One of the reasons that I try to be a theological snob is so I can avoid discussing popular culture, current events, and politics. Clearly theology is above all of that so I need not concern myself with such paltry thoughts. Yet this morning as I read about Glen Beck’s rally which is supposed to happen today, and thought, “hmm, I suppose that is theological and merits some response.”
First lets start with a type of government called “theocracy.” Say it with me: the-oc-racy. Now I am not with my tomes and tomes of books, so I went to Princeton for a definition:
a political unit governed by a deity (or by officials thought to be divinely guided); a belief in government by divine guidance
This is an important distinction to make from democracy:
The political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representative; a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
Ok, keep those two definitions in your head.
One of the critiques of Islam that I had heard is that they (the evil, plotting, Muslims) want to establish a theocracy instead of a democracy. Yet, the Taliban pushes such an approach and so there is some merit to such a critique. It probably is justified to look at one group of a religion and make the blanket statement that all Muslims are like the Taliban.
Then I found these quotes in an article this morning:
“This is the beginning of the great awakening of America…We must give voice to what God says we must do…My message to you tonight is stand where He wants you to stand and trust in the Lord. If He tells you to do it, do it. If you can’t figure it out, He will. Just do it.”
“My role is, as I see it, to wake America up to the back-sliding of principles and values and, most importantly, of God… We are a country of God. As I look at the problems in our country, quite honestly I think the hot breath of destruction is breathing on our necks.”
These are not quotes of someone supporting a democracy, but of someone supporting a theocracy. Clearly Beck is the spokesperson for God, and should be our supreme ruler. There is no need to vote for things, because we just need to listen to God (who has a direct line to Beck and company) and do what God says to do even if we don’t understand.
How the f—k is this any different from the oppressive rhetoric of dictatorial Muslims who have already gone so far as to oppress people in the name of religion? Just because Beck is under the flag of Christianity does not make it ok; his rhetoric is just as dangerous (say nothing of Sarah Palin’s gun-lovin’ sound bites). Say nothing of the people that Beck and company fears, hates, and would love to see this country without. It is very scary speech.
In a theocracy people are not free to follow God. This was one of the Baptist arguments for freedom of religion. People need to be free to say “yes” or “no” to God, a theocracy takes away that freedom.
I would agree with Beck that America is in a dangerous place but that is as far as the agreement would go. It is in a dangerous place because of the close-minded, short-sighted, self-serving polemical rhetoric that is spouted and embraced.
Today I will pray to God, but I’m not going to ask anyone else to pray, and I sure as hell won’t tell anyone what to ask from God. Bleh!
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
We Need More Pricks!
This past Sunday I had the privilege of attending an ordination council. For the non-Baptists out there, that is the final step someone has to do before becoming ordained. In the council, the individual reads a paper describing his or her religious life, call, and theological beliefs. The council, made up of pastors and lay people from nearby churches, will then ask questions of challenge and clarification. The purpose is to discern if the candidate has (1) an internal call – or a sense that God is calling him or her to a specific ministry in one way or another (normally pastoral ministry). (2) the external call – or a sense that the candidate has the abilities necessary, and a faith/theology within the norms (broadly construed) of the community.
In the past these councils were places where the candidate was grilled about things like the Atonement, the divine nature of Jesus, biblical interpretation, and many other things. Yet recently they seem to have become pro forma – a step that does not seem necessary. A committee has already worked with the candidate and made sure that his or her paper is acceptable, and the council is just supposed to give the stamp of approval. Thus most of the council questions have this flavor:
Q. – In your paper you say that you love God. How much do you love God?
A. – I love God a lot!
- Thank you.
Q. – I see that you like to quote a lot of scripture. Is that because the Bible is important to you?
A. – Yes
- Thank you.
Q. – Can you tell me more about your awesome experience of conversion?
Q. – Describe to me how great God is.
Q. – You’re such a great guy/gal. Why do you think that is?
You get my point.
So recently we had an ordination council. While most of the questions were not this easy, they were not specifically challenging, and perhaps more importantly, there were not a lot of them. There were a number of questions about the faith journey, which is important, as well as the sense of call, but not a lot concerning theology. This is disturbing to me. It gives me the impression that churches are not concerned if an individual shows that he or she has taken the time to really think about things like salvation, despair, and the church. So I ended up asking the majority of the questions in the theology section.
