Here are the thoughts for my Advent 1 sermon. The text is Isaiah 2:1-5 and Romans 13:11-14
MAIN IDEA – The holiday, “Christmas” season is a difficult time for me. Part of it is because I have been soured by playing to many music performances and I grew to hate Christmas music. Another part of it is because I have tended to in the past take the aspect and meaning of Advent as a penitential time, and I have had a difficult time getting into the “spirit of the time.” I had a spiritual director who once suggested that a great deal of my difficulty came from my sense that something is indeed missing in this time. There is something missing in my life and in the world. In my life I am missing the fullness of the grace of Jesus Christ and the glory I find with Christ. In the world there is a notable lack of the love and mercy that I find in Christ. So it is hard for me to be happy and upbeat in this time when I realize how much things are missing and needed.
Yet there is a longing and a desiring that is addressed in the scriptures. There is a longing for peace that is promised. There is a return of Christ that is promised. A challenge is embracing that longing and that promise and living them in an anticipatory way in the here and now. Then Advent becomes not only a time of recognizing what is missing but celebrating what is promised. Can I live with this hope and not let the excitement of the world usurp the hope of my faith?
Open my eyes to the real needs of the world and of my life. Let me see the way in which I need to be redeemed. May I see the wounds and the scars of the world even as many try to cover them up, and may I then work to offer the real hope, a promised hope, and a here and now hope of Christ.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – Paul often speaks in terms of “already/not yet.” This is a reality of the Christian life that we are already saved but not yet living into our salvation. I am led to think of David Tracy’s reference to such an awareness with his illustration of an analogical imagination. In worship, in specific moments of worship we are already in the presence of God, and yet we understand and realize the way in which we are in a very real way not yet fully living in God’s glory.
Isaiah offers a future hope and Paul calls us to future living. Two very different but very important ways to live. It is a combination of Multmann and a realized eschatology (in a way).
Whenever we are speaking of the here and now we must be aware of the presence of the Holy Spirit. In our actions of love (as Paul calls us to live) we are led and guided and lifted up by the Holy Spirit.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Friday, November 19, 2010
A Practice in Absurdity
I am currently attending meetings of bureaucratic purgatory for the American Baptist Churches, USA (ABC-USA). Through a comedy of events I have managed to be elected on the General Board of the denomination which is very basically the governing board of the denomination. It really does seem to be a practice in absurdity.
I’m going to reflect a little bit on some of the events of today (which is only half over), and maybe in another post speak about the so-far one positive meeting event that I have been a part of.
This morning was a meeting of procedure, minutia, and nit-picking over small things and things of little nature. In the same meeting we discussed a change to the by-laws of the denomination with the full realization that we will very likely not have any impact on the changes regardless if we are happy or not with the proposed changes.
So I am left thinking, “what is the point?”
I believe in the church, especially as it is manifested through the American Baptists yet the movement of the institution seems to be further away from the ideals and distinctive of the Baptist movement. Yet I do not feel as if I have any voice in the process (see a previous post for the first time the by-laws were presentedr).
What is the point?
There seems to be a growing disconnect between the denomination on the national level and local churches. The denomination seems to be focused on self-perseveration. Churches seem to be focused on self-preservation. Both seem to be looking past each other. So it is no wonder why the by-law changes do not reflect the aspect of the Baptist movement as it is practiced among the churches. On the other hand, it is no wonder why churches are not concerned with the denomination and its work.
The denomination needs to move out of the self-perseveration work and into the work of supporting and working with the churches. I doubt anything will happen.
Yet I will still sit in the meeting, half-listen and do other things at the same time (like write a blog post) and continue to practice in the absurdity.
I’m going to reflect a little bit on some of the events of today (which is only half over), and maybe in another post speak about the so-far one positive meeting event that I have been a part of.
This morning was a meeting of procedure, minutia, and nit-picking over small things and things of little nature. In the same meeting we discussed a change to the by-laws of the denomination with the full realization that we will very likely not have any impact on the changes regardless if we are happy or not with the proposed changes.
So I am left thinking, “what is the point?”
I believe in the church, especially as it is manifested through the American Baptists yet the movement of the institution seems to be further away from the ideals and distinctive of the Baptist movement. Yet I do not feel as if I have any voice in the process (see a previous post for the first time the by-laws were presentedr).
What is the point?
