so annoying!" (imagine that said in a mixed tone of sarcasm and whine)
People definitely do not have lateral lines. Life as a human being is messy. We're not like pandas, who live most of their lives in isolation, spending time together only to mate and raise cubs. We are not like fish, who are always together, and even work together to hunt, but never bump into one another.
We are made for community, but functioning together as a community is not smooth or even natural. You don't need to walk down a crowded street in Turkey to realize that; it is usually apparent at the family dinner table.
While in Turkey, I thought about what it is exactly about wealth that makes me uncomfortable. I have spent different parts of the last 22 years embracing wealth and living into it, as well as truly hating it, and trying to escape it. Neither felt right. A lot of my discomfort has to do with the fact that in my experience, wealth turns people (myself included) in to pandas or fish. (disclaimer: these are not by any means the only effects of wealth, and other things can lead to these states of being as well).
Pandas are self-sufficient. They use their panda community only when they absolutely need to (mating, and extreme food shortage). They don't need other pandas; they have the ability to get everything they need all on their own. Wealth can allow for this kind of lifestyle as well, and the luxuries that wealth gives often promote a more isolated life-style (quiet day at the spa, big house outside the city, car rather than public trans, ipods, private school with small classes...etc). But it isn't just about isolation; it is about isolation born out of self-sufficiency.
Fish, on the other hand, are not self-sufficient, but they also don't actually communicate with one another. They communicate with the vibrations in the water created by what is around them. They are also almost completely identical. As soon as there is any kind of significant difference, those different fish break away and form a new school and ultimately become an entirely different species. You see, each species of fish has a unique lateral line, and any variation in that will mess up the perfect swimming formation. When people are all the same- have the same goals, doing the same things- society tends to be more streamline. Wealth, in my experience, allows for a certain degree of "streamline-ness." It allows people to remove themselves from the chaos of society and steamline into another social group which does things together but doesn't actually require interaction. (if God had wanted a streamline society, He certainly wouldn't have created two genders which differ so greatly)
We aren't pandas and we aren't fish. We are made for community, rather then self-sufficient isolation, but we are not programmed to form streamline community that looks and acts the same. We are made to bump into one another- to both smooth and sharpen one another.
Perhaps that was a harsh view on wealth. To be fair, poverty has its own set of characteristics that lead to broken communities and should definitely not be glorified. I think what makes me so uncomfortable about the panda/fish scenarios, is that the more time I spend developing close relationships and communities, the more I firmly believe that it is that process that teaches me about God . The forming of community is a redeeming and sanctifying process because it makes us more like God and the community of Father, Son and Spirit.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
tennis ball fuzz and surf wax
Playing tennis and being at the beach for the last week reminded me of the reasons why I love tennis and surfing...so here's a random fun post about that...
Things I love about tennis
-the sound and smell of opening a fresh can of balls
-ball fuzz, and how it gets everywhere (in the soles of my shoes, between racket strings...etc)
-the squeaking sound of tennis shoes as they scurry to hit the ball
-drills and targets
-the personal and intense nature of the game. Just you against another person.
-that I feel like I can still be girly and be taken seriously
-that it is a sport equally valued among men and women
-the satisfying sound of smacking the ball right in the sweet spot
-spinning the racket in your hands as you wait for your opponent to serve
-the naturally polite and sportsmanship-focused nature of the game
-the perfect combination of strategy/skill and athletic ability. Both are absolutely necessary.
-while tennis can very much be a team sport, I like it for its individual quality. Probably because I like being in control (sigh). When something goes well, it is because of your skill. When you lose a point, it is also because of you. There is no blame shifting and full transparency in what kind of a player you are.
Things I like about surfing
-the smell, touch (and taste? no...just kidding) of surf wax
-the way water washes over the board for the first time in the day
-the science of waves (balls of energy that push water up as they crash into the sand. SO COOL)
-seeing the fish swimming below as you stand up on the board
-long rides and long boards (9 ft or longer only)
-getting as close to flying as humanly possible
-always knowing that it is never you controlling the waves. They are always more powerful, and surfing is like being allowed to enjoy their power. You're being moved by something much stronger then yourself, and you'll get to shore one way or another. If you let the wave do the work, you get there with speed and style. If you fight the natural motions of it, you end up in a tangled seaweed mess.
-feeling ridiculously small while sitting on the board in the vast ocean
-the feel of salt, sunscreen, and sand on your skin after a great surf session
Interesting. Tennis is all about perfecting your control over the ball, and surfing is all about realizing the lack of control you have over the ocean. Love them both.
Things I love about tennis
-the sound and smell of opening a fresh can of balls
-ball fuzz, and how it gets everywhere (in the soles of my shoes, between racket strings...etc)
-the squeaking sound of tennis shoes as they scurry to hit the ball
-drills and targets
-the personal and intense nature of the game. Just you against another person.
-that I feel like I can still be girly and be taken seriously
-that it is a sport equally valued among men and women
-the satisfying sound of smacking the ball right in the sweet spot
-spinning the racket in your hands as you wait for your opponent to serve
-the naturally polite and sportsmanship-focused nature of the game
-the perfect combination of strategy/skill and athletic ability. Both are absolutely necessary.
-while tennis can very much be a team sport, I like it for its individual quality. Probably because I like being in control (sigh). When something goes well, it is because of your skill. When you lose a point, it is also because of you. There is no blame shifting and full transparency in what kind of a player you are.
Things I like about surfing
-the smell, touch (and taste? no...just kidding) of surf wax
-the way water washes over the board for the first time in the day
-the science of waves (balls of energy that push water up as they crash into the sand. SO COOL)
-seeing the fish swimming below as you stand up on the board
-long rides and long boards (9 ft or longer only)
-getting as close to flying as humanly possible
-always knowing that it is never you controlling the waves. They are always more powerful, and surfing is like being allowed to enjoy their power. You're being moved by something much stronger then yourself, and you'll get to shore one way or another. If you let the wave do the work, you get there with speed and style. If you fight the natural motions of it, you end up in a tangled seaweed mess.
