Monthly Archives: April 2013

Toys, Batteries, and a Child’s Delight

29 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

There are many cries a parent hears from a child, “I’m hungry,” “I don’t want that,” “He hit me,” “I don’t want to watch that,” “Where are we going?” “I don’t want to go there,” or “I need some batteries.” Let me highlight the child’s cry for batteries. We don’t necessarily have to remember our childhood to remember the disappointment from grabbing something we wanted to use, only to find it didn’t work because it didn’t have power. Obviously to our children, the emotional low is magnified when their specific toy or gadget doesn’t work.

Just this past weekend, Caleb grabbed a remote control car that we had bought for his birthday last year, only to find that it needed some “juice.” However, at some point over the last year he had lost the battery pack that charged the battery. Of course, I was internally flustered (knowing that these things happen) because I knew this was an expensive car bought from a specialized store in Downtown Disney. Therefore, running to the Walmart was not an option. Needless to say, Joannie was able to call a place, where, graciously, the person said they would mail us another battery pack. And I know that when we get the battery pack, charge the car, and Caleb gets it and starts playing with it, there will be a satisfactory delight. Why? There is much delight in seeing what we have purchased for our own pleasure working properly towards its created purpose.

Not that people are God’s toys, but we are his prized creation, created for his own glory, pleasure, and purpose. For us to effectively work (and not be discarded), he needed to save us—thus sending us Jesus to die in our place. In addition, in order for us to effectively work towards our created design reflecting God’s glory, we needed to be filled with power, a different kind of power than we already possessed. Truth is, man was endowed with power (dominion) at the very beginning. God gave man power (dominion) to rule and oversee his created order. However, man took that power, corrupted it, by choosing to disobey God’s rule. Since then, man has corrupted the innate power they possess to work towards their own personal purpose.

Now going back to this understanding of man working effectively towards their created and intended purpose of glorifying and pleasing God, we must understand that we need a new power, a redeemed power. This is where the Holy Spirit comes in. Not only does the Holy Spirit convict the world of sin (John 16:8), drawing people into a saving relationship with God; the Holy Spirit empowers God’s people for Kingdom living and mission. In other words, he empowers us to work towards our created purpose. He is the new battery to empower us to effectively work right, thus pleasing the Father. Jesus tells his disciples prior to his ascension, that for them to bear witness to him they needed power (Acts 1:8). To get this power, they needed to go and wait for the Holy Spirit to “come upon” them.

The Holy Spirit is the power, the means, by which God’s people effectively bear witness to Jesus and his redeemed kingdom. However, if not careful, there can be a tendency (especially in North America) to use other man-made power sources. It is no secret; we live in a Disney, special effects, digital, technological, consumeristic, and entertainment-crazed culture. Thus, for many (churches) there is a monolithic focus on the weekend worship experience, so much so, churches spends large sums of money to create a comfortable, convenient, special effect, and culturally relevant worship experience. Please do not misunderstand what I am trying to communicate. I am not antagonistic of any of these. In fact, in churches that I have led, we have incorporated many of these elements. However, my point is that there is a tendency to come and rely on these elements for effective witness. Yet, this is not the impetus of Jesus’ intention for the empowering witness of the Holy Spirit in the life of his disciples. His effective witness surrounded proclamation and demonstration. This included power to be bold and clear in verbalizing the gospel of King Jesus; in addition, it included power to live in both holiness and deed (love of neighbor), demonstrating the future restored kingdom of Jesus.

The apostle Paul writes in his first letter to the Corinthians, “And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God” (1 Cor 2:1-5). In other words, Paul attests, that rather than using the cultural vehicle of oratory and public speaking to engage people and seek transformation, he choose to rely on the Spirit and the power of God.

Therefore, these cultural and contextual elements must not (in practice) become the battery pack that believers plug themselves into in order to be effective witnesses. While these elements are supplemental, they are not necessary. However, the Spirit of God is a necessity in our corporate worship gatherings for conviction and transformation. Furthermore, he is essential in our everyday life—in every sphere of our lives—in order for us to work effectively towards our created purpose, in which God our Father is pleased. If the Spirit of God is essential for us to work effectively as we live towards our created purpose, in which God finds delight, how do we live by the empowering of the Spirit?