Because of this I left looking like a prick – someone who wanted to show off their learning. I don’t think I asked anything that anyone who has a seminary degree would have been able to ask. Actually, a critical reader would have been able to find the discrepancies in the paper. Yet I got to be the prick. Oh well, soon they will have to call me Dr. Prick, PhD.
It is a serious concern when the ordination council becomes so easy and basic. We need to take the time to really be sure that the candidate has an internal call, and why that is so strong. As I often ask, “if there is anything else you can do, then do it. If not, if you have to be ordained because there is no other path, then go for it.”
We also need to push people, especially pastors, on their theology. I am not saying everyone has to believe what I believe (even though I am right, if I may humbly say so), but pastors need to be able to articulate their faith, be aware of inconstancies, and continue to address them. A recent article in the Christian Century suggests that Christians have become to nice, and push a morally relativistic religion. I’m not going to get into the details of that article, except to say that if we don’t push people on their articulation of their faith, a mushy, nice religion is what we get.
So ask questions. Don’t be a wuss.
Signed,
Dr. Prick, soon to be PhD.
In the past these councils were places where the candidate was grilled about things like the Atonement, the divine nature of Jesus, biblical interpretation, and many other things. Yet recently they seem to have become pro forma – a step that does not seem necessary. A committee has already worked with the candidate and made sure that his or her paper is acceptable, and the council is just supposed to give the stamp of approval. Thus most of the council questions have this flavor:
Q. – In your paper you say that you love God. How much do you love God?
A. – I love God a lot!
- Thank you.
Q. – I see that you like to quote a lot of scripture. Is that because the Bible is important to you?
A. – Yes
- Thank you.
Q. – Can you tell me more about your awesome experience of conversion?
Q. – Describe to me how great God is.
Q. – You’re such a great guy/gal. Why do you think that is?
You get my point.
So recently we had an ordination council. While most of the questions were not this easy, they were not specifically challenging, and perhaps more importantly, there were not a lot of them. There were a number of questions about the faith journey, which is important, as well as the sense of call, but not a lot concerning theology. This is disturbing to me. It gives me the impression that churches are not concerned if an individual shows that he or she has taken the time to really think about things like salvation, despair, and the church. So I ended up asking the majority of the questions in the theology section.
Because of this I left looking like a prick – someone who wanted to show off their learning. I don’t think I asked anything that anyone who has a seminary degree would have been able to ask. Actually, a critical reader would have been able to find the discrepancies in the paper. Yet I got to be the prick. Oh well, soon they will have to call me Dr. Prick, PhD.
It is a serious concern when the ordination council becomes so easy and basic. We need to take the time to really be sure that the candidate has an internal call, and why that is so strong. As I often ask, “if there is anything else you can do, then do it. If not, if you have to be ordained because there is no other path, then go for it.”
We also need to push people, especially pastors, on their theology. I am not saying everyone has to believe what I believe (even though I am right, if I may humbly say so), but pastors need to be able to articulate their faith, be aware of inconstancies, and continue to address them. A recent article in the Christian Century suggests that Christians have become to nice, and push a morally relativistic religion. I’m not going to get into the details of that article, except to say that if we don’t push people on their articulation of their faith, a mushy, nice religion is what we get.
So ask questions. Don’t be a wuss.
Signed,
Dr. Prick, soon to be PhD.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Friday, August 20, 2010
Four Snap Z Formation ATTITUDE!
The dissertation is almost, almost, almost done, but not yet. Today, in the midst of studying, working on a crossword, and reviewing someone’s ordination paper for Sunday I starting reading an essay by Michel Foucault. Horray, something new! This essay is from The Foucault Reader edited by Paul Rabinow – titled: What is Enlightenment. I haven’t finished the essay, and I still have the audacity to write about it. Meh.
Anyway, here is what I liked; it is a comment about modernity:
I wonder whether we may not envisage modernity rather as an attitude than as a period of history. And by “attitude,” I mean a mode of relating to contemporary reality; a voluntary choice made by certain people; in the end, a way of thinking and feeling; a way, too, of acting and behaving that at one and the same time marks a relation of belonging and presents itself as a task.
I like this idea of modernity as an attitude rather than a moment in history. On one level that is basically what all the captured and dissected moments of time are, naming the prevailing attitudes of the day. That’s all fine and good if we don’t care about the minority voices, which I understand we don’t because it makes history and philosophy to messy and complicated. It is better to just name the victors and lump the thoughts of the masses into a singular, or sometimes two categories.