There seems to be a growing disconnect between the denomination on the national level and local churches. The denomination seems to be focused on self-perseveration. Churches seem to be focused on self-preservation. Both seem to be looking past each other. So it is no wonder why the by-law changes do not reflect the aspect of the Baptist movement as it is practiced among the churches. On the other hand, it is no wonder why churches are not concerned with the denomination and its work.
The denomination needs to move out of the self-perseveration work and into the work of supporting and working with the churches. I doubt anything will happen.
Yet I will still sit in the meeting, half-listen and do other things at the same time (like write a blog post) and continue to practice in the absurdity.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Put Your Arms Down
Kelvin Mutize wrote:
worship is all about glorifying god.its bringing honour and praise to him. On my blog i write about the reasons and origins of worship. Read it www.theworshipofgod.blogspot.com
It doesn’t take much to make me happy. When someone posts a comment on my blog I do a little dance around my room (or coffee shop), shake my bootie, and have small, short, exaltations of joy (which usually sound like flatulence). So when Kelvin Mutize posted the above comment to my post on worship, there was much dancing, shaking, and exalting.
Then I read Mutize’s comment. I have to say, I am very grateful for his time and energy to offer his thoughts, but I disagree with his comment, and even more so with his blog.
I have heard people say that we are created to praise God, and that makes me depressed – no dancing. Is the point of worship to gather around some unseen deity, and throw our hands in the air saying again and again, “you are awesome, you are awesome, you are awesome?” Does God have such a low self-esteem that we need to prop ‘him/her’ up with our praise? This seems like a weak reason to worship.
What about the individual who just had a bad day? I mean a really bad day. The kind of day when you find out that you have cancer, and then you hear that your child has been arrested for possession, and you loose your job, and then you are reminded that you are supposed to bring the brownies to the PTA meeting tonight. Are you going to go to church before hand and say, “oh God, you are just so awesome, and greater than anything I can imagine. I’m just so darn lucky to be able to praise you?” Probably not. Instead, you will probably say something like, “what the f----, God. I’ve been good, I’ve gone to church, I’ve done what I am supposed to do, and yet I’ve found myself drowning in a pile of sh—that you call life! This sucks, amen.”
Try saying that with your arms in the air to an up-beat song.
What about the church built in an urban or rural area, surrounded by poverty? Is the purpose of worship still to praise God? Shouldn’t we be praying for the poor and asking for the gumption to go out and help the poor?
I think I’ve made my point, Mr. Mutize, your approach to worship is shallow at best. Plus, just because you find single, individual verses in the Bible that supports your argument, and you print it in nice, colorful letters, doesn’t make it true (see his blog to get what I am talking about).
What is the purpose of worship? You don’t expect me to answer that question after this long rant. I’ll just offer this – perhaps worship is a time to connect with God, wherever we are, and to connect with our brothers and sisters in Christ, wherever we are. It is a time for weeping, and for laughing…
Take us out, Pete Seeger (he put the words to music after all)
worship is all about glorifying god.its bringing honour and praise to him. On my blog i write about the reasons and origins of worship. Read it www.theworshipofgod.blogspot.com
It doesn’t take much to make me happy. When someone posts a comment on my blog I do a little dance around my room (or coffee shop), shake my bootie, and have small, short, exaltations of joy (which usually sound like flatulence). So when Kelvin Mutize posted the above comment to my post on worship, there was much dancing, shaking, and exalting.
Then I read Mutize’s comment. I have to say, I am very grateful for his time and energy to offer his thoughts, but I disagree with his comment, and even more so with his blog.
I have heard people say that we are created to praise God, and that makes me depressed – no dancing. Is the point of worship to gather around some unseen deity, and throw our hands in the air saying again and again, “you are awesome, you are awesome, you are awesome?” Does God have such a low self-esteem that we need to prop ‘him/her’ up with our praise? This seems like a weak reason to worship.
What about the individual who just had a bad day? I mean a really bad day. The kind of day when you find out that you have cancer, and then you hear that your child has been arrested for possession, and you loose your job, and then you are reminded that you are supposed to bring the brownies to the PTA meeting tonight. Are you going to go to church before hand and say, “oh God, you are just so awesome, and greater than anything I can imagine. I’m just so darn lucky to be able to praise you?” Probably not. Instead, you will probably say something like, “what the f----, God. I’ve been good, I’ve gone to church, I’ve done what I am supposed to do, and yet I’ve found myself drowning in a pile of sh—that you call life! This sucks, amen.”
