Hopes and Actions

There is a problem with blogging- it's just talk.

It's simply ideals and hopes written down during a person's most magnanimous moments.

It is how a person wants to be seen, heard and thought of.

It doesn't present the fullness of reality.

This is me. Hypocrite, contrast and jilted romantic.

I once (a few times) took great risks to express my heart to people- usually to one that I'd hoped would return the favour. Those experiences are ones of rejection and failure. Sadly these are the keystone experiences that shape my life. They say "once bitten twice shy" and my heart is shy. I don't want it to be. I want to be reckless and abandoned in displays of love for others but I cannot get my experiences and hurt out of the way.

There is a problem with blogging- it's just talk.

It's simply ideals and hopes written down during a person's most magnanimous moments.

It is how a person wants to be seen, heard and thought of.

It doesn't present the fullness of reality.

This is me. Hypocrite, contrast and jilted romantic.

Brennan Manning

My mum is a wise woman. She has guided me spiritually for most of my life and her steadfastness and belief in me is humbling. I share this because she has done it again.

For Christmas she bought me (amongst other things) a book. She bought me the final book by my favourite christian author- Brennan Manning. I have simply read the foreword and a few reader testimonies and I am already in tears. Manning is one of my spiritual heroes. He was a catholic priest who married, divorced, spent time living in solitude in a cave in Spain, preached boldly, wrote beautifully, was a lifelong alcoholic and a deeply intense lover and follower of God.

He is my spiritual hero for almost none of those reasons though. He is my spiritual hero because despite all of his many and vast shortcomings, he never hid them from people and always accepted God's amazing grace and love for him. His willingness to always get back up after being knocked down (often by his own compulsions) inspires me more greatly than you could know. I am inspired by the fact that he always did it through honesty and transparency.

Brennan Manning was under no illusions- God is greatly kind, greatly just and greatly to be praised.

I think Manning understood one key thing about God- his worthiness of God's love was never in question- he was always worthy.

It made me think of a scenario that sometimes plays across my mind. In the book of Job, God and Satan appear to be playing a cosmic betting game (like poker to my mind). Satan comes to God and says (I'm using artistic licence here) "if you let me kill Job's livestock he will turn his back on you" to which God says "I bet you he won't". It's like Satan and God are having a bet about the heart and character of Job.

Like with all bets, things of value are placed into the centre of the table to be used as collateral. The way Brennan tells his story, it was like God and Satan were betting to see what kind of man he was. The thing that caused God to win, however, was that he never placed the key/defining chip into the pot.

It was never bargained and never in question that Brennan Manning was worthy of God's love. 

Though his character struggled. Though his behaviours constantly failed. Though his desires betrayed him, Manning always got back up because he knew one thing:

A gracious God could never stop loving him. For, despite all of the other negotiable things of life, it was never on the table.

Vicarious

I just finished watching a TV series called the newsroom. It's brilliantly written and as I watched its final episode I did what I seem to do at the end of any show where the characters are well written- I cry.

I know it's fake and I know that these characters are not real but the thing I find hardest is that you get to see into the lives of these characters/people. You get to see what they do when they are alone and what they really think and feel- you get to see behind the mask. While I accept the irony of the following statement, it rings true- you get to who these people really are.

The reason I cry at the end of these shows is because I have to grieve people who have let me see them. In some false way, I connect with them and feel a sense of love, care and investment into their lives.

Some of you will probably find such an admission really sad. The reason why it is a truly sad statement is because that is what I long to find in real life but struggle to allow myself to do. I've said it before but I find it easy to be honest with people but hard to be vulnerable. To say it slightly differently, I struggle to live my life without having walls up around my heart.

I find that when I see others in candid, real and, perhaps, vulnerable moments I love them. It makes me feel safe and their candidness disarms and lowers the walls around my heart.

So in a somewhat strange and sad way I lost some friends today.

The reality is that real life is harder than fictional characters. It is scary to let your walls down and allow people to see you rightly, especially those who can and will hurt you. I guess that the enjoyment of watching other people's lives pales incredibly in comparison to the fulfillment of having people know, love and accept you.

Maybe it's time to let my walls down for those who can influence my life 24/7 rather than for 1hr approximately 20 times in my life.

The Gospel, Heresy and Indifference

Anyone who has ever had to sit down and talk with me about the church will have heard me regale them with the one thing I learned at bible college. (In fairness to the quality of education I received, I learned many more things- this is just my most used).

The one thing that sticks with me is an idea. Ideas, as we well know, are dangerous. I'm not sure Karl Marx envisaged that his ideas would lead to such suffering and in fairness I am not sure the father or mother of capitalism envisaged the damage that idea would do either. My ability to politically ostracise myself aside, the idea that stuck with me was from a "radical" theologian called Karl Barth. His idea was this:

"The greatest threat to the church is not heresy. Rather the greatest threat to the church is apathy and indifference."

This thought has stuck with me. Barth was an incredibly intelligent man and, although he was not considered orthodox, I have spent a great deal of time reflecting on this idea.

I grew up in the conservative church. Something I am very grateful for and indebted to. However, as part of the formation process I was always taught that heresy (false teaching or ideas about God from within or outside of the church) was the thing we were fighting against. Of course, Satan was the great exponent of heresy. After all, if you want to bring down an establishment you attack its core and heresy attacks the core beliefs of Christianity.

