What if Cornelius mentioned in the Gospels is the same Cornelius in Acts? Remember Cornelius? He was a centurion who came to Jesus and asked for his servant be healed. Cornelius, the centurion (commander of 100 Roman soldiers), said he was a man who followed commands and that if Jesus would just give the command, his servant would be healed. Jesus was amazed at his faith, saying he'd seen nothing like it anywhere.
What if Cornelius was stationed in Jerusalem and under the command of Pilate?
What if his 100 soldiers were in charge of locking up the thieves and Jesus? What if he overheard their jailhouse conversations? What if he watched the whole thing--the crown of thorns, the beating, and everything else?
What if he grabbed Peter and asked, "Weren't you one of his followers?" And Peter said, "No! I don't know him!" BUT their eyes locked, then Peter quickly looked away--because Cornelius had seen Peter when he sought out Jesus to heal his servant.
What if Cornelius was just a soldier doing his job? Executing a rebel and catching a fisherman lying through his teeth. A centurion follows orders.
What if he was at Golgotha and watched it all, then said out loud, "Surely, this is the Son of God"?
What if he became sick of the whole mess and retired to Macedonia to try to forget it all? How he betrayed and crucified the Son of God--the very man whom he trusted to hire his servant.
What if Cornelius prayed and prayed to God to be delivered from his pain and guilt. What if he asked God to forgive him and send him a sign?
What if one morning there's a knock at the door and who should it be but the lying fisherman!
What if they stood and stared in disbelief? Both knowing the other's story.
What if they wept together? Two men needing to confess to someone who could understand.
What if Peter sat with Cornelius and explained his "unclean food" dream, how terrible he felt about his own betrayal, and the saving grace of Jesus?
What if Peter and Cornelius became brothers forever?
What if?
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
A Post-Modern, Post-Protestant Nation
The ascendance of science over faith in the 1500s reshaped Christianity dramatically. Modern Christianity is often ridiculed and criticized in 21st Century culture as missing the point in terms of community and grace. Yet, let’s be truthful, no war has ever been fought for authentic Christian faith. The Crusades, War of Roses, Hundred Years War, and others were certainly “religious” wars, but none were waged on Christ’s principles. Kings and politicians wage war for temporal reasons, yet they rally the masses with, “God is with us!” That withstanding, few unbelievers care! They are not listening to our excuses. Historically, Christians are guilty of failing to be Christ-like in the proper time and place.
As Bob Dylan sang, “The times, they are a-changin’.” Baby Boomers and their parents are children of the Enlightenment—believing in science, cause-and-effect, and answers. Boomers expected more money, more square footage, nicer cars, better answers, and more more. I’m pretty sure a Boomer coined the phrase, “Too much is never enough.” Post-moderns are not so sure about the things Boomers take for granted. Generation X-ers and Millennials are not expecting better jobs, bigger houses, stable marriages, or fairytale endings.
As Bob Dylan sang, “The times, they are a-changin’.” Baby Boomers and their parents are children of the Enlightenment—believing in science, cause-and-effect, and answers. Boomers expected more money, more square footage, nicer cars, better answers, and more more. I’m pretty sure a Boomer coined the phrase, “Too much is never enough.” Post-moderns are not so sure about the things Boomers take for granted. Generation X-ers and Millennials are not expecting better jobs, bigger houses, stable marriages, or fairytale endings.
Will ministry in this century be different from ministry in the last? There are significant differences between last century (moderns) and the present (post-moderns):
1. Religion. Moderns tend to think all-or-none; they might say, “We [Christians] have the answers. They [Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, etc.] don’t.” Post-moderns are multicultural and exposed to the truth-claims of world religions. Thus, they tend to be syncretists—seeing related themes and teachings across religions. Post-moderns seek inclusion and respect for all. “All truth is God’s truth no matter where you find it.” The post-modern would think, “We [Christians] have a complete revelation. They [Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, etc.] have a partial revelation.” Sharing Christ’s distinctiveness and the role of repentance in a multi-cultural context may be evangelism’s most difficult challenge.
2. The Bible. Moderns think of the Bible as historical, literal, and authoritative (infallible and inerrant). Post-moderns think of the Bible as allegorical, linguistically transcendent (each translation yields unique, culturally insightful truths), and dynamic (Spirit-customized message for every reader). All-or-none truth-claims are illogical to today’s seekers.
3. Who is lost? Moderns describe non-believers as “lost”. Post-moderns think God has become lost. Nuances are important. Domination language (winning, converting, and conquering) and derogatory terminology (heathen, pagan, lost, sinner, etc.) repel post-moderns.
4. Doctrine. Modern evangelical faith is Protestant—biblical authority challenging individuals to change the Roman Catholic Church (and its denominational descendants). Post-modern evangelicals want to reconnect with authentic Christian traditions—they want to renew threads of truth connecting them to the ancient church. Creeds, Sacraments, and writings of the Church Fathers provide historical and spiritual proximity to the early church.
5. Community. Community may be THE most significant aspect of post-modern Christians. Today’s ministers travel with Christians and non-Christians together on life’s journey. Modernity valued dynamic leadership—bold, figurehead sorts of leaders with all the answers. Post-moderns see a level playing field occupied by a community of equals—they expect fellowship and companionship with ministers.
6. Mistakes. Moderns tend to be defensive, are loyal, ask no questions, and support party-line-type-people. Post-moderns are comfortable with apologies, questions, diversity, and multiple perspectives and nuanced answers. They do not expect simple answers to complex questions—they may not even expect answers!
7. Evangelism. Moderns come to church to “accept Jesus” and to learn proper doctrine. The old model is 1. Public profession, 2. Fellowship, and 3. Growth. The new model is 1. Fellowship, 2. Growth, and 3. Public profession. Post-moderns join a faith community for fellowship and to explore and discover how faith works. Non-believers are welcome to join the community’s journey.