Try saying that with your arms in the air to an up-beat song.
What about the church built in an urban or rural area, surrounded by poverty? Is the purpose of worship still to praise God? Shouldn’t we be praying for the poor and asking for the gumption to go out and help the poor?
I think I’ve made my point, Mr. Mutize, your approach to worship is shallow at best. Plus, just because you find single, individual verses in the Bible that supports your argument, and you print it in nice, colorful letters, doesn’t make it true (see his blog to get what I am talking about).
What is the purpose of worship? You don’t expect me to answer that question after this long rant. I’ll just offer this – perhaps worship is a time to connect with God, wherever we are, and to connect with our brothers and sisters in Christ, wherever we are. It is a time for weeping, and for laughing…
Take us out, Pete Seeger (he put the words to music after all)
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Doing Worship, Doing Service
These are the ideas for my sermon on Isaiah 58:6-9a. Chew on them and then spit them out and move on.
MAIN IDEA – I often find myself asking, “what is the purpose of worship?” I remember a conversation I had with a worship guru who kept saying that the purpose of worship was to worship. That is an answer that tells nothing. Yet so many feel that as long as they wave their arms and express an excessive amount of joy then they have done their religious duty. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to be in a place that just focuses on the down and the depressed, but I don’t want to be in a contrived, false joy either. I want a worship that is fulfilling, that is meaningful, and that is challenging. Perhaps, most importantly, I want a worship where I feel as if I have had an encounter with God.
As a pastor this is not so easy for me to achieve, but it is something that I strive to coordinate and conduct with my actions in worship. Recognizing that in the end I cannot control the movement of God or the hearts of people, I still can help guide people to be closer to Christ. Perhaps that is why the emphasis on service, for it is in doing that we find Christ. It is in action that we connect with God.
At the same time I know many folks who would argue that worship isn’t the most important, but that doing is. I know folks that would argue that precious resources and time is lost on worship and worship space. They would agree that in doing one finds Christ and thus we should turn off the organ and do the work of the Lord. Yet I feel as if a spiritual depth is missing in such a response. I feel as if we need to be deliberate in connecting with God.
So I struggle with the purpose of worship. I want to be engaged in worship that is active and challenging and moving. I want to be involved in a worship service that actually feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, and so on. I want it to be a time when it is clear that the Holy Spirit is present and active in the whole process.
So what is the purpose of worship? To be honest, I’m not sure there is one singular purpose. Yet I know I want to pull from worship a sense, a conviction of action and service.
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – George Lindbeck suggests that doctrine should not tell us so much what to believe, but how to believe. In worship we actively engage with the doctrine, the beliefs of our faith. That is if we are indeed active in our faith.
Brueggemann reminds us that the prophet cuts into the stupor, the kingly religion of our lives and calls us back to the cry of the Lord. The Latin phrase, Lex Orandi, Lex Crendi (in the work of the people is the rule or belief of the people) holds a lot of power and truth with worship.
Finally, there is a sacramental awareness that I feel is important to lift up. The difference between service the poor and service the poor in worship is that awareness of the presence of Christ in all that we are doing.
MAIN IDEA – I often find myself asking, “what is the purpose of worship?” I remember a conversation I had with a worship guru who kept saying that the purpose of worship was to worship. That is an answer that tells nothing. Yet so many feel that as long as they wave their arms and express an excessive amount of joy then they have done their religious duty. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to be in a place that just focuses on the down and the depressed, but I don’t want to be in a contrived, false joy either. I want a worship that is fulfilling, that is meaningful, and that is challenging. Perhaps, most importantly, I want a worship where I feel as if I have had an encounter with God.
As a pastor this is not so easy for me to achieve, but it is something that I strive to coordinate and conduct with my actions in worship. Recognizing that in the end I cannot control the movement of God or the hearts of people, I still can help guide people to be closer to Christ. Perhaps that is why the emphasis on service, for it is in doing that we find Christ. It is in action that we connect with God.
At the same time I know many folks who would argue that worship isn’t the most important, but that doing is. I know folks that would argue that precious resources and time is lost on worship and worship space. They would agree that in doing one finds Christ and thus we should turn off the organ and do the work of the Lord. Yet I feel as if a spiritual depth is missing in such a response. I feel as if we need to be deliberate in connecting with God.