What if we took this to describe different groups of people? What if political parties were attitudes? Republican would be an attitude of denial, of embracing wealth, hard earned wealth by my grandfather that I deserve via my trust fund. It is currently an attitude of small government until a Republican is in office, etc. Democrats, on the other had, embrace the attitude of continuing to smack their head against the wall thinking that maybe the next time it wont hurt, the attitude of greater bureaucracy in order to fix a problem, and avoiding any real convictions and fire when it comes to different issues. The fun thing about this is you can not say what Democrat or Republican stands for, but instead what the ethos, the feeling or attitude of the groups are. They will shift from time to time, with basic tendencies.
Think about this with Christianity. What if Christianity is not a set of beliefs or doctrines, but instead attitudes toward life, others, and the idea of God? If that were the case than I would say that most people seem to treat God as a 8 – 10 year old child sitting on a chair who demands to be kept happy through songs praising how awesome this child is. Self-esteem issues? Or the attitude of some Christians seems to be that God is sleeping and we need to be as quiet and dull as possible so we don’t wake God up. Some seem to think that God only listens to them and no one else. I won’t even start about attitudes towards others.
It seems to me that when we consider the attitudes of groups and individuals when take away a lot of the window dressing that people can hide behind. It may be a good way to consider people.
Then again, after reading this, you may find yourself saying, “he has got some attitude!”
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Thoughts for Isaiah 58:9-14, Taking naps on Sunday
It has been a little while since I have posted something substantial, and I’m afraid to say that it is going to be a little while longer. We are now in vacation time, so the posts will slow down a little bit. I do have to preach one more sermon before I go away, so here are some thoughts:
MAIN IDEA – I always feel like I could and probably should do better. I look at the days and weeks that I haven’t read the Bible, that I haven’t prayed with sincerity and devotion and I feel like I could do better. I notice those times when my actions have become routine and rote and I realize that there is an emptiness in me and I could do better. When I feel this way my usual first reaction is to adopt a system, a schedule, a routine that will make my life better. I think that if I just controlled my life more, if I just made myself read the Bible and at least go through the motions of praying, then I would do better. Even if I don’t feel better at least I could say that I was doing something and that should count for something.
More often than not this does not work. More often than not I find myself resenting the morning Bible readings, the forced prayer, and I think I am drawn further away from God. At best I am a hollow shell offering forced prayers. At worse I am a bitter individual forcing prayers. Neither are good.
The scripture calls me to consider reconnecting with God before doing anything else. It does call for actions, for taking care of the least, but it also calls for a recognition of the Sabbath. As a pastor this is not an easy thing to do, but one that I must take seriously. The Sabbath is a working day for me, but it should also be a day to reconnect. To reconnect means to find harmony in my relationship with God, with others, with nature, and with myself. That is why for many the Sabbath is supposed to be a day of rest. But it shouldn’t be a forced rest. It shouldn’t be a forced worship. It should be free and honest. Can I imagine taking the Sabbath and really using it to regain that connection with my family? Can I imagine taking the Sabbath and really using it to regain that connection with my faith? In all honesty, it is something that I need to do, something that I cannot avoid. Can I do it?
Free me from a sense of obligation, Lord. Free me from that drive that leads me to think I only need to read scripture and say the right prayers to be a good Christian. The relationship I have come from you, God. You are found in those relationships. May I use the Sabbath as a way to find you again, to find moments of rest, and to find harmony in my life.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – While it may seem obvious, the relational nature of God is key in this, specifically that God is found in relationships. Such a concept comes from a specific view of the Trinity emphasizing the mechanics of the relational nature of the Trinity – that all are equal, and that each dwell within each other while maintaining their individuality. In our relationships with others, when they are at their best we find God. Consider Volf, Fiddes, Zizioulus, and the Capadocians. Also consider Buber.
Secondly, this seems to address the idea of works vs. faith. While there are works in worship and reconnection, these works must come out of faith. A faith that is rote is empty. A faith that is relational is deep and profound. Consider Luther and Augustine.
Finally, this speaks to the nature of worship. There is not a right way to worship or a wrong way, there is just the way is authentic in one’s relationship with God. In the same way of thinking, there is not a right or a wrong approach to the Sabbath, just a way that honors one’s relationships. Consider Heschel.