1)   Surrender Control. This is another way of believing the Good News of Jesus. Jesus came to save us from ourselves, our sin. The Gospel calls us to repentance, an about-face from our old nature, our old life, and an embracing of God’s new nature, his new life. Thus, if we want to be filled with the Spirit, empowered to live towards God’s created purpose, we must surrender daily—relinquishing our control and yielding to the Spirit’s control. See Luke 9:23; Ephesians 5:18-21.

2)   Be Faithful. Surrendering control leads to faithfulness. As the Spirit controls us, we are faithful to Jesus—embodying his kingdom—thus effectively bearing witness. A lack of faithfulness leads to the Holy Spirit being grieved See Eph 4:30.

3)   Live in Community. I don’t mean go out and by a large compound where everyone can live together. Rather, I mean that we should do life with other believers, covenanting and communing together over meals, bible studies, service, prayer, and corporate worship. We must understand that God saves us personally, but not in isolation. When God saves us and transforms us, he ushers us into covenant fellowship with his people. Therefore, if we desire to see the Spirit empower us for effective witness, we must be connected to the church—the vehicle by which God has chosen to work, as well as the vehicle that is empowered by the Spirit to effectively work.

4)   Pray fervently. As the disciples were in the upper room waiting on the Spirit to call, they were fervently praying. Paul exhorts the Ephesians, in the context of putting on the whole armor of God, to “[pray] at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. Prayer is the means by which we tap into the unbelievable power of God, for prayer is our communication device that connects us to the Spirit. As John Piper militaristically notes, prayer is our “spiritual walkie-talkie” that is directly connected to our commander. As we communicate to our commander, we ask for wisdom, direction, discernment and power to effectively bear witness in every area of our life.

While we may not be toys that need new batteries, we are “[God’s] workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” Thus in order to faithfully live out these good works in which we were created to do, we must be empowered by the Spirit of God. When we are, are Father has great delight!

 

An Obituary of the Self-Centered Church Member: Acts 5

23 Tuesday Apr 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

This morning I was reading Acts 5 devotionally, and couldn’t help myself but to think of Ananias and Sapphira’s Obiturary page in the “Jerusalem Times.” Maybe it read something like this, “Ananias and Sapphira were married for twenty years. They leave behind two children, four grandchildren, and a church family that grieves their untimely death. On Friday morning, around 9a.m., Ananais took a portion of the proceeds from the sale of his land to his local church to give as an offering. Witnesses say as he laid it at the pastor’s feet, he fell over and breathed his last. When the autopsy and investigation was complete, it was learned that Ananias had promised he would give the whole amount of proceeds from the sale of his land—not a portion. In addition, his wife Sapphira entered the place where the church was gathered to see if she could find her husband, for he had been away for three hours. As she came in, not knowing her husband had passed, she was asked about the sale of the property, to which she replied “Yes, we sold it for that much.” At which point, she too fell over and died. They both died from a heart attack, an attack of selfishness, greed, and sin in the heart of those who follow Christ.” 

While this is a “cheesy” (probably poor) attempt to write an primitive obituary, it is not a laughing matter of what transpired in Acts 5:1-11. Two people, who were part of the local body of believers, died. Their death did not come by martyrdom, but by the work of the Holy Spirit. Their death is to be taken extremely serious, not only then, but even now. What can we learn from Ananias and Sapphira’s selfishness, greed, and sin?

1)   Selfishness originates in the heart, which is sin. We need to remember that all sin is ultimately against God. As David confessed in Psalm 51, “For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight” (Ps 51:3-4). In Ananias and Sapphira’s particular case, they had lied to the Holy Spirit. Undoubtedly, they had claimed they would give the whole amount, and instead at the last moment decided to give only a portion of the proceeds from the sell of their land. Lying is an attempt to cover-up. In this case, they thought they could hide from the Lord the selfishness of their embarrassing greed. In the end, their sin was open and exposed from the Lord who knows all and sees all.