-feeling ridiculously small while sitting on the board in the vast ocean
-the feel of salt, sunscreen, and sand on your skin after a great surf session
Interesting. Tennis is all about perfecting your control over the ball, and surfing is all about realizing the lack of control you have over the ocean. Love them both.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Lessons Learned
There are many, but here are a few things I've learned, or at least thought more about, over the last year:
1) What I'm good at (and feel particularly equipped to do) and what I enjoy doing are not always the same. I've learned to be (more) ok with enjoying things I'm not good at and still feeling their value. But I've also learned how to let some of those things go and embrace more of what I am actually made to do. Sometimes the two coincide, and that feels great!
2) God's plan is always good, but that doesn't mean it isn't sometimes terrifying. I spent a solid two weeks feeling almost convinced that God was calling me into full time ministry rather then med school.
3) God is not just redemptive (ie. redeeming, or perfecting/purifying the ways that the world is broken by our alienation from Him), but He is also creative. God is and does good because it is in His creative nature to create more good, not because of a need to react against our lack of good. He doesn't need us to be good, we need Him to be Go(o)d. This means that we're made to be creative too!
4) Observation. Interpretation. Application. They aren't just good Bible study steps, they are great steps to go through in almost any situation/text/conversation.
5) Fear of God, the kind we are commanded to have, is very different then fear of people/world/situations. The second kind makes us afraid to walk on water, the first makes us fear the God that made us actually able to do it. Sometimes they overlap, but not as often as I usually think they do. Fear of anything but God, I've learned, is almost never a good motivation or decision maker; but what exactly fear of God means/looks like, I'm still learning.
6) Interpretation and point of view is everything. Ok, maybe not everything, but a whole lot. Two people, presented with exactly the same set of facts, or involved in the same conversation or situation, can come away with entirely different interpretations. Different people/groups approach the same situations with different "toolboxes," different ways they are equipped to respond. Communication, I've learned, begins in understanding the other person's toolbox, and therefore the process by which they arrived at their interpretation of some set of facts. Learning this has required me to have a lot more grace for people.
7) There are multiple situations I've looked back on, or stepped back from, and have said, "wow, it really matters that I believe in an all powerful, loving, and strong God." I mean, I know it matters, but after encountering new life situations in the past year, I feel like I have new perspective on why it actually matters so much.
8) Voicing expectations of others, and needs for myself is necessary to healthy relationships.
9) My own comfort, in the general definition of the word, is pretty much never the most important thing in any situation. Not that being uncomfortable is a goal, but that it is never really supposed to be about me. Situations/conversations/relationships that are more about God then about me often lead me away from self-focused comfort, into discomfort, but also into a deeper idea of Comfort as a spiritual state rather then just a self-centered emotion.
10) People pleasing is dangerous ground to tread. In return for our faith in Him, God promises and gives us His pleasure. The pleasure of a person, in exchange for the pleasure of God, is like Esau's exchange of a bowl of MSG soup for his entire inheritance. Peace and pleasure-filled communion with God is our great reward, and it isn't only meant for the future.
Well, 10 seems like a good number to stop at. I didn't write in here much this year because I was always around people processing out loud. I'm planning on using it much more as a process palate next year when I interact less with people and more with text books.
1) What I'm good at (and feel particularly equipped to do) and what I enjoy doing are not always the same. I've learned to be (more) ok with enjoying things I'm not good at and still feeling their value. But I've also learned how to let some of those things go and embrace more of what I am actually made to do. Sometimes the two coincide, and that feels great!
2) God's plan is always good, but that doesn't mean it isn't sometimes terrifying. I spent a solid two weeks feeling almost convinced that God was calling me into full time ministry rather then med school.
3) God is not just redemptive (ie. redeeming, or perfecting/purifying the ways that the world is broken by our alienation from Him), but He is also creative. God is and does good because it is in His creative nature to create more good, not because of a need to react against our lack of good. He doesn't need us to be good, we need Him to be Go(o)d. This means that we're made to be creative too!
4) Observation. Interpretation. Application. They aren't just good Bible study steps, they are great steps to go through in almost any situation/text/conversation.
5) Fear of God, the kind we are commanded to have, is very different then fear of people/world/situations. The second kind makes us afraid to walk on water, the first makes us fear the God that made us actually able to do it. Sometimes they overlap, but not as often as I usually think they do. Fear of anything but God, I've learned, is almost never a good motivation or decision maker; but what exactly fear of God means/looks like, I'm still learning.
6) Interpretation and point of view is everything. Ok, maybe not everything, but a whole lot. Two people, presented with exactly the same set of facts, or involved in the same conversation or situation, can come away with entirely different interpretations. Different people/groups approach the same situations with different "toolboxes," different ways they are equipped to respond. Communication, I've learned, begins in understanding the other person's toolbox, and therefore the process by which they arrived at their interpretation of some set of facts. Learning this has required me to have a lot more grace for people.
7) There are multiple situations I've looked back on, or stepped back from, and have said, "wow, it really matters that I believe in an all powerful, loving, and strong God." I mean, I know it matters, but after encountering new life situations in the past year, I feel like I have new perspective on why it actually matters so much.
8) Voicing expectations of others, and needs for myself is necessary to healthy relationships.
9) My own comfort, in the general definition of the word, is pretty much never the most important thing in any situation. Not that being uncomfortable is a goal, but that it is never really supposed to be about me. Situations/conversations/relationships that are more about God then about me often lead me away from self-focused comfort, into discomfort, but also into a deeper idea of Comfort as a spiritual state rather then just a self-centered emotion.