So I struggle with the purpose of worship. I want to be engaged in worship that is active and challenging and moving. I want to be involved in a worship service that actually feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, and so on. I want it to be a time when it is clear that the Holy Spirit is present and active in the whole process.
So what is the purpose of worship? To be honest, I’m not sure there is one singular purpose. Yet I know I want to pull from worship a sense, a conviction of action and service.
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – George Lindbeck suggests that doctrine should not tell us so much what to believe, but how to believe. In worship we actively engage with the doctrine, the beliefs of our faith. That is if we are indeed active in our faith.
Brueggemann reminds us that the prophet cuts into the stupor, the kingly religion of our lives and calls us back to the cry of the Lord. The Latin phrase, Lex Orandi, Lex Crendi (in the work of the people is the rule or belief of the people) holds a lot of power and truth with worship.
Finally, there is a sacramental awareness that I feel is important to lift up. The difference between service the poor and service the poor in worship is that awareness of the presence of Christ in all that we are doing.
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
Hell is Always Changing
I’m continuing to slog thought Foucault and finding him more and more fascinating. Yesterday I read his selection from Discipline and Punish, “The Body Condemned.” In this work Foucault is looking at the forms and types of penal and judicial punishment in Western civilization throughout the centuries. In doing so he makes the point that, “different systems of punishment … (occur) with the systems of production within which they operate” (Reader, 172). He also states that, “the systems of punishment are to be situated in a certain ‘political economy’ of the body…” As I understand it, Foucault is stating that the punishment of the day fit the political economy of the day, for example in a mercantile economy a prison factory and forced labor was the punishment.
This is all very interesting, but what has it to do with the church or anything else? Consider this from a theological perspective – does the punishment that Christianity suggests align or is influenced by the political economy or the socio-historical context of the day?
For some time hell was the soup de jour. If you weren’t a Christian and especially the right kind of Christian you would end up in the terrors and pain and torture of hell. The horror, the horror. As society progressed, or at least plodded along hell continued to be in the mix but other ideas emerged. The existentialists suggested that the end may be nothing and that would be the hell. The warm and friendly liberals suggested that everyone would go to heaven and there would be no hell. Others would say that there is a hell but no one is going there. The focus on punishment shifted.
If you have time to kill and want to see a great contrast, read Dante’s Divine Comedy and then read C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce. Both deal with the same topic. Lewis is deeply influenced by Dante, yet the terror is very different. Gone is the man eating the brains of another man. Gone are the skins of people hanging on trees. Gone are the traitors being eternally chewed in the very bottom of hell. Instead people are in a hell which is very much like life, a Purgatory which is like a bus stop, and heaven, which is finding one’s true life.
Some may say that Lewis is just modernizing Dante’s work, but considering Foucault’s theory, perhaps Lewis is influenced by the socio-historical, political, and economic context of the day.
In the end the lesson is still, be good or go to hell. Hell may not be that bad or it may be awful or it may just be a room with two other people and there is no exit. Sure, we may make it up, but it still sucks.
This is all very interesting, but what has it to do with the church or anything else? Consider this from a theological perspective – does the punishment that Christianity suggests align or is influenced by the political economy or the socio-historical context of the day?
For some time hell was the soup de jour. If you weren’t a Christian and especially the right kind of Christian you would end up in the terrors and pain and torture of hell. The horror, the horror. As society progressed, or at least plodded along hell continued to be in the mix but other ideas emerged. The existentialists suggested that the end may be nothing and that would be the hell. The warm and friendly liberals suggested that everyone would go to heaven and there would be no hell. Others would say that there is a hell but no one is going there. The focus on punishment shifted.
If you have time to kill and want to see a great contrast, read Dante’s Divine Comedy and then read C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce. Both deal with the same topic. Lewis is deeply influenced by Dante, yet the terror is very different. Gone is the man eating the brains of another man. Gone are the skins of people hanging on trees. Gone are the traitors being eternally chewed in the very bottom of hell. Instead people are in a hell which is very much like life, a Purgatory which is like a bus stop, and heaven, which is finding one’s true life.
Some may say that Lewis is just modernizing Dante’s work, but considering Foucault’s theory, perhaps Lewis is influenced by the socio-historical, political, and economic context of the day.
In the end the lesson is still, be good or go to hell. Hell may not be that bad or it may be awful or it may just be a room with two other people and there is no exit. Sure, we may make it up, but it still sucks.