8. Ministry. Moderns support ministry through institutions staffed by professionals. Post-moderns advocate personal involvement and trust lay ministers. Post-moderns value community service—especially to the less fortunate. The lines between professional and laity are blurry. Some post-moderns might distrust professionals, suggesting they are naïve and out-of-touch with reality.
9. Teaching. Moderns prefer graded Sunday Schools, worship services, and programs. Post-moderns prefer small groups of people like themselves exploring spiritual formation.
10. Worship. Moderns like “worship services” and tend to be spectators—the leaders perform and members (and God?) watch. Post-moderns like worship experiences—fellowship, Communion, and dialogue.
11. Tomorrow. Moderns are often concerned about the next life—heaven or hell—the faith dividend. Post-moderns are concerned about this life—what is God doing right now? How can we walk in the Kingdom of God on Earth? If we live well, now, the future will take care of itself.
12. Conversion. Modern evangelicals preach salvation (a heavenly reward) by grace, but often appear to support salvation by works. Salvation is transactional; justice must be done. Post-moderns preach living by grace (survival in a cruel world) and practice authenticity (flawed believers trying to be pure and Christ-like). Repentance yields forgiveness (acceptance), today grace is sufficient, and Jesus answers all questions of divine justice. Grace is not about where you are going, but where you are.
1. Religion. Moderns tend to think all-or-none; they might say, “We [Christians] have the answers. They [Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, etc.] don’t.” Post-moderns are multicultural and exposed to the truth-claims of world religions. Thus, they tend to be syncretists—seeing related themes and teachings across religions. Post-moderns seek inclusion and respect for all. “All truth is God’s truth no matter where you find it.” The post-modern would think, “We [Christians] have a complete revelation. They [Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, etc.] have a partial revelation.” Sharing Christ’s distinctiveness and the role of repentance in a multi-cultural context may be evangelism’s most difficult challenge.
2. The Bible. Moderns think of the Bible as historical, literal, and authoritative (infallible and inerrant). Post-moderns think of the Bible as allegorical, linguistically transcendent (each translation yields unique, culturally insightful truths), and dynamic (Spirit-customized message for every reader). All-or-none truth-claims are illogical to today’s seekers.
3. Who is lost? Moderns describe non-believers as “lost”. Post-moderns think God has become lost. Nuances are important. Domination language (winning, converting, and conquering) and derogatory terminology (heathen, pagan, lost, sinner, etc.) repel post-moderns.
4. Doctrine. Modern evangelical faith is Protestant—biblical authority challenging individuals to change the Roman Catholic Church (and its denominational descendants). Post-modern evangelicals want to reconnect with authentic Christian traditions—they want to renew threads of truth connecting them to the ancient church. Creeds, Sacraments, and writings of the Church Fathers provide historical and spiritual proximity to the early church.
5. Community. Community may be THE most significant aspect of post-modern Christians. Today’s ministers travel with Christians and non-Christians together on life’s journey. Modernity valued dynamic leadership—bold, figurehead sorts of leaders with all the answers. Post-moderns see a level playing field occupied by a community of equals—they expect fellowship and companionship with ministers.
6. Mistakes. Moderns tend to be defensive, are loyal, ask no questions, and support party-line-type-people. Post-moderns are comfortable with apologies, questions, diversity, and multiple perspectives and nuanced answers. They do not expect simple answers to complex questions—they may not even expect answers!
7. Evangelism. Moderns come to church to “accept Jesus” and to learn proper doctrine. The old model is 1. Public profession, 2. Fellowship, and 3. Growth. The new model is 1. Fellowship, 2. Growth, and 3. Public profession. Post-moderns join a faith community for fellowship and to explore and discover how faith works. Non-believers are welcome to join the community’s journey.
8. Ministry. Moderns support ministry through institutions staffed by professionals. Post-moderns advocate personal involvement and trust lay ministers. Post-moderns value community service—especially to the less fortunate. The lines between professional and laity are blurry. Some post-moderns might distrust professionals, suggesting they are naïve and out-of-touch with reality.
9. Teaching. Moderns prefer graded Sunday Schools, worship services, and programs. Post-moderns prefer small groups of people like themselves exploring spiritual formation.
10. Worship. Moderns like “worship services” and tend to be spectators—the leaders perform and members (and God?) watch. Post-moderns like worship experiences—fellowship, Communion, and dialogue.
11. Tomorrow. Moderns are often concerned about the next life—heaven or hell—the faith dividend. Post-moderns are concerned about this life—what is God doing right now? How can we walk in the Kingdom of God on Earth? If we live well, now, the future will take care of itself.
12. Conversion. Modern evangelicals preach salvation (a heavenly reward) by grace, but often appear to support salvation by works. Salvation is transactional; justice must be done. Post-moderns preach living by grace (survival in a cruel world) and practice authenticity (flawed believers trying to be pure and Christ-like). Repentance yields forgiveness (acceptance), today grace is sufficient, and Jesus answers all questions of divine justice. Grace is not about where you are going, but where you are.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Big Place, Small People
Last week (early December, 2010) the estimated number of stars in the universe was increased three-fold to 300,000,000,000,000,000,000 (give or take a couple). I'm smiling. I'm guessing that's how I'd say, "Don't really know." I'm guessing we're the only species offering doctorates on such things.
Whatever the case, we're part of a bigger picture. That's actually a scientific trend--wherever one stands, things get incomprehensibly bigger and bigger and smaller and smaller. Infinity lies without and within. So, whatever one believes, there is a greater picture and more details. Perhaps this is a fundamental glimpse of the divine--greater and finer than us. Mysteries great and small.
We're surrounded by divinity.
I have a science experiment: Materials: a common nail and a coke bottle. Is it possible, in a single toss, to throw a nail across a yard and have it drop down the neck of a Coca Cola bottle? Scientifically, yes; it's undeniably possible; there's nothing physically blocking the nail from the bottle. Scientifically, no, it's impossible; the variables that would allow the nail to share the same space as the bottle cannot be controlled to meet such an expectation. A successful attempt would be unexplainable. Sort of.