10) People pleasing is dangerous ground to tread. In return for our faith in Him, God promises and gives us His pleasure. The pleasure of a person, in exchange for the pleasure of God, is like Esau's exchange of a bowl of MSG soup for his entire inheritance. Peace and pleasure-filled communion with God is our great reward, and it isn't only meant for the future.
Well, 10 seems like a good number to stop at. I didn't write in here much this year because I was always around people processing out loud. I'm planning on using it much more as a process palate next year when I interact less with people and more with text books.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Freedom
The culmination of the inauguration has left me thinking a lot about freedom. We live in a country that boasts about its access to freedom for all. But we talk about freedom typically as a means to an end, rather than the end itself. We say "you are free to speak, to defend yourself, to have a speedy trial, to pursue prosperity" and more. We never say, you are free to be free.
It is certainly true that the people of America are more free, in many ways, than the people of other nations. Even with the presence of inequality, racism, and prejudices of all kinds, a certain degree of freedom does exist. But the funny thing about freedom is that no one really has it unless everyone has it. If I am rich and my friend is poor, what is my freedom? Should it be said that I am free to help my friend, or free to ignore him. I guess both are technically options, but I want to suggest that feeling "free to ignore" is not actually freedom at all, it is bondage to my status, wealth, and position, rather than freedom to love and serve without worry or anxiety about what I am losing and what someone else is gaining. Is it freedom that allows some to give sub-prime mortgage loans, and is it freedom that allows for landlords and health insurance companies to refuse service to people with AIDS? These are choices freely made, that is true, but they are not made out of a spirit of freedom but rather out of a spirit of bondage. And is it freedom to say to the over-worked inner city single mom with four kids, whose father is in jail, and who continue to pass each grade level despite learning almost nothing that all of her children are free to graduate high school, dream big dreams, go to college, and live the american dream? That is the problem when freedom is the means to the end, rather than an end in itself.
America may be a nation that boasts of freedom, but we are not people who act as though we are free. We have not yet learned that the freedom to consume one another is really just slavery wrapped up in some fancy language.
From Galatians 5
1For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery...13For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 15But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another...
18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
No law will ever say that you want these fruits of the Spirits too much, that it is wrong to desire them, or that having more of them is bad. It is living in the full knowledge of the freedom we've been given that produces these fruits of the Spirit.
There are a lot of important, and in some sense, timeless questions that have floated around as we entered a New Year and a new presidential era. My question is this: How will America define or re-define the purpose of being "the land of the free" in an era where it has become acceptable for freedom and massive inequality to co-exist.
It is certainly true that the people of America are more free, in many ways, than the people of other nations. Even with the presence of inequality, racism, and prejudices of all kinds, a certain degree of freedom does exist. But the funny thing about freedom is that no one really has it unless everyone has it. If I am rich and my friend is poor, what is my freedom? Should it be said that I am free to help my friend, or free to ignore him. I guess both are technically options, but I want to suggest that feeling "free to ignore" is not actually freedom at all, it is bondage to my status, wealth, and position, rather than freedom to love and serve without worry or anxiety about what I am losing and what someone else is gaining. Is it freedom that allows some to give sub-prime mortgage loans, and is it freedom that allows for landlords and health insurance companies to refuse service to people with AIDS? These are choices freely made, that is true, but they are not made out of a spirit of freedom but rather out of a spirit of bondage. And is it freedom to say to the over-worked inner city single mom with four kids, whose father is in jail, and who continue to pass each grade level despite learning almost nothing that all of her children are free to graduate high school, dream big dreams, go to college, and live the american dream? That is the problem when freedom is the means to the end, rather than an end in itself.
America may be a nation that boasts of freedom, but we are not people who act as though we are free. We have not yet learned that the freedom to consume one another is really just slavery wrapped up in some fancy language.
From Galatians 5
1For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery...13For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 15But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another...
18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
No law will ever say that you want these fruits of the Spirits too much, that it is wrong to desire them, or that having more of them is bad. It is living in the full knowledge of the freedom we've been given that produces these fruits of the Spirit.
There are a lot of important, and in some sense, timeless questions that have floated around as we entered a New Year and a new presidential era. My question is this: How will America define or re-define the purpose of being "the land of the free" in an era where it has become acceptable for freedom and massive inequality to co-exist.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Micro or Macro?
More free time than usual and two 15 hour car rides led to a good amount of reading in the last week and a half. Two books stand out as reflective of a tension I often feel. Jeffrey Sachs' "The End of Poverty;" I finally finished Jonathan's copy of it, and "Finding Calcutta," a quick read about a woman's experience wtih Mother Teresa in Calcutta and what she learned about work and service while there (a Christmas gift from a friend). While the tension is personally relevant, I believe it is one that also inhibits much collaboration and potential for good work in the world.
Jeffrey Sachs is a macro, or big picture, kind of guy. He thinks and talks in terms of systems, structures, societies, markets, and global communities. Yes, he can identify value in one-on-one interactions and even talks about how it is important for policy makers to have face-to-face encounters with the people the policies are for. Still, his mindset is always one of "big picture" work, and clearly, he is pretty great at what he does. (side note- the book was great. Agreed with most of it, and looking forward to reading his next one...ie. Jonathan, hurry up and finish it).
Mother Teresa is very different. She is a micro person. She never (and made a point not to) involve herself in politics and policies, or social systems and structures. She is known for calling herself and her work "a drop in the ocean" or a "little pencil in the hand of a writing God." Momma T writes about herself that she "doesn't agree with the big way of doing things. To us what matters is an individual. To get to love the person we must come in close contact with him. If we wait until we get the numbers, then we will be lost in the numbers. And we will never be able to show that love and respect for the person. I believe in person to person; every person is Christ for me, and since there is only one Jesus, that person is only one person in the world for me at that moment."