Sunday, November 07, 2010
What Now?
Now that I have pretty much finished the doctoral stuff, I am left wondering what to do. I don’t want to become one of those people who never does any research again, but on the other hand I don’t want to have my life ruled by something in such a way. I want to live, damnit, can’t you let me live!
So I am trying to figure out what to do with my time. I am still reading Foucault with a friend of mine, but I feel I could do more, or at least be a little more focused. I do have a lot of books to read, which is good, but that isn’t focused either.
My fear is that I will end up being pulled in many directions, that I will find my time full but without any focus or direction. I want to continue to work, just give me some direction.
So I am trying to figure out what to do with my time. I am still reading Foucault with a friend of mine, but I feel I could do more, or at least be a little more focused. I do have a lot of books to read, which is good, but that isn’t focused either.
My fear is that I will end up being pulled in many directions, that I will find my time full but without any focus or direction. I want to continue to work, just give me some direction.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Elections aren't Real
Finally, elections are over and I can return to thinking and worrying about myself and not getting angry about ads, lies, and corruption. Back to the church.
I have been thinking about the elections, rhetoric, and how the whole process is in some very real ways a construct but not a reality (chew on that for a moment). I have recently read two essays by Michel Foucault from his work Madness and Civilization in The Foucault Reader – "The Great Confinement" and "Birth of the Asylum." In these essays, as best as I can understand them, Foucault describes the ways in which ideas of “madness” were construed based on the desires and priorities of society and in which the ideas of healing was construed based on the set norms and standards of society.
Madness was being idle, not working. Healing was agreeing with the terms and standards set by those in control. Granted, this is a very, very gross simplification of Foucault’s ideas and writings but it will serve my purpose. Think about the rhetoric of politicians in this whole process. “If you vote this way then you believe X” “If you vote for me then you are casting a vote for X” With these statements the terms of a vote are being created and we are pulled into making a decision not for a candidate based on his or her values and abilities, but for ideals.
This goes even farther when we are told what values we are supposed to have. The often used phrase, “Take our Country Back,” is loaded with implications. Our country has gone astray and we need to either vote to take it back, or vote to further lead it away.
Powerful rhetoric is nothing new in the process; in fact the whole thing is nothing new. Yet I think Foucault’s ideas offer a point of view of the role of power in the discourse. In this whole process the terms are set, the ideals are set, and the stakes are set. We (the people) do not have a choice to change for if we do we are “mad.” When we cast a vote we are relinquishing power. When we, out of disgust, abstain from voting we are relinquishing power. We are told that we exercise our power when we vote, yet I think that the whole thing is about the populous losing power and the leading class maintaining it.
Sad news – there is most likely no way out. Because I care so much about the consciousness and mental health of my readers I want to leave you on a happy note. Follow this link to one of the many inane videos of a cat doing something on YouTube.
I have been thinking about the elections, rhetoric, and how the whole process is in some very real ways a construct but not a reality (chew on that for a moment). I have recently read two essays by Michel Foucault from his work Madness and Civilization in The Foucault Reader – "The Great Confinement" and "Birth of the Asylum." In these essays, as best as I can understand them, Foucault describes the ways in which ideas of “madness” were construed based on the desires and priorities of society and in which the ideas of healing was construed based on the set norms and standards of society.
Madness was being idle, not working. Healing was agreeing with the terms and standards set by those in control. Granted, this is a very, very gross simplification of Foucault’s ideas and writings but it will serve my purpose. Think about the rhetoric of politicians in this whole process. “If you vote this way then you believe X” “If you vote for me then you are casting a vote for X” With these statements the terms of a vote are being created and we are pulled into making a decision not for a candidate based on his or her values and abilities, but for ideals.
This goes even farther when we are told what values we are supposed to have. The often used phrase, “Take our Country Back,” is loaded with implications. Our country has gone astray and we need to either vote to take it back, or vote to further lead it away.
Powerful rhetoric is nothing new in the process; in fact the whole thing is nothing new. Yet I think Foucault’s ideas offer a point of view of the role of power in the discourse. In this whole process the terms are set, the ideals are set, and the stakes are set. We (the people) do not have a choice to change for if we do we are “mad.” When we cast a vote we are relinquishing power. When we, out of disgust, abstain from voting we are relinquishing power. We are told that we exercise our power when we vote, yet I think that the whole thing is about the populous losing power and the leading class maintaining it.