I have a science experiment: Materials: a common nail and a coke bottle. Is it possible, in a single toss, to throw a nail across a yard and have it drop down the neck of a Coca Cola bottle? Scientifically, yes; it's undeniably possible; there's nothing physically blocking the nail from the bottle. Scientifically, no, it's impossible; the variables that would allow the nail to share the same space as the bottle cannot be controlled to meet such an expectation. A successful attempt would be unexplainable. Sort of.
So, if I throw the nail into the bottle, what's up?
Isn't it odd how something seems impossible until it happens, then it is undeniable to the witnesses and unexplainable to others. Sounds like religion.
If deity is what is beyond our understanding, candidates for divinity are infinite. Denying God is a waste of time. Intellectually, one system is as "god" as another if it explains things. Thus, a deity is where we go with mysteries and imponderables. Atheists profess no hope or expectation in "god," but I'm guessing they have hope and expectations in something else. We run into things that are unexplainable, but undeniable. In the end, the best we can do is speculate on what we think we know, test the waters, and leave the rest to hopes and expectations.
What do people crave? White Castles (see www.whitecastle.com) AND answers, reliability, wisdom, power, joy, truth, transcendence, and more. We want someone to say, "I can explain mysteries." In my scorebook, science qualifies as a religion as much as anything else. Those who turn to science love it's willingness to take on any mystery, impersonally, amorally, and meet needs.
Religion is hope and we frame our religion with expectations. Hope and expectations are our faith statements. These days I grapple with high hopes and low expectations. My hopes are what I believe, my expectations are what I have experienced. This says more about me than I understand. This philosophy is so transparently safe and convenient. Finding older adults with this philosophy is easy. Call it, "learned helplessness" or "idealism meets reality." I'm optimistic, but experience has taught me I'm not in control of outcomes and outcomes can be painful. When I was younger I had high hopes and high expectations. Many young people are this way.
Things haven't turned out like I expected. Up to a point I thought X would happen because I was doing Y. Something unexplainable and undeniable happened. Perhaps the nail went in the bottle or I assumed it would and it didn't. I don't know. Some people have things happen and then have no hope and no expectations. I understand why this happens--sort of a "deeds become creeds" thing. We all examine our experiences with providence and pain, then manufacture a coherent, logical life story. Some abandon hopes or expectations over unexplainable, yet undeniable circumstances. "Nothing works," they say.
When things appear to go wrong, I blame myself for lacking the wisdom or will-power to make good decisions or make correct sense of circumstances. I know life has choices and actions have consequences. When someone says their way skips all that, I smile. Thus, I expect there must be some connection between what's happening today and what I did yesterday. Life is full of infinitely small and large choices and actions. How they all work together is a mystery to me. I hope and expect they all eventually work together for good.
There is an unexplainable rhythm and harmony in the universe that is undeniable. My friends speak in proofs, hypotheses, sermons, commandments, precepts, and theories, but the topic is inevitably the greater without or the more within. My colleagues are all about extending boundaries, but there is always "greater and more." We speak of the unexplainable. What we do not fully know but perceive to be so.
What's the point?
Well, that's the ultimate question. We are everything from atheist to fundamentalist and in every case our hopes and expectations try to cipher the point of existence. We find our faith in our hopes and mysteries. We hope in what we believe. Our hope is as big as our belief. Christians believe the "greater and more" wants to get personal and be the object of our hopes and expectation. Until Christians get more details and the bigger picture we lean into the Bible and affirm the Apostle's Creed.
The Psalmist says, God names all the stars and holds the universe in the span of his hand. I like that. My hope is that this is so and my expectation is that I will someday get to see more of the universe than I do now. What do your hopes and expectations have to offer? Reality is what it is regardless, so hope big. If God is for us, who can stand against us? If God isn't, I still have no regrets. Perfect hope wishes hope for all.
This note borders on being silly because I think I know something. I'm also pretty sure there are 299,999,999,999,999,998 stars in the universe. They counted two stars twice.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Pain and Guilt
Our bodies and spirits have limits within which they work well—move beyond those limits and bad things happen. Martin Luther suggested self-loathing is a condition or penalty of wrongdoing that continues until the cause is appeased. Whether one agrees with Luther or not, humans experience internal dissonance over actions.
Guilt is analogous to pain. Guilt is to the human spirit as pain is to the human body. When the human body moves beyond its physical limits the result is discomfort and pain. When the human spirit moves beyond its moral limits the result is spiritual/mental discomfort and guilt.
The body is limited by its natural design and construction. Force a joint out of place and the result is pain. The spirit has built-in design and construction limitations, too. Go beyond these limits and things get bad. Bottom line: humans have natural limits.
Pain
The body seeks a life free of pain and hurt. We are at our physical best and happiest when we are pain-free. Pain or hurt comes from three sources:
1. When we force ourselves beyond our physical limits (direct choice).
2. From accidents, illness, or attacks (not by choice).
3. As a consequence of placing ourselves in high-risk situations likely to result in accidents (indirect choice).
Pain requiring no healing usually serves as a warning. For example, pain while exercising signals approaching or passed limits. Exercise and practice extend limits; abuse and inaction decrease limits.
Pain usually requires healing. Healing involves triage (determining the seriousness of ailments), mending and medication, therapy/tending, and time. In severe cases those in pain cannot self-heal. Friends, family, and medical professionals help. Healing is a return to living within the body’s natural limits. In some cases healing returns the body to its former condition; in other cases the body remains scarred or disabled and pain may continue. Some injuries result in lifelong pain. Some injuries result in death.
Pain may be cured or masked by medication. Medication that helps one deal with pain while healing is typically good. Medication that keeps one from experiencing pain while surpassing limits is dangerous. Humans dislike pain so much that they are tempted to self-medicate in order to preempt pain.
Guilt
The human spirit seeks a life free of guilt and emotional hurt. We are at our best and happiest when we are guilt-free. Guilt or self-loathing comes from three sources:
1. When we force ourselves beyond our moral limits (direct choice).
2. From accidents, illness, or attacks (not by choice).
3. As a consequence of placing ourselves in high-risk situations likely to result in accidents (indirect choice).
Guilt that vanishes completely with a change in action usually serves as a warning. Humans learn from guilt experiences.