Politically minded intellectuals often criticized Mother Teresa for not getting involved in the politics of poverty, for speaking out against abortion and for feeding the poor directly rather than "teaching them to fish." Her response was: "If there are people who feel God wants them to change the structures of society, that is something between them and God. We must serve Him in whatever way we are called. I am called to help the individual; to love each poor person. Not to deal with institutions. I am in no position to judge...All of us are but His instruments, who do our little bit and pass by."
I don't think Jeffrey Sachs and Mother Teresa are complete opposites. They are/were clearly gifted in their respective types of work. Jeffrey Sachs does see value in the individual and reminds his readers that the market/community is made of individual people and it is their interactions, in homes, shops, fields, and street corners, that reflect the effects of policy. Similarly, Mother Teresa certainly had an impact on many people she never met. While she didn't advize any policy or network organizations, her work is known world-wide- it is quoted in speeches and books, and inspires (though often cliched and skin deep) world leaders and common folk alike.
I am tempted to ask the question: which is better? Big picture or little picture thought and work. I can make cases, even biblical cases, for both, and in the end I do think both are necessary and it is unfair to rank them. I don't think the work of big picture policy people lacks emotion, heart, and genuine care for the people they are writing policy for (though this, of course, is not universally true). And I don't think that "little picture" work always makes you more aware of real issues and genuine in heart and care.
So which am I wired for? I am not as extreme as either Jeffrey Sachs or Mother Teresa. Do I have to pick? Can I do both? Am I allowed to want to do some kind of great work in the world?*
The first fear seems pretty legitimate; the second, untrusting of God and prideful. I have certainly seen how very small words or actions have made large impacts on people and even whole communities and I believe that God magifies our feeblest attempts at serving others. I'm comforted by the fact that we are saved by grace through faith, and not by works, and yet I easily become frustrated when I feel like what I do or say doesn't have any or a big enough impact.
Like with so many questions and tensions, I end up with a need for greater trust and humility. Wanting me/my work to be more than a "drop in the ocean" diminishes the size of the ocean. To do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly, that is the call.
It is a New Year, and so these verses from Psalm 7 come to mind as I think back on the year and as I think more about what it looks like to have humility as I ponder the tension between big picture and little picture. **
3O LORD my God, if I have done this, if there is wrong in my hands,4if I have repaid my friend with evil or plundered my enemy without cause,5let the enemy pursue my soul and overtake it, and let him trample my life to the ground and lay my glory in the dust.
6Arise, O LORD, in your anger; lift yourself up against the fury of my enemies; awake for me; you have appointed a judgment.7Let the assembly of the peoples be gathered about you; over it return on high.
8The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.9Oh, let the evil of the wicked come to an end, and may you establish the righteous—you who test the minds and hearts, O righteous God!10My shield is with God, who saves the upright in heart.11God is a righteous judge, and a God who feels indignation every day.
*sorry friends, no straighforward answers to these. I do think God works through people to do great things, but it seems rarely seems to be the people you would expect, and often the 'great work' isn't what you would expect either. We are saints, not saviors.
**by little picture, I don't mean "little" as inconsequential or un-important
Jeffrey Sachs is a macro, or big picture, kind of guy. He thinks and talks in terms of systems, structures, societies, markets, and global communities. Yes, he can identify value in one-on-one interactions and even talks about how it is important for policy makers to have face-to-face encounters with the people the policies are for. Still, his mindset is always one of "big picture" work, and clearly, he is pretty great at what he does. (side note- the book was great. Agreed with most of it, and looking forward to reading his next one...ie. Jonathan, hurry up and finish it).
Mother Teresa is very different. She is a micro person. She never (and made a point not to) involve herself in politics and policies, or social systems and structures. She is known for calling herself and her work "a drop in the ocean" or a "little pencil in the hand of a writing God." Momma T writes about herself that she "doesn't agree with the big way of doing things. To us what matters is an individual. To get to love the person we must come in close contact with him. If we wait until we get the numbers, then we will be lost in the numbers. And we will never be able to show that love and respect for the person. I believe in person to person; every person is Christ for me, and since there is only one Jesus, that person is only one person in the world for me at that moment."
Politically minded intellectuals often criticized Mother Teresa for not getting involved in the politics of poverty, for speaking out against abortion and for feeding the poor directly rather than "teaching them to fish." Her response was: "If there are people who feel God wants them to change the structures of society, that is something between them and God. We must serve Him in whatever way we are called. I am called to help the individual; to love each poor person. Not to deal with institutions. I am in no position to judge...All of us are but His instruments, who do our little bit and pass by."
I don't think Jeffrey Sachs and Mother Teresa are complete opposites. They are/were clearly gifted in their respective types of work. Jeffrey Sachs does see value in the individual and reminds his readers that the market/community is made of individual people and it is their interactions, in homes, shops, fields, and street corners, that reflect the effects of policy. Similarly, Mother Teresa certainly had an impact on many people she never met. While she didn't advize any policy or network organizations, her work is known world-wide- it is quoted in speeches and books, and inspires (though often cliched and skin deep) world leaders and common folk alike.
I am tempted to ask the question: which is better? Big picture or little picture thought and work. I can make cases, even biblical cases, for both, and in the end I do think both are necessary and it is unfair to rank them. I don't think the work of big picture policy people lacks emotion, heart, and genuine care for the people they are writing policy for (though this, of course, is not universally true). And I don't think that "little picture" work always makes you more aware of real issues and genuine in heart and care.