Sad news – there is most likely no way out. Because I care so much about the consciousness and mental health of my readers I want to leave you on a happy note. Follow this link to one of the many inane videos of a cat doing something on YouTube.
Outcasts!
Thoughts for Matthew 25:34-36 focusing on the sick and those in prison.
MAIN IDEA – Labels are very useful to cast people out, to proclaim who the “other” is. Some are placed with malice, but others are subconsciously projected with blame, shame, and judgment. I am constantly visiting people who are sick and I go because I feel they need to be connected with the family of Christ and the presence of Christ. Yet I describe them as sick. I label them, and with those labels separate myself from them. I wonder to what degree I place myself above those who are sick. I wonder to what degree I see myself as better in one way or another because I am not in that same situation. I go, I pray, and then I leave. Yet to I ever really imagine what it might be like to be in that situation? This is not just for the sick, but for the grieving, the hurting, and the lost. People living with unemployment, divorce, death, and many other issues of life.
I think I am being to hard on myself, I do try to imagine what it might be like, but I still protect myself. The separation is more evident when I think of those in prison. These are people who made bad choices. These are people who should be in prison, but am I so different? I am fortunate because I have been born a white male, because I have good parents, and have grown up in a good environment. How responsible am I for my blessings? How responsible are others for their curses?
It is a small step to end up living a life of despair. It is a small moment that places a person in a place of sickness unto death. I may place myself apart and above, but it is not so great of a divide from those in the prison of the hospital bed or of the jail. Thus I visit not only to bring Christ but to experience Christ with a brother or sister who is in a situation that I very well could be in.
Lord, help me to humble my views of others. Help me to be honest with my blessings and my failings. When I visit others, may I see myself and offer thanks. When I visit others may I see you and live in your love.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – Lucan writes about relationality that is important – a relationality that is reflected in the trinity. We also need to be honest about the human condition, that we all are fallen in one way or another, that we all could be sick or in prison no matter how good we think we are. We don’t grant forgiveness, but we do offer compassion.
Finally, interestingly, Michel Foucault seems to offer some insight on being in prison or in the hospital. While he is speaking about the Asylum, there is a sense that applies to sick or in prison. We, society, dictates the terms and conditions upon which others may live, and if they do not meet those terms, we label them as different and as others.
MAIN IDEA – Labels are very useful to cast people out, to proclaim who the “other” is. Some are placed with malice, but others are subconsciously projected with blame, shame, and judgment. I am constantly visiting people who are sick and I go because I feel they need to be connected with the family of Christ and the presence of Christ. Yet I describe them as sick. I label them, and with those labels separate myself from them. I wonder to what degree I place myself above those who are sick. I wonder to what degree I see myself as better in one way or another because I am not in that same situation. I go, I pray, and then I leave. Yet to I ever really imagine what it might be like to be in that situation? This is not just for the sick, but for the grieving, the hurting, and the lost. People living with unemployment, divorce, death, and many other issues of life.
I think I am being to hard on myself, I do try to imagine what it might be like, but I still protect myself. The separation is more evident when I think of those in prison. These are people who made bad choices. These are people who should be in prison, but am I so different? I am fortunate because I have been born a white male, because I have good parents, and have grown up in a good environment. How responsible am I for my blessings? How responsible are others for their curses?
It is a small step to end up living a life of despair. It is a small moment that places a person in a place of sickness unto death. I may place myself apart and above, but it is not so great of a divide from those in the prison of the hospital bed or of the jail. Thus I visit not only to bring Christ but to experience Christ with a brother or sister who is in a situation that I very well could be in.
Lord, help me to humble my views of others. Help me to be honest with my blessings and my failings. When I visit others, may I see myself and offer thanks. When I visit others may I see you and live in your love.
Amen
THEOLOGICAL IDEA – Lucan writes about relationality that is important – a relationality that is reflected in the trinity. We also need to be honest about the human condition, that we all are fallen in one way or another, that we all could be sick or in prison no matter how good we think we are. We don’t grant forgiveness, but we do offer compassion.
Finally, interestingly, Michel Foucault seems to offer some insight on being in prison or in the hospital. While he is speaking about the Asylum, there is a sense that applies to sick or in prison. We, society, dictates the terms and conditions upon which others may live, and if they do not meet those terms, we label them as different and as others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)