2)   Selfishness hurts our Father. The sin of Ananias and Sapphira as stated above, was against God. Not only was it against him, but our selfishness and sin, particularly when we claim to know him, hurts him. It particularly hurts him for it is behavior uncharacteristic of his nature and unbefitting of his people—whom he imputed his nature in them through the substitutionary sacrifice of his Son, Jesus. We read in Ezekiel that Israel had profaned God’s name among the nations through their unholy posture (Ezk 36:22-23). In addition, we read a story very similar to Ananias and Sapphira in Joshua 7, with the sin of Achan. God had communicated to Joshua, and Joshua to Israel, that they were to devote the cities they were to conquer to utter destruction. Yet, Achan kept back some of the devoted things for himself, putting them among his own belongings (Josh 7:11). In these three passages we learn that our selfishness and our sin hurt our Father; it distorts and damages his image in us, an image that he is repairing and redeeming for the purpose of radiating his glory to the nations. It also hurts him, for it reduces his people back into a posture and lifestyle of the people God desires them to bear witness. In other words, our sin and selfishness makes us just like the people God is attempting to reach through us. This hurts God.

3)   Selfishness affects the body, and leads to severe consequences. I am sure that if Ananias and Sapphira had it to do over now, they would have just gave the entire amount—as they said they would. However, God chose not to give them a mulligan, but to make them an example. Selfishness and sin in the body is a severe indictment by God that can lead to severe consequences. In this case, the severe consequence was death. Obviously, God does not (and has not) do this with every single believer that exhibits selfishness and sin. However, let us not fool ourselves to think that sin and selfishness in local bodies of believers do not cause other forms of severe consequences and death. Sin and selfishness can cause relational deaths, missional deaths, and ecclesial (church) deaths. Paul tells the believers in Philippi to not only look to each persons’ own interests, “but also to the interests of others” (Phil 2:4). People like Ananias and Sapphira, believers over-taken by selfishness and sin and who only look out for their own interests, affect the body and (can) cause severe consequences. Imagine a local body of believers comprised by a spirit of selfishness and sin, making life and “church” all about them and their interests. What do you think would be a severe consequence? A missional death. Selfish and sinful believers, who make life, ministry, and “church” about them, do not reach out to invite people opposite of them into the fold. Thus, a selfish church experiences the severe consequence of a missional death. A missional death, therefore, leads to an ecclesial (church) death. A church that is selfish, runs off those who are not, leaving a group of self-centered/sinful so-called believers, thus killing mission, and leaving the church to decay and eventually die. This leads me to my last point.

4)   Selfishness can prohibit the advancement of the gospel. God knew the slippery slope of Ananias and Sapphira’s behavior. If selfishness, greed, and sin was present in the church, and went unchecked, it would eventually lead to an inward church—not a church for the world. God’s people exist for the sake of God’s glory, and for the good of the world. It is an oxymoron to be part of the people of God and be selfish, self-centered, greedy, and sinful. This posture prohibits the advancement of the good-news of Jesus, rather than advancing it. Let us all pier into our heart, into the dark crevasses, and do some heart surgery confessing our selfishness, greed, and sin as we seek to be the people of God for the sake of his glory, the advancement of his gospel, for the good of the world. 

Image

Review: “The Missional Leader” by Alan Roxburgh and Fred Romanuk

18 Thursday Apr 2013

51wXiHyWu1L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_

Introduction

Change conjures up emotions of love and hate. People love change when it is beneficial; a wife loves when her husband changes and begins to help her around the house. An employee loves when their boss changes his demeanor and becomes nicer. Parents love when their teenager changes and becomes more respectful and responsible. The examples could go on and on.

On the other hand, there are times where people loathe change. It may not be so much as hating change, as it is fear of change. This describes the North American church. With well over the majority of churches (from all denominations) experiencing decline, stagnation, and missional ineffectiveness, change must occur. However, changing paradigms and models causes fear among church people. Some are afraid because “they have never done it that way before.” Others are afraid because it might threaten their tradition and comfort. Still others may be afraid of stepping outside the four walls and becoming vulnerable to the people outside the church. The remedy involves understanding and leadership. Churches must understand the importance of changing in an ever-changing world. This change will require strong missional leaders to navigate such change.

Alan Roxburgh and Fred Romanuk, in their book, The Missional Leader, explain the type of leader it takes to lead such change. They present a way of understanding what type of leader is required in navigating through change, as well as a blueprint for how these leaders can form missional congregations. This brief interaction paper will engage three major ideas of Roxburgh and Romanuk— and discuss a possible weakness of their work.