Heresy is often expressed as open defiance or disagreement with the central or key aspects of Christian belief. Barth believed that such questioning and disagreement from outsiders (and occasionally insiders) caused those in the church to reexamine and solidify their positions on why they believed what they believed. In other words, handled appropriately heresy acts as a purifying fire that helps to protect, refresh and renew correct doctrine. Barth even goes so far as to suggest that any healthy church will have heresy being expressed in and around it all the time. His reasons for this are best explained, I think, by his use of the term indifference. And the best way to illustrate this idea is by looking at Jesus' use of parables.

Most theologians agree that Jesus told parables in such a way so as to leave his audience with no ability to remain neutral. As people were listening to his stories Jesus would tell them in such a way that a person was forced to respond to the ideas being put forward. For example (although not strictly a parable) he tells his followers in John 6 that if they want to follow him they have to eat his flesh and drink his blood- no man listening to that can remain indifferent, it will evoke a response. The chapter actually says many stopped following him as a result of this teaching.

The point here is simple. When Jesus was telling parables he was not concerned by those who would openly question or deny his declaration (heresy/heretics). What he always avoided was allowing people to remain indifferent to his message (apathetic). The "heretics" (or those who believed differently to Jesus) were forced to ask questions, reject his belief or qualify their own beliefs as a result of his proclamation. What was not possible was the ability to think that what he had to say had no bearing on their life.

Indifference is such a great enemy to the church because it declares that we have not been preaching the gospel correctly. It is such a great enemy because those who need to be confronted with the truth of the gospel have not understood the gravity of the situation. When the church cannot break through the indifference of those outside it, it has failed in its mission. When the church embodies the indifference of the outside world in its own doctrine, it has let go of a part of the God that characterises it.

No church is perfect but if heresy is present within a church it is possibly because it has new (and some old) people in the church who are still forming a right view of the God they believe in. Heresy, in Barth's eyes, causes a church to grow and perform mission more succinctly that leads to new converts and more heresy. (This idea is not talking about an endemic heresy where the pastor/leader rejects central and key tenets of Christianity leading to cultism etc)

Indifference leads to a community that is disinterested in the message of God and a church that is asleep to the magnificence of their saviour.

There are a few flaws to this idea but I love its principles. Does your church have this kind of heresy in it? If not, has it grown indifferent as a result?

Love and Loneliness

I sit at home tonight....alone.

Everything in me wants to feel sorry for myself. It's easier that way. The world is to blame and I am the victim. A sad thing happens to humanity when we feel this isolated- we seek to survive.

One person may want to run into a corner, curl up in a ball and rock themselves gently to sleep. Another person may choose to fight and take companionship by force- or desperate act.

I'm told relationships are hard. I bet they are. I don't have someone constantly challenging me to live a different way and to think of them. I'm told there is wonderful freedom in my current single state. I believe them, I'm just not sure it's better.

I believe one of the greatest truths to life is understanding that although Jesus came to set us free he lived by a greater conviction. Despite his glorious freedom, Jesus chose to give it up in order to love others. Love involves limitations. Not because it demands a laying down of freedom but because by nature some freedoms will become "counter-loving".

For example, if your spouse is anaphylactic then, although you may wish to occasionally indulge in peanuts, you choose to restrict that freedom out of love. It is ironic that in this place of constant sacrifice that we learn how fulfilling it can be to put others first and just why freedom pales in the presence of love. (In fairness to the philosophers/romantics- there is no true love without freedom. While cut from the same cloth, freedom is the foundation, love is the fullest expression). I guess to take this slightly further, the greatest expression of freedom is the ability not to use it. That's what makes love so meaningful.

My point is this. Freedom is great but limitations for the sake of love fulfill freedom. Therefore, tonight, despite my shocking inability to love others well, I'd prefer to be in the shoes of those who have someone to make life hard.

Perception

Perception is a strange thing. It is strange for one simple reason- it can be easily altered. Perceptions are like the lenses of a pair of glasses- the lens shapes the image of the world and after a while your brain interprets it as the reality of how the world is.

I work with people who perceive themselves very differently to how I see them. There are some that are incredibly loving, capable and sacrificial who believe themselves to be poor teachers. There are others who are outgoing, verbose and self-obsessed who believe themselves to be the best...human... beings...ever.

The reality, of course, is that both are looking through glasses that are tainted (or at least shaped) by a host of factors.

So here is my question- how does one see themselves rightly? and, is there such a thing as an objective set of criteria by which one might see themselves rightly?

I look at the prevailing philosophy of today which says being yourself and being okay with it is seeing yourself rightly. The problem with such subjectivity is that one does not normally know who they are let alone how to be okay with it. Those who claim being okay with themselves and who 'are just being me' are usually expressively indulgent and/or strangely angry with the world.

I guess I just wonder whether 'being ourselves' is like wearing the same pair of glasses for a long time- we just accept that this is the way things are.

I have one big problem with this view of life- it sucks. I once needed glasses and when I had put on the correct prescription which enabled me to look at the world rightly, I was amazed at how beautiful and clear everything looked. I had become used to an inferior way of viewing the world.

The lenses we wear (and perceptions we have) massively impact our lives.

Psychologists and philosophers alike acknowledge that at our core it is our beliefs that shape our lives. Our beliefs are our lenses. This, of course, opens up a completely new can of worms.

This is why it is vital for the world to have an objective set of beliefs to help us see ourselves rightly.

I can't help but think that maybe we don't like change and really enjoy (need) feeling comfortable wearing our current set of glasses.

Celebration

I think people are meant to be celebrated.

Not all people do things or become things we would want to celebrate but I think all people are meant to be celebrated.

The key question is why. Fortunately for this question there is a simple answer.

God made them in his image. 

It's just easiest to celebrate those who look most like the Jesus we see.

I think all people are meant to be celebrated.