MAIN IDEA – I always feel like I could and probably should do better. I look at the days and weeks that I haven’t read the Bible, that I haven’t prayed with sincerity and devotion and I feel like I could do better. I notice those times when my actions have become routine and rote and I realize that there is an emptiness in me and I could do better. When I feel this way my usual first reaction is to adopt a system, a schedule, a routine that will make my life better. I think that if I just controlled my life more, if I just made myself read the Bible and at least go through the motions of praying, then I would do better. Even if I don’t feel better at least I could say that I was doing something and that should count for something.
More often than not this does not work. More often than not I find myself resenting the morning Bible readings, the forced prayer, and I think I am drawn further away from God. At best I am a hollow shell offering forced prayers. At worse I am a bitter individual forcing prayers. Neither are good.
The scripture calls me to consider reconnecting with God before doing anything else. It does call for actions, for taking care of the least, but it also calls for a recognition of the Sabbath. As a pastor this is not an easy thing to do, but one that I must take seriously. The Sabbath is a working day for me, but it should also be a day to reconnect. To reconnect means to find harmony in my relationship with God, with others, with nature, and with myself. That is why for many the Sabbath is supposed to be a day of rest. But it shouldn’t be a forced rest. It shouldn’t be a forced worship. It should be free and honest. Can I imagine taking the Sabbath and really using it to regain that connection with my family? Can I imagine taking the Sabbath and really using it to regain that connection with my faith? In all honesty, it is something that I need to do, something that I cannot avoid. Can I do it?
Free me from a sense of obligation, Lord. Free me from that drive that leads me to think I only need to read scripture and say the right prayers to be a good Christian. The relationship I have come from you, God. You are found in those relationships. May I use the Sabbath as a way to find you again, to find moments of rest, and to find harmony in my life.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – While it may seem obvious, the relational nature of God is key in this, specifically that God is found in relationships. Such a concept comes from a specific view of the Trinity emphasizing the mechanics of the relational nature of the Trinity – that all are equal, and that each dwell within each other while maintaining their individuality. In our relationships with others, when they are at their best we find God. Consider Volf, Fiddes, Zizioulus, and the Capadocians. Also consider Buber.
Secondly, this seems to address the idea of works vs. faith. While there are works in worship and reconnection, these works must come out of faith. A faith that is rote is empty. A faith that is relational is deep and profound. Consider Luther and Augustine.
Finally, this speaks to the nature of worship. There is not a right way to worship or a wrong way, there is just the way is authentic in one’s relationship with God. In the same way of thinking, there is not a right or a wrong approach to the Sabbath, just a way that honors one’s relationships. Consider Heschel.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Luke 12:49-56 - A Prelude to Getting Angry
Well, this is the second time that I have done this, so I guess that makes this a series. Again, I am not printing the sermon – go to the website to find that, or ask me nicely (like $300 nicely). These are the thoughts and theological ideas behind the sermon for this Sunday (8/15). So for the 2-3 church members who look at this blog, you have a leg up on what will bore you. For the 3-4 other people who just can’t make it all the way to RI, assuming that you are going to go to some church service on Sunday, while you are sitting, restless, sleepy, and bored listening to your preacher you can wonder, “What would the theosnob have preached?” Hmm… maybe I’ll make some bracelets and such with WWTTHP or WWTHP or WWTP depending on what specific words are seen as essential. Probably WWTP, maybe it is time to hire a marketing expert…
MAIN IDEA – We don’t want to make waves. We don’t want to cause problems, we don’t want to upset people nor do we want people upset at us. I often keep silent about my ideas, my belief, and my faith because I don’t want others to not like me, to judge me, or to avoid me. It is easier to keep things calm and quiet. I say that we need to focus on bigger things, and to a large degree this is true. Yet a vague message will lead to vague Christians and perhaps there are times when it is appropriate to speak with certainty and specificity.
On the other hand, it is not helpful to cause trouble just for the sake of causing trouble. It is not helpful to stir the pot, to get people excited and angry, because then people are so focused on the little picture that they miss the big picture.
I preach inclusion. I preach that everyone is welcome in the church regardless of one’s theological, political, social ideas. Is this a tolerance that is too passive? Can there be a church of opposing ideas and opinions or is this the house that Christ has come to divide?