Mindset of the Western Church

Roxburgh and Romanuk believe much confusion still exists in regards to what a missional church actually is. Therefore, prior to even beginning their first chapter, they define a missional church as: “A community of God’s people who live in the imagination that they are, by their very nature, God’s missionary people living as a demonstration of what God plans to do in and for all of creation in Jesus Christ” (xv). Much of the church today fails to fit within the framework of this definition. Many find themselves in more of a business/entrepreneurial framework, led by an ideology of growth, numbers, and trends (26, 39). Churches like this tend to focus on tactics, programs, and techniques, along with organizational skills, structure, and capacities. Others find themselves being thrown into an unfamiliar cultural milieu, and their reaction is one of survival. Roxburgh and Romanuk describe these two scenarios as “organizational cultures,” which can be either “performative” or “reactive”.  Both exist in most churches in the West, with the “performative” being the dominant zone of the 20th Century.

A third organizational zone described is the “emergent” (43-44). The emergent zone expresses itself in creative, energetic, and new imaginative ways. Churches that are described as emergent strategize as they go. A missional church finds itself placed within this organizational zone. Churches that find themselves as performative and reactive should aim at becoming a church in the emergent zone. In a cultural milieu that is constantly changing, churches that can navigate change with fluidity are ones better equipped to reach those outside the church.

This will require “missional leadership”, which has the ability to navigate a congregation through all the zones: emergent, performative, and reactive (59). In other words, missional leaders have the ability to create a culture adaptive to change and transition, which is in essence contextualization.

The Big Picture: Leading through Narrative

Narrative is the most effective way of providing a system and structure by which a church can operate. Roxburgh and Romanuk write about the importance of narratives in that they shape and form reality, provide understanding, and create a system for social community (67-70). Organizing a church and one’s life by narrative, particularly God’s grand narrative, discourages the bifurcation of private sphere vs. public sphere; rather, it encourages one to view life and a congregation to view ministry in a way that orients all of life through the lens of God’s grand narrative. In other words, rather than using Scripture as a how-to tool for “private use only,” individuals and congregations see themselves immersed and embedded in the narrative of God’s redemption.

This may seem to be small changes in semantics, but as Roxburgh and Romanuk explain, narrative shapes reality. So, rather than inviting and applying God to join the story of individual lives and congregations, individuals and congregations should seek to apply themselves to God’s story and what He is doing. Therefore, “Missional congregations are formed out of the interaction between the Christian narrative in which they live and that has been passed down to them, and their listening interaction with the narratives of the people in their community” (73). Cultivating this type of missional system does not occur in a vacuum or within a Christendom narrative, but in one where missional imagination, creativity, dialogue, and participation are encouraged (76-77).

Leading Through the Missional Change Model (MCM)

Having prepared the reader through the discussion of organizational zones and the importance of narrative and understanding how systems need narrative, Roxburgh and Romanuk then introduce their Missional Change Model (MCM). The MCM is founded on the premise that change is rarely linear, but progressive. Models, according to Stephen Bevans, do not fully capture the reality of the intended subject, but does seek to simplify complex realities that yield a true knowledge of the particular reality. Therefore, Roxburgh and Romanuk’s Missional Change Model presents a model by which they show the simplified reality (or “framework”) of how churches can change to be inclined more towards a missional posture. There are five stages, according to the authors, a local church needs to move through in order to cultivate a missional community (82). Building upon one another, these five stages are: awareness, understand, evaluation, trial, and commit. The five elements are based upon the work of anthropologist, Everett Rogers, whose insights help to understand the key elements in getting change adopted in a system.

The MCM is designed to assist leaders in cultivating an environment of adaptive, emergent zone culture changes in their congregation. After having explained the MCM, Roxburgh and Romanuk devote the second half of the book specifically to leaders and what is needed for them to utilize this model in leading congregations to become more missional in nature. Missional leaders begin with theological foundations rather than pragmatic ones. They are more concerned with the “telos” or end, and that end being Jesus Christ. Working towards the end, missional leaders focus on the formation of a people rather than shaping individual consumeristic spirituality through a Christianized version of Dr. Phil or Oprah. In order to innovate a missional congregation, one that is focused on forming a people, leadership must function within four interconnected areas. Roxburgh and Romanuk dedicate a chapter to each of these areas.