So which am I wired for? I am not as extreme as either Jeffrey Sachs or Mother Teresa. Do I have to pick? Can I do both? Am I allowed to want to do some kind of great work in the world?*
The tension between the two brings up a fear of mine. I am afraid of forgetting the personal, intimate, and unique person-to-person value when I think/work in a "big picture" setting. And I am afriad of not having any kind of sustainable or lasting impact through my work if I work for and serve only on a person-to-person level.
The first fear seems pretty legitimate; the second, untrusting of God and prideful. I have certainly seen how very small words or actions have made large impacts on people and even whole communities and I believe that God magifies our feeblest attempts at serving others. I'm comforted by the fact that we are saved by grace through faith, and not by works, and yet I easily become frustrated when I feel like what I do or say doesn't have any or a big enough impact.
Like with so many questions and tensions, I end up with a need for greater trust and humility. Wanting me/my work to be more than a "drop in the ocean" diminishes the size of the ocean. To do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly, that is the call.
It is a New Year, and so these verses from Psalm 7 come to mind as I think back on the year and as I think more about what it looks like to have humility as I ponder the tension between big picture and little picture. **
3O LORD my God, if I have done this, if there is wrong in my hands,4if I have repaid my friend with evil or plundered my enemy without cause,5let the enemy pursue my soul and overtake it, and let him trample my life to the ground and lay my glory in the dust.
6Arise, O LORD, in your anger; lift yourself up against the fury of my enemies; awake for me; you have appointed a judgment.7Let the assembly of the peoples be gathered about you; over it return on high.
8The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.9Oh, let the evil of the wicked come to an end, and may you establish the righteous—you who test the minds and hearts, O righteous God!10My shield is with God, who saves the upright in heart.11God is a righteous judge, and a God who feels indignation every day.
*sorry friends, no straighforward answers to these. I do think God works through people to do great things, but it seems rarely seems to be the people you would expect, and often the 'great work' isn't what you would expect either. We are saints, not saviors.
**by little picture, I don't mean "little" as inconsequential or un-important
Sunday, January 4, 2009
The Body
I went to my church in San Diego today for the first time in about six months. I've never really gotten to know anyone there since I am in SD so infrequently, but I love this church a lot. Every time I go I'm newly amazed at how strongly I feel and see God though I'm away from friends, a home church, and a supportive community.
I went a few minutes early this evening and sat in the parking lot in my car, not in the best of moods. I hate being the perpetual new person at this church since I've never really gotten to know anyone. I prayed really briefly but strongly, "God, I need to feel welcomed tonight. I need to feel the church really and actually be the church for me tonight." Then I rushed out of the car because I thought I saw someone I knew- turned out it wasn' them.
I was confused when the main sanctuary was closed, but saw the fellowship hall open instead. I went in, and the room was set up with round dinner tables, chairs, and a cup of wine and loaf of bread on each table. I didn't see anyone I knew so I stood awkwardly near the side twirling my hair and hoping someone would come talk to me. It is strange, that even though I am in church and Christian settings all the time, I still feel intimidated and awkward and shy as the new person.
The assistant pastor, Josh, whom I had met before, came over and talked to me briefly, asked about how IV was going, and introduced me to a couple who then asked if I wanted to join them at a table. Josh said that the first Sunday of the month they have been setting up the room with these dinner tables and chairs in order for a more family-like atmosphere. We were to listen to the sermon, worship, serve communion to one another around the table, and then enjoy a pot-luck dinner together. Even before sitting down I could tell God was answering my prayer....it doesn't get anymore welcoming and community-church like then that.
Before the service began, another couple came to sit at the our table, Ramiro and Wendy. After a few minutes of conversation, I discovered that they were the IV staff for UCSD and Cal State San Marcos. We talked and clicked immediatly, and that feeing of being the new person no one knows felt a couple light years away.
Worship was great. The sermon was the second half of Mark 1. We talked about leadership, and how it is leaders are called to commit, risk, and follow together, and never alone. And that leadership is not defined only by what you do, but by what you have left behind in order to pursue that leadership. I was struck by Peter, still called Simon in Mark 1, and how chances are that never in a million years he would have imagined himself as the Peter of Acts 2.
Service came to a close and it was time for communion. We passed the bread and wine around the table, saying to one another "the body of Christ, broken for you," and "the blood of Christ, shed for you." It was really powerful to say those words and to have them said to me in such an intimate setting yet among people I didn't know at all. I was not just partaking of the body of Christ, but was in it as well.
I couldn't stay for the pot-luck because mom wanted me home for dinner. I left feeling so uplifted and amazed at how perfectly and immediatly God had answered my prayer in the car before church.
I went a few minutes early this evening and sat in the parking lot in my car, not in the best of moods. I hate being the perpetual new person at this church since I've never really gotten to know anyone. I prayed really briefly but strongly, "God, I need to feel welcomed tonight. I need to feel the church really and actually be the church for me tonight." Then I rushed out of the car because I thought I saw someone I knew- turned out it wasn' them.
I was confused when the main sanctuary was closed, but saw the fellowship hall open instead. I went in, and the room was set up with round dinner tables, chairs, and a cup of wine and loaf of bread on each table. I didn't see anyone I knew so I stood awkwardly near the side twirling my hair and hoping someone would come talk to me. It is strange, that even though I am in church and Christian settings all the time, I still feel intimidated and awkward and shy as the new person.
The assistant pastor, Josh, whom I had met before, came over and talked to me briefly, asked about how IV was going, and introduced me to a couple who then asked if I wanted to join them at a table. Josh said that the first Sunday of the month they have been setting up the room with these dinner tables and chairs in order for a more family-like atmosphere. We were to listen to the sermon, worship, serve communion to one another around the table, and then enjoy a pot-luck dinner together. Even before sitting down I could tell God was answering my prayer....it doesn't get anymore welcoming and community-church like then that.