God, help me to be true to my faith. Help me to stay true to you and the path you have set before me. At the same time, help me to realize those moments when I might be wrong. Help me to listen to others with compassion, to keep my mind and heart open while holding fast to your presence, to scripture, and to the faith that I have received. In every way, may I show the love of Christ so that your truth will be known. May I have the courage to do so. Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – At first I assumed that this passage was about conviction and passion and courage, and in many ways it is. Yet, the approach I am taking looks at one’s source of authority for revelation of knowledge concerning theology. The Wesleyan Quadrilateral suggests that some rely on experience as the primary way that God can be known, other rest on tradition, and others on knowledge. Some will then say that Scripture is always in the middle of these sources of authority, yet I agree with those who would argue that scripture is another corner in the square. Scripture can be secondary to reason, experience, or tradition. Or, scripture can be primary.
With all of these different ways of understanding our faith how can we assume that there will be a consciousness concerning God, Christ, scriptural interpretation, or anything. Thus, this becomes a question of discernment as well as revelation.
Finally, Lindbeck, and McClendon’s take on language, rules, doctrine, and speech-act theory may offer some direction. If one’s speech (actions are included as speech) is contrary to other aspects of speech (actions), then perhaps such a dissonance merits further investigation.
MAIN IDEA – We don’t want to make waves. We don’t want to cause problems, we don’t want to upset people nor do we want people upset at us. I often keep silent about my ideas, my belief, and my faith because I don’t want others to not like me, to judge me, or to avoid me. It is easier to keep things calm and quiet. I say that we need to focus on bigger things, and to a large degree this is true. Yet a vague message will lead to vague Christians and perhaps there are times when it is appropriate to speak with certainty and specificity.
On the other hand, it is not helpful to cause trouble just for the sake of causing trouble. It is not helpful to stir the pot, to get people excited and angry, because then people are so focused on the little picture that they miss the big picture.
I preach inclusion. I preach that everyone is welcome in the church regardless of one’s theological, political, social ideas. Is this a tolerance that is too passive? Can there be a church of opposing ideas and opinions or is this the house that Christ has come to divide?
God, help me to be true to my faith. Help me to stay true to you and the path you have set before me. At the same time, help me to realize those moments when I might be wrong. Help me to listen to others with compassion, to keep my mind and heart open while holding fast to your presence, to scripture, and to the faith that I have received. In every way, may I show the love of Christ so that your truth will be known. May I have the courage to do so. Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – At first I assumed that this passage was about conviction and passion and courage, and in many ways it is. Yet, the approach I am taking looks at one’s source of authority for revelation of knowledge concerning theology. The Wesleyan Quadrilateral suggests that some rely on experience as the primary way that God can be known, other rest on tradition, and others on knowledge. Some will then say that Scripture is always in the middle of these sources of authority, yet I agree with those who would argue that scripture is another corner in the square. Scripture can be secondary to reason, experience, or tradition. Or, scripture can be primary.
With all of these different ways of understanding our faith how can we assume that there will be a consciousness concerning God, Christ, scriptural interpretation, or anything. Thus, this becomes a question of discernment as well as revelation.
Finally, Lindbeck, and McClendon’s take on language, rules, doctrine, and speech-act theory may offer some direction. If one’s speech (actions are included as speech) is contrary to other aspects of speech (actions), then perhaps such a dissonance merits further investigation.
Thursday, August 05, 2010
In the Paper!
This blog has made it to actual print (as opposed to virtual print)! That’s right, the local East Greenwich paper has finally recognized my blogging brilliance (or needed some crap to fill up space). You can’t find this article online so you have to go and spend the money on the Thursday, August 5, 2010 Pendulum. Send $20 and a self-addressed envelope and I’ll send you back a copy of the article.
Anyway, now I have this pressure to continue blogging in a witty, wry manner. I also feel that I have to point out the absurdities of the world (like the possible 14th amendment change saying that just because you were born here doesn’t mean you can be a citizen. Shouldn’t that retroactively remove all of our citizenship? Ah, then we would all have to leave and then the government would not have to spend billions of dollars on silly things like education, roads, healthcare, social security, and any other service organization. Brilliant!)
Anyway, for the two or three other people who come to check out this blog because you read the article and thought, “Surly this can’t be real.” Yes it is, and stop calling me Shirley (heh).
Despite my recent rise to fame I will continue to be the humble theological snob that I have been since the inception. I will continue to offer mediocre posts with big words that make it look like I know more than I do, and I promise to continue to make this blog as boring as possible. That means no video posts (which are oh, so flashy and catchy).
Anyway, now I have this pressure to continue blogging in a witty, wry manner. I also feel that I have to point out the absurdities of the world (like the possible 14th amendment change saying that just because you were born here doesn’t mean you can be a citizen. Shouldn’t that retroactively remove all of our citizenship? Ah, then we would all have to leave and then the government would not have to spend billions of dollars on silly things like education, roads, healthcare, social security, and any other service organization. Brilliant!)