Guilt requires healing. Healing involves triage (determining the seriousness of moral transgression), changing behavior, apology, and acceptance. In severe cases guilt cannot be self-healed. Friends, family, and mental/spiritual professionals help. Healing is a return to former times; living within moral limits. In some cases healing returns the spirit to its former condition; in other cases the spirit remains scarred or disabled and guilt may continue. Some actions or injuries result in depression and lifelong guilt. Some injuries result in spiritual death.
Guilt may be treated or masked by medication. Medication that helps one deal with guilt while healing is typically good. Medication that keeps one from experiencing normal guilt while surpassing moral limits is dangerous. Humans dislike guilt so much that they are tempted to self-medicate in order to preempt guilt.
Becoming Guilt-Free
Our ultimate goal is to become pain and guilt-free. Humans naturally choose to relieve pain. Unfortunately, humans are not as inclined to admit guilt. As a result there are many unhappy, emotionally scarred and disabled individuals. Unaddressed pain and guilt lead to spiraling bad consequences. One ignores pain or guilt at one’s own risk.
Various religions and philosophies offer suggestions for moral healing: Atheism: Moral pragmatism, Buddhism: Eightfold Path, Confucianism: Right relationships, Hinduism: Dharma, Islam: Islamic law, Judaism: Mosaic Law, Taoism: Non-resistance, and Christianity: Repentance. In most religions, the god-figure is the source of moral authority and requires appeasement for guilt. Guilt is the result of offending a moral authority. Healing is the act of regaining acceptance from one’s moral authority.
Christianity and Guilt
Christianity has ironically become synonymous with guilt. The one faith that proclaims the “good news” of forgiveness and new starts is perceived as mercilessly judgmental. Many feel Christianity causes guilt. Christians are bad at marketing—they believe, “the body is a temple”, but they market it as “no smoking”, “no drinking”, “no drugs”, “no sex”, etc. As if turning sound principles to trite rules weren’t bad enough, some prominent Christians are really judgmental and unkind.
The Christian message is “Forgiveness!” yet many seem to be hearing, “Guilty!” The purpose of guilt is to encourage us to live guiltless and moral lives. Accusation and shame are another matter entirely. Accusation of guilt either hastens the healing or worsens the spiritual wound. Therefore, accusation is dangerous—it helps those who agree and hurts those who do not. Those who judge themselves as good and others as bad are as misguided as the Pharisees in Christ’s day. We are all in need of grace and forgiveness.
Christian-Judeo morality has strongly influenced the United States and Europe for centuries. Historic Christian communities relied heavily upon Mosaic Law to formulate socially acceptable moral limits. Throughout Christian history, grace (the cure for guilt) more often than not received second billing to The Law (the cause of guilt). Western churches emphasized the cause of guilt far more than the cure. Jesus’ principled guidance, “Love God, love your neighbor as yourself, and don’t judge”, was drowned out by the Ten Commandments.
In an effort to cure guilt many reject moral responsibility and declare themselves innocent. They declare: “Outside moral authority does not exist.” If one is only accountable to self; one need have no morals beyond what one approves. Yet, guilt continues. Declaring ourselves “Not guilty!” does not seem to work. The reason this method fails is self-accusation and shame. Self-accusation is when our chosen actions do not agree with our personal moral stance. While guilt is self-loathing, shame is suspecting others loathe us, too. Shame joins guilt when others know our shortcomings and we assume they judge us.
Healing
The first truth about healing guilt is that most of those around us wish we’d get healed, too. Spiritual healing is a return to one’s moral home. The return home is straightforward: Own the guilt, apologize, reject similar actions for the future, and start over. We also feel better if we do something morally good as restitution or a sign of our changed spirit.
The difficult part is taking responsibility for guilt. Physically, no one has trouble owning the pain in one’s body, but spiritually we often deny ownership of guilt. Healing seems simple, but religion can certainly muddy the waters. Religions typically add another step in the healing process. They have formulas for regaining self-respect and acceptance. All religious formulas have at least three common features: Confession, sacrifice, and change. Each religion provides a formula for becoming free of guilt and returning to happiness.
The sacrificial part varies among religions. All religions except Christianity require the guilty ones to do something to earn reacceptance. The actions required typically include offerings, sacrifices, self-denial, or submission to ceremonial cleansing rites. In Christianity, the guilty
1. Confess (admits error) and repent (ceases practicing the error),
2. Accept forgiveness (based upon the example of Christ), and
3. Start over (seeking to live the way Christ lived).
Christianity is built upon the idea that God is a loving father and we (all) are his children. This relationship was taught and demonstrated by Jesus Christ. Jesus made the outrageous claim that he was “one with the Father” (John 10:24-30)—claiming to be God wrapped in human flesh living a human life. C. S. Lewis (2005) wrote Jesus “either was (and is) just what He said or else a lunatic, or something worse.” Christians believe Jesus was who he said he was. Jesus taught we could be “one with the Father”, too.
Becoming a Christian is submitting to the healing process: Confess, repent, and accept God’s way—a life imitating Christ. Regardless of what others might add, the heart of Christian doctrine is grace—loving God with all one’s heart and treating others as one’s self (Matthew 22:37-40).
__________________________
Lewis, C. S. (2005). What Christians believe. San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, p. 59.
Luther, Martin. (1517). Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the power and efficacy of indulgences. Spaeth, Reed, Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds., Vol.1, pp. 29-38. Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915.
Guilt is analogous to pain. Guilt is to the human spirit as pain is to the human body. When the human body moves beyond its physical limits the result is discomfort and pain. When the human spirit moves beyond its moral limits the result is spiritual/mental discomfort and guilt.
The body is limited by its natural design and construction. Force a joint out of place and the result is pain. The spirit has built-in design and construction limitations, too. Go beyond these limits and things get bad. Bottom line: humans have natural limits.