Before the service began, another couple came to sit at the our table, Ramiro and Wendy. After a few minutes of conversation, I discovered that they were the IV staff for UCSD and Cal State San Marcos. We talked and clicked immediatly, and that feeing of being the new person no one knows felt a couple light years away.
Worship was great. The sermon was the second half of Mark 1. We talked about leadership, and how it is leaders are called to commit, risk, and follow together, and never alone. And that leadership is not defined only by what you do, but by what you have left behind in order to pursue that leadership. I was struck by Peter, still called Simon in Mark 1, and how chances are that never in a million years he would have imagined himself as the Peter of Acts 2.
Service came to a close and it was time for communion. We passed the bread and wine around the table, saying to one another "the body of Christ, broken for you," and "the blood of Christ, shed for you." It was really powerful to say those words and to have them said to me in such an intimate setting yet among people I didn't know at all. I was not just partaking of the body of Christ, but was in it as well.
I couldn't stay for the pot-luck because mom wanted me home for dinner. I left feeling so uplifted and amazed at how perfectly and immediatly God had answered my prayer in the car before church.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Joy to the World
Love wins.
Peace reigns.
The present is the Presence.
Merry Christmas!
and a few delicious words from our friend St. Augustine:
My dearly beloved Brothers and Sisters in Christ! Here we are at midnight. Candles all around. You’re my children of light tonight, adopted tots in the kindergarten of the Lord! Have I got good news for you this holy eve! It’s from the Psalmist! Rejoice in the Lord! Raise bold, laudacious sounds as only the just can do! Yes yes, you already know what I’m going to say, but hear it anyway with a kind and open ear.
First off, come to love the things you believe!
Then speak out about the things you love!
Yes, we’re celebrating this anniversary day. Christ is born! God of the Father! A human being from a human mother! From the immortality of the Father- from the virginity of a mother. From the Father comes the Principle of Life- from His mother, the end of death!
Yes, my Brothers and Sisters, it’s the Angelic Voice we hear today! A rousing ovation! A feathery fluttering! The Savior came to save us today! What meaning can all this angelistic activity possibly have for us? The angels are His heavenly messengers; we’re His carrier pigeons. Ambrosia aplenty for them; manna galore for us.
A question arises. Just what was that heavenly fare? The Evangelist John had the answer.
“In the beginning was the Word…and the Word was made Flesh, and dwelled among us.” Whose Word? The Father Himself. What Word? The Son Himself. Never the One without the Other.
For humankind to eat the Bread of Angels, the Creator of Angels baked a loaf, the Loaf of Loaves; that’s to say, He was made man. He nudges the stars, but nurses from the breast.
Truth has sprung from the earth, or so the Psalmist has sung. Christ is born of the flesh- and that’s what we’ll sing today! We prayerfully presume we’re the Sons of God. Why? Because we’ve received the power to be such. For your sake the Timeless Cause of time has become a temporal effect Himself. Because of you, my dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, the Founder of the World has made His appearance in the flesh. Because of you the Creator has become a creature. Now I know you find this hard to believe, so I ask you to believe something else first. God was made man so that He could make men into gods. Without losing a slip of what He was, He wanted to become what He’d made. That’s to say, He made what He already was. How? By adding human nature to Divine Nature without at the same time losing His Divine Nature in that human nature.
When the Wordiness of an Other-worldly God revealed itself as a worldly if worldless tot, and when the Word of God let out, if not the Wisdom of God, then an unholy howl, that’s when we’re talking about the Birthday of the Lord. The Scholars in the East read the Divine Event in the skies. The Shepherds in the hills heard the Angelic Voices. We get the word today, the anniversary of the event, in the solemnity of our celebration. In it we refer to the Psalmist’s prophecy: Truth has sprung from the earth, and Justice has looked down from Heaven. The Truth that holds the world together with rugged hands has sprung from the earth so that He may be held by His mother’s lacy fingers. The Truth that overflows the Heavens’ banks has sprung from the earth so that it may lie within the friendly confines of a manger.
Where did “peace on earth” come from? From the Truth that sprang from the earth; that’s to say, from Christ who was born of the flesh.
The Lord has made all things, and yet He takes His stand among the very things He’s made. He’s the Revealer of His father, and at the same time He’s the Creator of His mother. He’s the Word of God before there were timepieces; He’s the Word made flesh who stoped the clock when He was made flesh. He made the sun with His own hands, and yet He Himself was made under the light and heat of the sun. He remains with His Father, and yet He goes forth from His mother. He’s the Creator of the heavens and the earth; and yet He takes His own rise under the heavens and the earth. As God He has more Wisdom than He can mouth, and yet as a babe He hasn’t enough mouth to utter the Wisdom He knows. His divinity isn’t underwhelmed by His humanity, nor is His humanity overwhelmed by His divinity. He didn’t abandon His divine agenda when He picked up His carpenter’s tools. He didn’t stop holding His universe together with His might arms while He was trying to catch flies with His baby fingers. He put on the clumsiness of the flesh when He entered the Virgin’s womb, and yet His movement throughout the universe wasn’t hampered by the baggy pants. He didn’t take away the food of Wisdom from the Angels while He was supplying us with the sweetness of the Lord.
Let’s stroll in the light of His aura!
Let’s rejoice in His presence!
Let’s be truly glad He’s here with us today, of all days!
Peace reigns.
The present is the Presence.
Merry Christmas!
and a few delicious words from our friend St. Augustine:
My dearly beloved Brothers and Sisters in Christ! Here we are at midnight. Candles all around. You’re my children of light tonight, adopted tots in the kindergarten of the Lord! Have I got good news for you this holy eve! It’s from the Psalmist! Rejoice in the Lord! Raise bold, laudacious sounds as only the just can do! Yes yes, you already know what I’m going to say, but hear it anyway with a kind and open ear.
First off, come to love the things you believe!
Then speak out about the things you love!