The first area is that of the personal character of the leader, and one that the authors believe is primary. Key factors in a leader’s character include: maturity, conflict management, personal courage, and trustworthiness. A missional leader who desires to navigate congregational change will need to be a person who demonstrates maturity, embraces conflict, displays personal courage, and lives trustworthy. The second area moves from the leader to the people. The key to missional change lies with people, and cultivating them into a missional community. Emerging from the people will be energy and vision for missional life. To achieve this missional community specific skills, according to the authors, are needed to form a missional people: fostering missional imagination, cultivating growth through specific practices, engaging and dialoging with people through the changes, and creating a coalition of people energized to experiment. The third and fourth areas are forming a missional environment and culture, and engaging a local context with a Christian imagination. The fifth area prepares the covenant community to learn, listen, and enter its community.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Overall, Roxburgh and Romanuk provide an accurate description of where most churches in the West reside, which fall into their categories of “performative” and “reactive” organizational culture zones. Given their solid grasp on the state of the Western church, coupled with their solid grasp on what the church should be (missional), they have provided invaluable “how to” insight (specifically the MCM) for leaders wanting to transition their congregations to being more missional. Yet, in order to fully understand their critique of the Western church and their idea of being missional, it would be helpful to read Roxburgh’s book, Introducing the Missional Church, since his engagement of a detailed description of a missional church and critique of “performative” churches is very limited (rightfully so, given the intent of this book).

A weakness of their work rests with their ideas and examples illustrating the move away from “church as usual” to that of being missional. It would have been helpful for them to provide more examples of what missional churches look like compared to “performative” churches. Many times, it is difficult to see the difference between such churches. Thus, it would have been helpful for them to probe a little deeper in differentiating the two. Also, although they write from a very optimistic view, their optimism, in regards to change, is another weakness. While there is nothing wrong with being optimistic about change and leading through change, they tended to stay away from the ugliness of change and people’s refusal to change. When they did address a negative circumstance where the congregation rebelled against change, it was the leader’s fault because he did not do it in a way that would mirror their suggestions (143-44). Even Jesus, along with Paul, could not lead all people to be more missional. There are people and churches that exist that will refuse to change and embrace a missional posture, no matter what model of change one implements with them.

Conclusion

The Missional leader is a valuable resource for the Western church. Any church probing into the sea of transitional change should utilize this book as a resource. Churches in the process of searching for a pastor, specifically to lead through a transition, could find this book very resourceful. Pastors, who know their church must change, could begin that process with forming a small group of leaders to read this book. The church in the West finds itself in a very precarious position. It is ironic, but many churches must decided to either “turn or burn.” While many are heading down the road of burning out, there is still the opportunity and potential to turn, leading to a vibrant missional church. But, this turning will require a new kind of leadership and a new kind of model. May God grant his church and pastors the grace and strength necessary to sail through this sea of change.

Posted by | Filed under Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

God’s Glory, Suffering, and Promotion

18 Thursday Apr 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

This morning I was reading the account of the fiery furnace in Daniel 3. Many are familiar with the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refusing to fall down and worship the golden image of Nebuchadnezzar. (on a side note, I always wondered where Daniel was and if he bowed down). Their refusal to obey the order and command led to their being bound and thrown into a fire, a fire that was heated seven times hotter than usual. They were thrown in, and within minutes, the king to his amazement said that he saw four men in the fire—one looking like “a son of the gods.” Upon seeing this, Nebuchadnezzar called the three men out. As they walked out there was not even a hint or trace on their bodies that suggested they had just walked out of a molten hot furnace. Nebuchadnezzar responded to this event saying, “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and delivered his servants, who trusted in him, and set aside the king’s command, and yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God. Therefore I make a decree: Any people, nation, or language that speaks anything against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego shall be torn limb from limb, and their houses laid ruins, for there is no other god who is able to rescue in this way. Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the province of Babylon” (Daniel 3:28-30).

Here in this story, as well as narratives throughout Scripture, there is this running theme of God’s glory in the life of his people, suffering, and promotion. In other words, there is a theme that surfaces where those who publicly live for God and his glory amidst an opposing world will suffer—experiencing hardship, trial, and [sometimes] even persecution—but through endurance and faithfulness in their suffering they will be promoted. Within the biblical narrative, this promotion can either be seen in this life, or the life to come.