Pain
The body seeks a life free of pain and hurt. We are at our physical best and happiest when we are pain-free. Pain or hurt comes from three sources:
1. When we force ourselves beyond our physical limits (direct choice).
2. From accidents, illness, or attacks (not by choice).
3. As a consequence of placing ourselves in high-risk situations likely to result in accidents (indirect choice).
Pain requiring no healing usually serves as a warning. For example, pain while exercising signals approaching or passed limits. Exercise and practice extend limits; abuse and inaction decrease limits.
Pain usually requires healing. Healing involves triage (determining the seriousness of ailments), mending and medication, therapy/tending, and time. In severe cases those in pain cannot self-heal. Friends, family, and medical professionals help. Healing is a return to living within the body’s natural limits. In some cases healing returns the body to its former condition; in other cases the body remains scarred or disabled and pain may continue. Some injuries result in lifelong pain. Some injuries result in death.
Pain may be cured or masked by medication. Medication that helps one deal with pain while healing is typically good. Medication that keeps one from experiencing pain while surpassing limits is dangerous. Humans dislike pain so much that they are tempted to self-medicate in order to preempt pain.
Guilt
The human spirit seeks a life free of guilt and emotional hurt. We are at our best and happiest when we are guilt-free. Guilt or self-loathing comes from three sources:
1. When we force ourselves beyond our moral limits (direct choice).
2. From accidents, illness, or attacks (not by choice).
3. As a consequence of placing ourselves in high-risk situations likely to result in accidents (indirect choice).
Guilt that vanishes completely with a change in action usually serves as a warning. Humans learn from guilt experiences.
Guilt requires healing. Healing involves triage (determining the seriousness of moral transgression), changing behavior, apology, and acceptance. In severe cases guilt cannot be self-healed. Friends, family, and mental/spiritual professionals help. Healing is a return to former times; living within moral limits. In some cases healing returns the spirit to its former condition; in other cases the spirit remains scarred or disabled and guilt may continue. Some actions or injuries result in depression and lifelong guilt. Some injuries result in spiritual death.
Guilt may be treated or masked by medication. Medication that helps one deal with guilt while healing is typically good. Medication that keeps one from experiencing normal guilt while surpassing moral limits is dangerous. Humans dislike guilt so much that they are tempted to self-medicate in order to preempt guilt.
Becoming Guilt-Free
Our ultimate goal is to become pain and guilt-free. Humans naturally choose to relieve pain. Unfortunately, humans are not as inclined to admit guilt. As a result there are many unhappy, emotionally scarred and disabled individuals. Unaddressed pain and guilt lead to spiraling bad consequences. One ignores pain or guilt at one’s own risk.
Various religions and philosophies offer suggestions for moral healing: Atheism: Moral pragmatism, Buddhism: Eightfold Path, Confucianism: Right relationships, Hinduism: Dharma, Islam: Islamic law, Judaism: Mosaic Law, Taoism: Non-resistance, and Christianity: Repentance. In most religions, the god-figure is the source of moral authority and requires appeasement for guilt. Guilt is the result of offending a moral authority. Healing is the act of regaining acceptance from one’s moral authority.
Christianity and Guilt
Christianity has ironically become synonymous with guilt. The one faith that proclaims the “good news” of forgiveness and new starts is perceived as mercilessly judgmental. Many feel Christianity causes guilt. Christians are bad at marketing—they believe, “the body is a temple”, but they market it as “no smoking”, “no drinking”, “no drugs”, “no sex”, etc. As if turning sound principles to trite rules weren’t bad enough, some prominent Christians are really judgmental and unkind.
The Christian message is “Forgiveness!” yet many seem to be hearing, “Guilty!” The purpose of guilt is to encourage us to live guiltless and moral lives. Accusation and shame are another matter entirely. Accusation of guilt either hastens the healing or worsens the spiritual wound. Therefore, accusation is dangerous—it helps those who agree and hurts those who do not. Those who judge themselves as good and others as bad are as misguided as the Pharisees in Christ’s day. We are all in need of grace and forgiveness.
Christian-Judeo morality has strongly influenced the United States and Europe for centuries. Historic Christian communities relied heavily upon Mosaic Law to formulate socially acceptable moral limits. Throughout Christian history, grace (the cure for guilt) more often than not received second billing to The Law (the cause of guilt). Western churches emphasized the cause of guilt far more than the cure. Jesus’ principled guidance, “Love God, love your neighbor as yourself, and don’t judge”, was drowned out by the Ten Commandments.
In an effort to cure guilt many reject moral responsibility and declare themselves innocent. They declare: “Outside moral authority does not exist.” If one is only accountable to self; one need have no morals beyond what one approves. Yet, guilt continues. Declaring ourselves “Not guilty!” does not seem to work. The reason this method fails is self-accusation and shame. Self-accusation is when our chosen actions do not agree with our personal moral stance. While guilt is self-loathing, shame is suspecting others loathe us, too. Shame joins guilt when others know our shortcomings and we assume they judge us.
Healing
The first truth about healing guilt is that most of those around us wish we’d get healed, too. Spiritual healing is a return to one’s moral home. The return home is straightforward: Own the guilt, apologize, reject similar actions for the future, and start over. We also feel better if we do something morally good as restitution or a sign of our changed spirit.
The difficult part is taking responsibility for guilt. Physically, no one has trouble owning the pain in one’s body, but spiritually we often deny ownership of guilt. Healing seems simple, but religion can certainly muddy the waters. Religions typically add another step in the healing process. They have formulas for regaining self-respect and acceptance. All religious formulas have at least three common features: Confession, sacrifice, and change. Each religion provides a formula for becoming free of guilt and returning to happiness.