Yes, we’re celebrating this anniversary day. Christ is born! God of the Father! A human being from a human mother! From the immortality of the Father- from the virginity of a mother. From the Father comes the Principle of Life- from His mother, the end of death!
Yes, my Brothers and Sisters, it’s the Angelic Voice we hear today! A rousing ovation! A feathery fluttering! The Savior came to save us today! What meaning can all this angelistic activity possibly have for us? The angels are His heavenly messengers; we’re His carrier pigeons. Ambrosia aplenty for them; manna galore for us.
A question arises. Just what was that heavenly fare? The Evangelist John had the answer.
“In the beginning was the Word…and the Word was made Flesh, and dwelled among us.” Whose Word? The Father Himself. What Word? The Son Himself. Never the One without the Other.
For humankind to eat the Bread of Angels, the Creator of Angels baked a loaf, the Loaf of Loaves; that’s to say, He was made man. He nudges the stars, but nurses from the breast.
Truth has sprung from the earth, or so the Psalmist has sung. Christ is born of the flesh- and that’s what we’ll sing today! We prayerfully presume we’re the Sons of God. Why? Because we’ve received the power to be such. For your sake the Timeless Cause of time has become a temporal effect Himself. Because of you, my dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, the Founder of the World has made His appearance in the flesh. Because of you the Creator has become a creature. Now I know you find this hard to believe, so I ask you to believe something else first. God was made man so that He could make men into gods. Without losing a slip of what He was, He wanted to become what He’d made. That’s to say, He made what He already was. How? By adding human nature to Divine Nature without at the same time losing His Divine Nature in that human nature.
When the Wordiness of an Other-worldly God revealed itself as a worldly if worldless tot, and when the Word of God let out, if not the Wisdom of God, then an unholy howl, that’s when we’re talking about the Birthday of the Lord. The Scholars in the East read the Divine Event in the skies. The Shepherds in the hills heard the Angelic Voices. We get the word today, the anniversary of the event, in the solemnity of our celebration. In it we refer to the Psalmist’s prophecy: Truth has sprung from the earth, and Justice has looked down from Heaven. The Truth that holds the world together with rugged hands has sprung from the earth so that He may be held by His mother’s lacy fingers. The Truth that overflows the Heavens’ banks has sprung from the earth so that it may lie within the friendly confines of a manger.
Where did “peace on earth” come from? From the Truth that sprang from the earth; that’s to say, from Christ who was born of the flesh.
The Lord has made all things, and yet He takes His stand among the very things He’s made. He’s the Revealer of His father, and at the same time He’s the Creator of His mother. He’s the Word of God before there were timepieces; He’s the Word made flesh who stoped the clock when He was made flesh. He made the sun with His own hands, and yet He Himself was made under the light and heat of the sun. He remains with His Father, and yet He goes forth from His mother. He’s the Creator of the heavens and the earth; and yet He takes His own rise under the heavens and the earth. As God He has more Wisdom than He can mouth, and yet as a babe He hasn’t enough mouth to utter the Wisdom He knows. His divinity isn’t underwhelmed by His humanity, nor is His humanity overwhelmed by His divinity. He didn’t abandon His divine agenda when He picked up His carpenter’s tools. He didn’t stop holding His universe together with His might arms while He was trying to catch flies with His baby fingers. He put on the clumsiness of the flesh when He entered the Virgin’s womb, and yet His movement throughout the universe wasn’t hampered by the baggy pants. He didn’t take away the food of Wisdom from the Angels while He was supplying us with the sweetness of the Lord.
Let’s stroll in the light of His aura!
Let’s rejoice in His presence!
Let’s be truly glad He’s here with us today, of all days!
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Advent Reconciliation
Pictures from Scott Bennett from Advent 2007's La Posada Sin Fronteras at Friendship Park
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smbennett/sets/72157603486306430/
The Advent season is often filled with so many warm and sentimental memories – favorite foods, intimate times at home with loved ones, beautiful music that fills the air, gift exchanges with those close to you, care for those who regularly go without. Advent is also a time for reflection, repentance and mourning. It is a time to be with our fellow Christians, our families, but it is also a time to reach out to the suffering around us.
So, this Saturday, Dec. 13, La Posada Sin Fronteras celebrates Christian hope and hospitality by gathering as Christians on both sides of the border fence. They meet at Border Field State Park, where the border fence meets the ocean. La Posada sin Fronteras celebrates and mourns because it is important to remember the migration of Jesus, Mary and Joseph and the lack of a warm welcome that they found in Bethlehem. They anticipate the Jesus coming and they mourn the babies that died under the hand of Herod at Jesus’ birth. They celebrate reconciliation and mourn for the families of those who died crossing the US/Mexico border. They mourn as they remember the pain that many families have experienced as they have been migrants at some point in history. They mourn to remember that the borders they have are artificial, that this particular border did not exist prior to 1948 and may not exist again in the future. They mourn to confess complicity in creating them to protect “us” from “them,” and to confess that they continue to enforce these borders to protect the privileged at the expense of those who go without.They celebrate the unity in Christ, and they mourn the border as a symbol and sign of the divisions that separate brother and sister from one another.
Monday, November 17, 2008
weeping and resurrection
"Jesus wept." John 11:35
One of the more well known verses of the Bible. Jesus knows that he will raise Lazarus from the dead. Mary and Martha are full of sorrow and frustration that Jesus didn't get there sooner. So what then does weeping with Mary achieve? Jesus' weeping confirms the power of resurrection.
In those moments of weeping Jesus confirms that death without the hope of resurrection is unbearably sorrowful. That is the type of death Mary understand Lazarus to have. Jesus spends time confirming what is truly sad in that situation- not that Lazarus is dead, but that Mary's words to Him are, "Lord if you had been here, my brother would not have died." Mary's words show that she doesn't yet understand Jesus to be someone who has power over death.