Another example of this theme can be seen in the life of Joseph. Joseph for thirteen years, even though he was faithful, endured suffering, mistreatment, and betrayal. But in his faithfulness, and his desire to make God known, was promoted to the second highest position in Egypt. Jesus is another example. Jesus glorified God by living a sinless life and by being the perfect sacrifice that would bear the sins of the world; but, who also endured suffering—coming in the form of rejection, betrayal, torture, crucifixion, and death. Yet, the Bible clearly informs us that God, because of Jesus’ act of faithfulness, sacrifice, and suffering, promoted Jesus by bestowing on him the “name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:9-10). We also read elsewhere that God, as a result of Jesus’ faithfulness and finished work, “seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:20).

This theme of God’s glory, suffering, and promotion is clearly visible. Yet, the incredible impetus of this theme is that it is not just applied to select individuals, but to God’s people overall. Paul attests, “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Rom 8:18). Peter exclaims, “And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. To him be the dominion forever and ever. Amen” (1 Ptr 5:10-11). Furthermore, John in revealing the final picture quips, “No longer will there by anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever” (Rev 22:3-5). Therefore, for all children of God, there is a glorious promotion coming. Although we may have to endure many trials and bouts with suffering in the here and now, there is coming an eternal promotion, where we become co-heirs and co-regents with Christ.

What do we take away from Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, as well as from this running theme of God’s glory, suffering, and promotion? I think Jesus sums it up well when he states, “In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world” (John 16:33b). Therefore, no matter how faithful we strive to be, no matter how much we attempt to live for the glory of God and make him known, there will be trials, tribulation, heartache, pain, possibly persecution, betrayal, hurt, and suffering. However, when these unpleasant, unfortunate, but glorious showers flood our life, let us remember to be faithful in them honoring the Lord as a fragrant aroma amid the stench of a fallen world—for Jesus has overcome the world and promises us an eternal promotion. Moreover, Peter clearly reveals the principles of suffering this way when he writes,”But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s suffering, that you may also rejoice   and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name” (1 Ptr 4:14-16).

Believers, promotion is coming. Whether it comes in this life is up to our heavenly Father. Know that a promotion beyond our wildest dreams lays just beyond the horizon in the new world, in the new city. May the glory of God, his grace, mercy, and loving-kindness sustain us in the midst of our sufferings and trials that we experience in the here and now.

Self-Righteousness: Six Identifiers for those Blinded by Self-Righteousness

15 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by in Christian Life, Discipleship, Ministry; Leadership;, Theology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Being a father provides you a front row seat peering into the manifestation of self-righteousness. When something goes wrong, and one of my children are confronted about it, sure enough, it was not their fault. From their point of view, it was clearly the other person’s fault—even if there were no others around. But before I cast judgment on them, as if to be myself self-righteous, this behavior and blindness to self-righteousness has been present in humanity since the fall of Adam and Eve.

God, approaching Adam and Eve in their hiding, asks them, “Who told you that you were naked?” From the readers account, it is a fairly simple and straightforward question; yet, they turned it into a complex answer, one that passed the buck to the next. Adam blamed Eve, Eve blamed the serpent, and the serpent does not say anything. No one took responsibility, and the fear and embarrassment they were individually feeling came as a result of someone else’s doing, not their own. This is the birth of self-righteousness.

Since then, self-righteousness can be found virtually anywhere two or more are gathered. It can be lurking in families, organizations, and churches. In addition, self-righteousness can be manifested both by the individual or the corporate body or entity. Defining self-righteousness is more a state, a condition, and/or a way of life. It refers to those who are holier-than-thou, pharisaic, or sanctimonious. It is a subtle, yet clearly manifested antagonistic pious posture people or groups have towards others. It is an “us vs. them” posture.

Here are some identifiers of self-righteousness.

1)   Self-righteousness makes one Better than, not Better together. Self-righteous groups or people walk around snubbing their nose in a pious manner as if they are spiritually, morally, physically, and intellectually superior than all other groups or people. Self-righteousness turns groups and people into constant critics parading through life looking down at those they consider outside their sphere. In short, they consider themselves “better than” those not like them. As a result, the self-righteous forfeit ever experiencing the joy and power of “better together” because they live on their own little island of “better than.”