Anyway, for the two or three other people who come to check out this blog because you read the article and thought, “Surly this can’t be real.” Yes it is, and stop calling me Shirley (heh).
Despite my recent rise to fame I will continue to be the humble theological snob that I have been since the inception. I will continue to offer mediocre posts with big words that make it look like I know more than I do, and I promise to continue to make this blog as boring as possible. That means no video posts (which are oh, so flashy and catchy).
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Perfection!
I am in the process of editing my dissertation, looking for errors, and trying to make sure that everything is perfect. I have decided to ignore Paul Tillich’s claim that all humans are finite. If I accept that claim then I will have to accept that I will not be able to produce a perfect dissertation. So for now may Tillich and his finite, limited, world be damned (along with Kant, Plato, Hume, and all others)!
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Hebrews 11:103, 8-16 - A Prelude to Substance and Proof
As I have written previously, I am against simply posting a sermon as a blog post. I think it is a cheap way to sqeeze out a post (yeah, that's right - I'm talking to you preacher-boy). However, I am not against posting thoughts that are part of the forming of a sermon. This is't completely cheap, only half cheap. Below are my very own personal thoughts about the sermon I am preaching on 8-8-10. Feel free to offer any thoughts, etc. as always (come on, preacher-boy, what do you got?).
MAIN IDEA – faith is about the journey and the destination / faith means we are going towards something real, something promised. We may not get there, we may not see it, but we have the substance of the promise and we have the proof of belief that fuels all of our actions. Faith is not stationary, but active.
One of the reasons I entered into the ministry is because I see the pain of the world and I believe the church is the way to address that pain. I could have been a social worker, a politician, or a doctor, but I am a pastor because I believe the grace of God is the balm we all need individually and socially.
Holy God, remind me again and again of your promises. Remind me that you promise to guide me and lead me. Remind me that you promise to be with me and that through the cross I know that you promise to love me no matter what. On this day may I remember and embrace the hope that I am heading somewhere in my faith and my life. On this day may I embrace the hope that all that I am doing, with my vocation, with my studies, and with my family are ways of moving closer to you individually and collectively. May that be the vision that I can embrace in this message, that you are working with us, that you are guiding us and our lives and our work is not in vain.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – realized eschatology, i.e. we are working with God in realizing the Kingdom. Faith – believing in something promised. This is not the same as grace, but instead is something that we claim. Grace is offered by God; it is God’s actions. Faith is something that we do, we believe in the promises and the presence and the person of Christ and God. This is similar to hope as Multmann suggests it. Hope, in the Christian context, is a belief in something that is promised to happen, it is not a wish. Faith has that future orientation, but at the same time has a present orientation. The substance of faith is the reality of the promise that helps us in the here and now with assurance in what we are doing as Christians.
MAIN IDEA – faith is about the journey and the destination / faith means we are going towards something real, something promised. We may not get there, we may not see it, but we have the substance of the promise and we have the proof of belief that fuels all of our actions. Faith is not stationary, but active.
One of the reasons I entered into the ministry is because I see the pain of the world and I believe the church is the way to address that pain. I could have been a social worker, a politician, or a doctor, but I am a pastor because I believe the grace of God is the balm we all need individually and socially.
Holy God, remind me again and again of your promises. Remind me that you promise to guide me and lead me. Remind me that you promise to be with me and that through the cross I know that you promise to love me no matter what. On this day may I remember and embrace the hope that I am heading somewhere in my faith and my life. On this day may I embrace the hope that all that I am doing, with my vocation, with my studies, and with my family are ways of moving closer to you individually and collectively. May that be the vision that I can embrace in this message, that you are working with us, that you are guiding us and our lives and our work is not in vain.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – realized eschatology, i.e. we are working with God in realizing the Kingdom. Faith – believing in something promised. This is not the same as grace, but instead is something that we claim. Grace is offered by God; it is God’s actions. Faith is something that we do, we believe in the promises and the presence and the person of Christ and God. This is similar to hope as Multmann suggests it. Hope, in the Christian context, is a belief in something that is promised to happen, it is not a wish. Faith has that future orientation, but at the same time has a present orientation. The substance of faith is the reality of the promise that helps us in the here and now with assurance in what we are doing as Christians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)