The sacrificial part varies among religions. All religions except Christianity require the guilty ones to do something to earn reacceptance. The actions required typically include offerings, sacrifices, self-denial, or submission to ceremonial cleansing rites. In Christianity, the guilty
1. Confess (admits error) and repent (ceases practicing the error),
2. Accept forgiveness (based upon the example of Christ), and
3. Start over (seeking to live the way Christ lived).
Christianity is built upon the idea that God is a loving father and we (all) are his children. This relationship was taught and demonstrated by Jesus Christ. Jesus made the outrageous claim that he was “one with the Father” (John 10:24-30)—claiming to be God wrapped in human flesh living a human life. C. S. Lewis (2005) wrote Jesus “either was (and is) just what He said or else a lunatic, or something worse.” Christians believe Jesus was who he said he was. Jesus taught we could be “one with the Father”, too.
Becoming a Christian is submitting to the healing process: Confess, repent, and accept God’s way—a life imitating Christ. Regardless of what others might add, the heart of Christian doctrine is grace—loving God with all one’s heart and treating others as one’s self (Matthew 22:37-40).
__________________________
Lewis, C. S. (2005). What Christians believe. San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, p. 59.
Luther, Martin. (1517). Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the power and efficacy of indulgences. Spaeth, Reed, Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds., Vol.1, pp. 29-38. Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Way, the Truth, and the Life
Generally, the term “way” identifies a method for doing something. We often say, “Do it this way,” meaning one should imitate our actions. Teachers use behavioral tasks because knowledge is invisible, but its application is not. The mind is revealed by the way one behaves.
One may say he or she is a friend, but we know it by the way he or she acts. The way one drives, talks, or does a job reveals inner dispositions. James, one of the leaders in the first church with Peter and John, wrote what some think is the very first apostolic letter. Within about ten years of Christ’s ascension James wrote faith is observed in the way people act.
But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? (James 2:18-20, NIV)
This is probably the same James who went on to demonstrate his faith as the first apostle to be martyred. He was beheaded around 62 A.D. The way of faith is not to be lightly dismissed. This epistle suggests one of the earliest issues confronting the church was, “How can we tell who has faith?” James, speaking for the Apostles, answered from his experiences as one of Jesus’ inner circle—the way one lives reveals faith.
Jesus did not command his disciples to believe. He knew saying, “Trust me, I’m God,” was impossible to believe. He simply said, “Follow me.” If they followed, they saw Jesus communing with God and doing things only God could do. Eventually, they could conclude none other than Jesus was the Son of God. His way connected him to God.
Thus, we arrive at a key definition distinguishing Jesus from all others. He said, “My way is the only way to the Father.” This distinction is one culturally sensitive people dislike. Most concede Jesus is a way. They are quick to allow (perhaps with a smirk) that Jesus may be our way, but good, tolerant, inclusive, peace-loving folks acknowledge other ways, too. You may have thought this yourself—how could God be so narrow-minded and exclusive? Not one way, but may ways—Buddha’s way, Mohammed’s way, Moses’ way, or my way. In essence, whatever way anyone decides is best for them—whatever way you decide is best for you.
Well, Christians do not believe this. There are a number of good reasons why this is so. The main reason appears intellectually weak because it claims authority from itself—much like saying, “I’m right because I say I am.” Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life—no one comes to the Father except by me” (John 14:6, emphasis added).
Before anyone gets too upset, remember we are considering the way a thing is done. If I explained, “This is the way to spell ‘Atlanta,’” few would argue that to be fair, other combinations of letters ought to work just as well. “That’s the way to the kitchen,” but shouldn’t all ways lead to the kitchen? That would be absurd. A “way” has two parts, a method (path) and an objective (destination). In the case of Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Moses, or L. Ron Hubbard one must consider objectives for the method to make sense.
Many think all religions are basically the same, but this is intellectually shallow and obviously untrue. The objectives of Buddhism and Hinduism are to live above suffering and escape the rebirth cycle. The objective of Islam is to honor God through justice and return to Eden. The objective of Judaism is to honor God through keeping The Law of Moses. The objective of Confucianism is respectful relationships. The objective of Taoism is non-resistance and the middle path. The objective of humanism is fulfilling human potential. The objective of science is empirical understanding. The objective of Christianity is a relationship with God in the way of Jesus.
Some will say, “Its clear Christians are obsessed with this ‘Jesus’ fellow.” Christians believe God became human in the form of Jesus to show us the way to support his side in the Great Rebellion. C.S. Lewis said, “This man we are talking about either was (and is) just what He said or else a lunatic, or something worse.” Christians are crazy—they believe in a heavenly rebellion led by unseen principals, incarnation behind enemy lines, and a grand storyline in which the incarnation conquers death and reclaims our rebel planet. In today’s world this sounds more like a video game than a reality.
Yet, it is the way Christians have historically seen things.
Religions have different ways because they have different objectives. The different paths often cross or merge for stretches, but in the end they lead to distinct destinations. Three of the world’s major religions—Christianity, Judaism, and Islam—attempt to placate God and almost all significant religious paths merge at “Do as you would be done unto,” but only Christianity ends at Jesus as God. Christ as the way applies if you are trying to reach his objective—a personal, meaningful relationship with God.
We live on a rebellious planet. Lucifer started the Great Rebellion and brought it to Earth. The war cry of the Rebellion is, “I am wise—I know what’s best.” Those opposing the Rebellion say, “God is wise and His Way is best.” Christians state, “His Way is revealed in Christ.” A clever rebel will say, “But aren’t you just dreaming up God, Jesus, and this rebellion business? You are guilty of defining your own reality.” I can only reply, “I believe this is not the case.”
I bring this point up now because Christianity leans upon faith and rebels lean upon intellect—the fuel of the Rebellion. Ironically, trusting intellect is faith in self. The Great Rebellion provides a framework for analyzing the many ways of this world. A simple question emerges: From which side of the Rebellion does something flow? The Great Rebellion focuses on reason and self—the human way. Those in the Resistance focus upon God’s way.