The self-righteous forfeit ever experiencing the joy and power of ‘better together’ because they live on their own little island of ‘better than’.

2)   Self-righteousness makes one more Selfish, not Selfless. Those with snubbed pointing noses do not live life in order to serve others. Rather everything they do, or want done to them, serves their self-righteous interests. Remember, self-righteous groups and people are interested in keeping a good clean public image, devoid of any blemishes. They will protect themselves, even if it costs lying, distorting, or mischaracterizing someone or something else. Self-righteous groups and people are the center of their world; everyone, including God, rests outside the center. However, if you listen carefully you will find that self-righteous people use God as ammunition to fuel their self-righteousness. They will use language, “I am only doing it for God.” Or, “God told me to…” or “God is pleased with me.” In other words, they use God as the prop in the play of their life.

The self-righteous use God as the prop in the play of their life.

3)   Self-righteousness makes one Repulsive, not Attractive. No one wants to be around groups or people that are self-righteous. Being around the self-righteous does not build up, but only tears down. They are very quick to point out how you are not like them, and how you fail to meet their standards. They highlight the planks in everyone else’s eyes but themselves. Thus, there is nothing attractive about being around the self-righteous. There resides no love, no grace, no mercy, and no compassion. They are all law, no grace. They may appear attractive on the outside—looking as if they have it all together—but their internal condition releases a hideous odor that drives people away. As Jesus stated about the Pharisees, they are like white-washed tombs.

Self-righteous people may appear attractive on the outside—looking as if they have it all together—but their internal condition releases a hideous odor that drives people away.

4)   Self-righteousness makes one a Forceful, not Faithful. When I think of someone being forceful, I think about the Crusaders. Crusaders engage in a holy war, seeking to turn people over to their side in a coercive, insidious, and vicious way. They live with the mentality if you are not for me, or for our group, then you are against me or our group. This characterization manifests itself in ugly divorces, church feuds, political groups, or activists groups, etc. On the other hand, one who is faithful seeks to win people by the standard of the one who sent them. For believers, we are not Crusaders forcing people to live according to our standards; rather, we have been commissioned by the King to be sent out to faithfully preach and demonstrate the good-news—the good-redemptive news, the good-grace-filled news of Jesus. Self-righteous people whop people over the heads in order for them to believe in their way; Jesus followers attempt to win people’s hearts in order to believe that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Self-righteous people whop people over the heads in order for them to believe in their way; Jesus followers attempt to win people’s hearts in order to believe that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

5)   Self-righteousness makes one an Exclusive Purists, not an Inclusive Person. Self-righteous zealots are very protective who they associate with, or who they allow in their group. Only those similar and like-minded are invited into the gates of the self-righteous. In addition, if it is a self-righteous individual, be sure that unless you side with them, agreeing with them in everything, or do it their way, you will be kicked-to the curb. You will be viewed as a traitor, a sinner, an evil doer, a non-conformer, a person who has “not seen the light.” For, they will not let competing ideas, thoughts, sides, or people enter into their self-righteous world. They must keep it clean.

6)   Self-righteousness makes one Haughty, not Humble. The self-righteous need no help. They can achieve everything—including salvation—on their own. Their faith and hope is in their ability, morality, and works. If they looked in a mirror and said, “Mirror, mirror on the wall, whose the greatest one of all?” They would hear the mirror answer, “You.” Such a haughty posture leads to a rigid life devoid of grace. They don’t believe they need grace—given their stellar ability to perform—therefore they don’t show any grace. Haughtiness, therefore, hardens one’s heart preventing them from seeing their true need for God and seeing the true needs of others.

In this blog, I have tried to identify at least six manifestations of self-righteousness. The reality is, we must all take off the blinders of self-righteousness. For within our still damaged, distorted, and sinful bodies there is the dormant disease of self-righteousness that potentially can awake at a moments notice.

In closing, what kind of life counteracts that of self-righteousness? Micah 6:8 gives a great answer. “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness (or steadfast love) and to walk humbly with your God.” Justly looking out for the interests of others, having a lovingly disposition towards all, and walking humbly with God as we seek to live for His glory and renown, counteracts any self-righteous impulse that may arise in our life.