Earlier in the chapter, He had a similar encounter with Martha. Martha, though, seems to have a better grasp on Jesus' power of resurrection. She says "But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you....I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." and she responds with a "yes" when Jesus asks her if she believes that He is the resurrection and the life.
Not that I think Martha knew exactly what Jesus meant by resurrection. But there is a difference between her and Mary's words. Jesus weeps with Mary and co. over a death that has no hope in resurrection.
I've been thinking today about resurrection, and connecting this Mary/Martha passage to 2 Peter 3 :8-9. "But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance."
I can imagine Mary and Martha thinking that Jesus was slow in his actions to raise up Lazarus. But it wasn't about how long things took for Jesus. And those verses from Peter say that as well. It was about not wishing that any should perish...and in this situation, it was Mary and Martha He didn't wish to see perish in despair.
Yes, of course it was a miracle that Jesus raised Lazarus. But I think the real miracle is in how beautifully Jesus confirms these verses: "So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. For this slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal" (2 Corinthians 4: 16-18)
If Mary had been able to look at the unseen, at the resurrection of Lazarus which hadn't happened yet, she would not have lost heart. (not that i'm blaming her...don't know that i would have reacted any differently). Mary's fixed point of reality was Lazarus' death rather than Jesus as one who resurrects. Mary identifies the problem that we still have- bodily existence is tied to the present age, and the present age is tied to affliction and hardship. But the age to come is tied to resurrection and glory.
I've wondered today what it is that I actually weep about. Do I weep in despair, or do I weep because the fixed points of society are found in the physical world of the present, and not in the eternal one? Do I weep because I personally see no hope, or do I weep because the way the world approaches brokenness and death is largely one that has no hope?
One of the more well known verses of the Bible. Jesus knows that he will raise Lazarus from the dead. Mary and Martha are full of sorrow and frustration that Jesus didn't get there sooner. So what then does weeping with Mary achieve? Jesus' weeping confirms the power of resurrection.
In those moments of weeping Jesus confirms that death without the hope of resurrection is unbearably sorrowful. That is the type of death Mary understand Lazarus to have. Jesus spends time confirming what is truly sad in that situation- not that Lazarus is dead, but that Mary's words to Him are, "Lord if you had been here, my brother would not have died." Mary's words show that she doesn't yet understand Jesus to be someone who has power over death.
Earlier in the chapter, He had a similar encounter with Martha. Martha, though, seems to have a better grasp on Jesus' power of resurrection. She says "But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you....I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." and she responds with a "yes" when Jesus asks her if she believes that He is the resurrection and the life.
Not that I think Martha knew exactly what Jesus meant by resurrection. But there is a difference between her and Mary's words. Jesus weeps with Mary and co. over a death that has no hope in resurrection.
I've been thinking today about resurrection, and connecting this Mary/Martha passage to 2 Peter 3 :8-9. "But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance."
I can imagine Mary and Martha thinking that Jesus was slow in his actions to raise up Lazarus. But it wasn't about how long things took for Jesus. And those verses from Peter say that as well. It was about not wishing that any should perish...and in this situation, it was Mary and Martha He didn't wish to see perish in despair.
Yes, of course it was a miracle that Jesus raised Lazarus. But I think the real miracle is in how beautifully Jesus confirms these verses: "So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. For this slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal" (2 Corinthians 4: 16-18)
If Mary had been able to look at the unseen, at the resurrection of Lazarus which hadn't happened yet, she would not have lost heart. (not that i'm blaming her...don't know that i would have reacted any differently). Mary's fixed point of reality was Lazarus' death rather than Jesus as one who resurrects. Mary identifies the problem that we still have- bodily existence is tied to the present age, and the present age is tied to affliction and hardship. But the age to come is tied to resurrection and glory.
I've wondered today what it is that I actually weep about. Do I weep in despair, or do I weep because the fixed points of society are found in the physical world of the present, and not in the eternal one? Do I weep because I personally see no hope, or do I weep because the way the world approaches brokenness and death is largely one that has no hope?
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
compare and contrast
I know...it has been a while. Life has been busy.
New Panthers' war on whites
and
White supremacists target middle America
The first article in particular raises this question for me: what are the effects of hate that is openly displayed and clearly stated by the 'hater' vs. hate that is subliminally worked into systems and structures and peoples' mindsets? Is one hate "better" than another?
Which is worse...secret societies like the KKK, or obvious and open words and works of hate? Do they have different effects? Have different goals? Target different people? Emerge from different motives?
Psalm 133
1Behold, how good and pleasant it is
when brothers dwell in unity!
2It is like the precious oil on the head,
running down on the beard,
on the beard of Aaron,
running down on the collar of his robes!
3It is like the dew of Hermon,
which falls on the mountains of Zion!
For there the LORD has commanded the blessing,
life forevermore.
I really can't even fathom how much heart-ache we, the creations of God, cause for our creator.
New Panthers' war on whites
and
White supremacists target middle America
The first article in particular raises this question for me: what are the effects of hate that is openly displayed and clearly stated by the 'hater' vs. hate that is subliminally worked into systems and structures and peoples' mindsets? Is one hate "better" than another?
Which is worse...secret societies like the KKK, or obvious and open words and works of hate? Do they have different effects? Have different goals? Target different people? Emerge from different motives?
Psalm 133
1Behold, how good and pleasant it is
when brothers dwell in unity!
2It is like the precious oil on the head,
running down on the beard,
on the beard of Aaron,
running down on the collar of his robes!
3It is like the dew of Hermon,
which falls on the mountains of Zion!
For there the LORD has commanded the blessing,
life forevermore.
I really can't even fathom how much heart-ache we, the creations of God, cause for our creator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)