I must share a personal note here about how deeply the spirit of rebellion runs. Almost every breakthrough in faith has come at the realization of how selfish I truly am. Throughout my Christian pilgrimage I’ve resisted submitting to just about everything and everybody. My way was always a bit better. I was friendly, had talent, and some engaging ideas. Sadly, if whatever I was involved in didn’t spin my way, entertain me, or agreed with me, I’d check out. Inwardly I’d evaluate prayers, offerings, study techniques, teaching, leadership, and worship styles, etc. For years I rejected repeating the Lord’s Prayer because it seemed “, artificial” and “insincere.” Whenever someone read a prayer or preached a less-than-dynamic sermon I’d secretly think, “I could have done better than that!”
What a jerk! I was more often than not left wanting something more—always looking for Six Flays Over Jesus or Beatles Worship Bands. I’m still learning the discipline of faithful submission—to recognize the Holy Spirit’s power in things I’d formerly dismissed as weak or poor versions of faith. Turns out the greater part of my life has been spent in missing the Spirit’s wisdom and fellowship because I though I was the “active ingredient” in Christianity. It turns out God is everywhere—even in those Catholic masses you can watch on EWTN on cable. Pride is NOT God’s way, but we might consider discussing that later.
Those trying to quit rebelling and join the Resistance eventually must consider, “How can I know God’s way?” If the answer is human it is tainted by the Rebellion with self-centeredness and corruption. If the answer is from God it is perfection and exceeds human capacity. Thus, at the right time, while we were yet rebels, God infiltrated Earth as a human (Romans 5). God became human to demonstrate his love while defeating the principals (and principles) of the Great Rebellion. God became Jesus and demonstrated the way to live on a rebellious planet. The way to the Father is Jesus. God, in Jesus, said, “Do it this way.”
One may say he or she is a friend, but we know it by the way he or she acts. The way one drives, talks, or does a job reveals inner dispositions. James, one of the leaders in the first church with Peter and John, wrote what some think is the very first apostolic letter. Within about ten years of Christ’s ascension James wrote faith is observed in the way people act.
But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? (James 2:18-20, NIV)
This is probably the same James who went on to demonstrate his faith as the first apostle to be martyred. He was beheaded around 62 A.D. The way of faith is not to be lightly dismissed. This epistle suggests one of the earliest issues confronting the church was, “How can we tell who has faith?” James, speaking for the Apostles, answered from his experiences as one of Jesus’ inner circle—the way one lives reveals faith.
Jesus did not command his disciples to believe. He knew saying, “Trust me, I’m God,” was impossible to believe. He simply said, “Follow me.” If they followed, they saw Jesus communing with God and doing things only God could do. Eventually, they could conclude none other than Jesus was the Son of God. His way connected him to God.
Thus, we arrive at a key definition distinguishing Jesus from all others. He said, “My way is the only way to the Father.” This distinction is one culturally sensitive people dislike. Most concede Jesus is a way. They are quick to allow (perhaps with a smirk) that Jesus may be our way, but good, tolerant, inclusive, peace-loving folks acknowledge other ways, too. You may have thought this yourself—how could God be so narrow-minded and exclusive? Not one way, but may ways—Buddha’s way, Mohammed’s way, Moses’ way, or my way. In essence, whatever way anyone decides is best for them—whatever way you decide is best for you.
Well, Christians do not believe this. There are a number of good reasons why this is so. The main reason appears intellectually weak because it claims authority from itself—much like saying, “I’m right because I say I am.” Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life—no one comes to the Father except by me” (John 14:6, emphasis added).
Before anyone gets too upset, remember we are considering the way a thing is done. If I explained, “This is the way to spell ‘Atlanta,’” few would argue that to be fair, other combinations of letters ought to work just as well. “That’s the way to the kitchen,” but shouldn’t all ways lead to the kitchen? That would be absurd. A “way” has two parts, a method (path) and an objective (destination). In the case of Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Moses, or L. Ron Hubbard one must consider objectives for the method to make sense.
Many think all religions are basically the same, but this is intellectually shallow and obviously untrue. The objectives of Buddhism and Hinduism are to live above suffering and escape the rebirth cycle. The objective of Islam is to honor God through justice and return to Eden. The objective of Judaism is to honor God through keeping The Law of Moses. The objective of Confucianism is respectful relationships. The objective of Taoism is non-resistance and the middle path. The objective of humanism is fulfilling human potential. The objective of science is empirical understanding. The objective of Christianity is a relationship with God in the way of Jesus.
Some will say, “Its clear Christians are obsessed with this ‘Jesus’ fellow.” Christians believe God became human in the form of Jesus to show us the way to support his side in the Great Rebellion. C.S. Lewis said, “This man we are talking about either was (and is) just what He said or else a lunatic, or something worse.” Christians are crazy—they believe in a heavenly rebellion led by unseen principals, incarnation behind enemy lines, and a grand storyline in which the incarnation conquers death and reclaims our rebel planet. In today’s world this sounds more like a video game than a reality.
Yet, it is the way Christians have historically seen things.
Religions have different ways because they have different objectives. The different paths often cross or merge for stretches, but in the end they lead to distinct destinations. Three of the world’s major religions—Christianity, Judaism, and Islam—attempt to placate God and almost all significant religious paths merge at “Do as you would be done unto,” but only Christianity ends at Jesus as God. Christ as the way applies if you are trying to reach his objective—a personal, meaningful relationship with God.
We live on a rebellious planet. Lucifer started the Great Rebellion and brought it to Earth. The war cry of the Rebellion is, “I am wise—I know what’s best.” Those opposing the Rebellion say, “God is wise and His Way is best.” Christians state, “His Way is revealed in Christ.” A clever rebel will say, “But aren’t you just dreaming up God, Jesus, and this rebellion business? You are guilty of defining your own reality.” I can only reply, “I believe this is not the case.”
I bring this point up now because Christianity leans upon faith and rebels lean upon intellect—the fuel of the Rebellion. Ironically, trusting intellect is faith in self. The Great Rebellion provides a framework for analyzing the many ways of this world. A simple question emerges: From which side of the Rebellion does something flow? The Great Rebellion focuses on reason and self—the human way. Those in the Resistance focus upon God’s way.