Using Language as a Missional Liturgy

04 Thursday Apr 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Using Language as a Missional Liturgy: The Need for a Paradigmatic Shift in our Language

I was reading Genesis 41 this morning where Joseph is brought before Pharaoh to interpret his dreams. Pharaoh exclaims to Joseph, “I have heard it said of you that when you hear a dream you can interpret it.” Responding, Joseph pointedly states, “It is not in me; God will give Pharaoh a favorable answer.” Strikingly, Joseph tells the so-called “god” that his God is the true interpreter of dreams and will be the one working through him to deliver Pharaoh a favorable answer.

Joseph could have simply stated something like, “Yep.” Rather, his response reveals how we can use our language as a missional liturgy. Liturgy could be defined as a practice prescribed for public worship; therefore, language as a missional liturgy would be using our everyday language to point people the lordship and kingship of Jesus. Not only do we see Joseph using language as a missional liturgy, but we see men and women throughout Scripture exercising their language, their words, their every day verbiage, as a missional liturgy. Another example can be found in the New Testament. The proclamation that “Jesus is Lord” particularly in a Roman governmental climate where Caesar was lord, certainly was an example of language as a missional liturgy. While the proclamation that “Jesus is Lord” still is a missional liturgy, it does not carry as much weight in North American democracy, especially at a time when the linguistic use of “lord” carries no weight. In fact, most people today, when they hear the term “lord,” probably think back to the medieval days, at a time when lords ruled the lands.

Although the language that that Joseph (and others) used was counter-cultural, missional, and liturgical, it was still ordinary, common, everyday, and natural— language that transpired in everyday simple conversations. This is something that believers need and must recover to be effective witnesses in today’s pluralistic secular world. However, there are three major obstacles we must be aware of in order to employ language that is missionally liturgical.

First, we must be aware of our doxological assumptions. Doxological assumptions can either be that we assume the person we are talking to believes the same way we do, therefore we have no need to stress the importance and weight of God in our life; or we assume that the person already knows how important God is to us, therefore we (again) have no need to stress it. Second, we must be aware of the dichotomy that has taken place between public facts and private values. In other words, over time our growing pluralistic and secular culture has privatized faith as a personal value—not a public fact (To read more about this, read Lesslie Newbiging, “The Gospel in a Pluralistic Society). Therefore, when it comes to our everyday public language and conversations we omit God, privatizing him to our prayer language, church language, and bible study language. I think this obstacle will be the most difficult for many, because bringing the private things in our life out into the public may be uncomfortable. Nevertheless, we must remember that Jesus is the cosmic public King, not a private god for personal use only.

Third, we must be aware of how mechanical evangelism has become, dumbing it down to evangelistic presentations. There is great need to reset ourselves to be natural, composed, and authentic. Personal evangelism is not some rehearsed set of propositions and presentations that one has learned in order to implement them on a person. [Please do not misunderstand, I am not against evangelistic training. I think for some, evangelism trainings are beneficial. However, I do believe that teaching evangelism like a Math class equips people to either learn something there will never use, or memorize a set of steps only to mechanically regurgitate them.] Personal evangelism is simply the personal proclamation that Jesus is Lord of your life. Personal evangelism is simply bearing witness to the truth claim that Jesus is Lord, God, King, and Savior. Thus bearing witness to him should come naturally in everyday conversations.

When it comes to simply everyday language and word usage, in what ways can we use our language as a missional liturgy, publicly pronouncing the lordship, headship, kingship, as well as the glory of Christ in our life? Here are a couple of examples; I will leave room for our creativity.

–  When someone asks you, “How are you today?” Our response can be something like, “Jesus has been so good to me,” “I am loved by the King,” or “I am graced.” Responding like this, expresses that your condition is not based upon how you feel, or what has happened, it is based upon your identity and condition in King Jesus.

–  When someone asks you, “What do you do?” Our response can be something like, “I serve Jesus as a barista at Starbucks,” or “Jesus has called me to be a teacher.” Responding like this, expresses that your identity is not wrapped up in your vocation, but is wrapped up in either the vocation Christ has called you to, or how you use what you do in the service of King Jesus.

In any case, there is great need for believers to have a paradigmatic shift in the way we use our everyday language. If we can find natural ways to express the kingship of Jesus, his lordship over our life in everyday conversations, then we will be able to use our language as a missional liturgy.