I must share a personal note here about how deeply the spirit of rebellion runs. Almost every breakthrough in faith has come at the realization of how selfish I truly am. Throughout my Christian pilgrimage I’ve resisted submitting to just about everything and everybody. My way was always a bit better. I was friendly, had talent, and some engaging ideas. Sadly, if whatever I was involved in didn’t spin my way, entertain me, or agreed with me, I’d check out. Inwardly I’d evaluate prayers, offerings, study techniques, teaching, leadership, and worship styles, etc. For years I rejected repeating the Lord’s Prayer because it seemed “, artificial” and “insincere.” Whenever someone read a prayer or preached a less-than-dynamic sermon I’d secretly think, “I could have done better than that!”
What a jerk! I was more often than not left wanting something more—always looking for Six Flays Over Jesus or Beatles Worship Bands. I’m still learning the discipline of faithful submission—to recognize the Holy Spirit’s power in things I’d formerly dismissed as weak or poor versions of faith. Turns out the greater part of my life has been spent in missing the Spirit’s wisdom and fellowship because I though I was the “active ingredient” in Christianity. It turns out God is everywhere—even in those Catholic masses you can watch on EWTN on cable. Pride is NOT God’s way, but we might consider discussing that later.
Those trying to quit rebelling and join the Resistance eventually must consider, “How can I know God’s way?” If the answer is human it is tainted by the Rebellion with self-centeredness and corruption. If the answer is from God it is perfection and exceeds human capacity. Thus, at the right time, while we were yet rebels, God infiltrated Earth as a human (Romans 5). God became human to demonstrate his love while defeating the principals (and principles) of the Great Rebellion. God became Jesus and demonstrated the way to live on a rebellious planet. The way to the Father is Jesus. God, in Jesus, said, “Do it this way.”
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Jesus and Text
Jesus could read (Luke 4:16). He could write (John 8:6). Jesus Christ could have personally written down explicit directions about the way to God.
He didn’t.
He didn’t.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
The Way of Repentance
What many fail to realize is that the Great Rebellion from our side is about power, but from God’s side it’s about freedom. Ironically, God’s placement of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil within our reach guaranteed we could turn from him any time we wished. God gave humans the freedom (and power) to choose him or the tree.
I suspect God made a similar offer to Lucifer eons ago—probably used the same tree. “Lucifer, you can be with me forever and have anything in the universe, but stay away from that tree on Earth.” Lucifer couldn’t resist, rebelled, and also drew us in, “You think you have everything, but God won’t let you eat the fruit from that tree. Are you his slave that you obey everything he says?”
Jesus is the “fix” for the Great Rebellion. He is the way back to Eden for anyone who wants to return to the cool walks in the evening with God at one’s side. Jesus is the way to a personal relationship with a personal God. Jesus demonstrates the way and attitude necessary as one approaches God.
Perhaps this is a good place to mention a lot of nice things happen on the way to the God. The Rebellion likes to trivialize and redirect our attention to by-products of a relationship with God. Thus, on this rebel planet, who is surprised that Christianity has grown self-centric?
Here are some of the ways the Rebellion has taken the by-products of a godly life and spun them into the objectives of human life:
Christ was one with the Father and his life might be seen by many as a first rate tragedy of misunderstanding, hatred, and betrayal ending in a terrible death. The steps up to God’s throne were not an easy climb because he carried the sins of the world on his shoulders. Assuming one has the desire to submit to the will of God, approaching the throne is fraught with challenges. Our sins clutter up the steps.
King David, in Psalms 51, as he attempted to draw close to God, finds he is blocked by his sin. David writes, “For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight.” As we draw close to God we find our sins stand on the steps—between us and fellowship with God.
Fortunately, Jesus bore the burden of our sins and shared with us the way to take care of sin that separates us from God. He knew sin blocked us from having a relationship with the Father. He even went so far as to submit to the human side of the process with the help of his cousin, John the Baptist, at the Jordan River. After the ascension Peter reiterates the proper way to deal with sin.
The way?
Repentance.
I suspect God made a similar offer to Lucifer eons ago—probably used the same tree. “Lucifer, you can be with me forever and have anything in the universe, but stay away from that tree on Earth.” Lucifer couldn’t resist, rebelled, and also drew us in, “You think you have everything, but God won’t let you eat the fruit from that tree. Are you his slave that you obey everything he says?”
I think God would have liked for us all to have ignored the tree, but maybe the tree was like a cross. Pain, misery, death, and loneliness teach us the peace, joy, life, and love God grants to those who seek him. Maybe he knew we couldn’t appreciate him until we spent some time on the outside. “I want a two-way relationship with humans, so I’ll let them rebel—when they see the other side, they might look again to me.”
Jesus is the “fix” for the Great Rebellion. He is the way back to Eden for anyone who wants to return to the cool walks in the evening with God at one’s side. Jesus is the way to a personal relationship with a personal God. Jesus demonstrates the way and attitude necessary as one approaches God.
Perhaps this is a good place to mention a lot of nice things happen on the way to the God. The Rebellion likes to trivialize and redirect our attention to by-products of a relationship with God. Thus, on this rebel planet, who is surprised that Christianity has grown self-centric?
Here are some of the ways the Rebellion has taken the by-products of a godly life and spun them into the objectives of human life:
- eternity in heaven
- salvation from hell and evil
- power in spirit and influence
- healing/physical well-being
- blessings/prosperity
- inside guidance
- happiness, joy, peace, and love
- pride in being right and good
- supernatural abilities
King David, in Psalms 51, as he attempted to draw close to God, finds he is blocked by his sin. David writes, “For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight.” As we draw close to God we find our sins stand on the steps—between us and fellowship with God.
Fortunately, Jesus bore the burden of our sins and shared with us the way to take care of sin that separates us from God. He knew sin blocked us from having a relationship with the Father. He even went so far as to submit to the human side of the process with the help of his cousin, John the Baptist, at the Jordan River. After the ascension Peter reiterates the proper way to deal with sin.
The way?
Repentance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)