Out in the Sticks: The Archive

Blog is moving...

2007-03-28T14:51:00.000-06:00

Several folks in my church have recently discovered my blog Out in the Sticks. I've decided to update things a bit and create a new Out in the Sticks and have this blog serve as an archive.

Why you ask? Partly because hawkenstein.blogspot.com is confusing for folks. I picked hawkenstein to honor two of my favorite scientists, Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein. But it's a bit strange and difficult for many to remember. So I thought preacherkoops.blogspot.com would be easier. Hopefully, preacherkoops is self explanatory. So here we go. Hope you enjoy!

Sermon on Mark 10:13-16

2007-03-19T10:29:00.000-06:00

Here is a sermon that I didn't get to deliver as we were unable to make it home to Wray from Denver. I hope you enjoy!

Today we are beginning a new series called People Bringing People leading up to Easter. We will be looking at stories in the gospels of people who bring people to Jesus. What can we learn about bringing people to Jesus from these stories? How can these stories help and motivate us to bring people to Jesus today?

I have mentioned many times before that only 15% of Americans 30 and under attend church and only 5% of Americans 18 and under attend church. That means that the vast majority of children in our country are growing up apart from the influence of the church. Fewer and fewer children are growing up with knowledge of Jesus Christ; with a relationship with Jesus Christ.

And those that are growing up in the church usually don’t stay throughout their lifetime. In fact only 1 in 8 children who are raised in the church will still be in the church when they are 22 years old. These are discouraging stats. But it makes it even more important for us to bring the children of our day to Jesus.
Here in Mark 10:13-16 we see people bringing children to Jesus. They bring their children to Jesus to have him touch them. Now why do they want Jesus to touch them? There is no mention of these children being sick or demon possessed. Why do they want Jesus to touch these children? These people want these children to be touched by Jesus to bless them. They are seeking a visible means of conveying God’s blessing on their lives. It was common for parents to seek the blessing of a Rabbi for their children and it makes sense that many would seek the blessing of Jesus for their children.

It seems to be an innocent enough request. We’ve all seen paintings with Jesus and children. Jesus welcoming little children, laughing, hugging. But the children first need to get past the disciples. Past the bouncers. We see here the disciples rebuking those who are bringing children to Jesus. This seems so strange to us. What is going on?

It’s like the disciples are saying, “Don’t you know who this is? Don’t you know how important his time is? He doesn’t have time for little children! He doesn’t have time for the unimportant, the insignificant, the powerless. Children can’t help fulfill the mission. Children can’t bring about the kingdom of God. They have no political clout, no useful contacts.”

But Jesus sees this completely differently. Jesus is indignant! He is ticked off! He is angry. He is outraged! He is furious! This is the only time in scripture that Jesus is said to be indignant. He is indignant because this is wrong! The disciples are once again demonstrating that they don’t get it! Once again we see that they misunderstand the Kingdom of God, they misunderstand Jesus’ work.

So Jesus rebukes the disciples for their rebuking the people bringing the children. And he has two commands…let the children come to me and don’t hinder them. Start allowing them to come to me and stop preventing them from coming to me.

Then he tells his disciples something amazing. He says they must become like little children to receive the kingdom. Those they were preventing they must now be like. The scene ends with Jesus not just briefly touching the children but hugging them, taking them into his arms, laying his hands on them, and blessing them. We see that Jesus has time for children. Jesus values little children. Jesus values the unimportant, the insignificant, the powerless.

This story leads me to ask several questions. First; are we bringing people to Jesus for him to touch? Like those that brought the little children are we bringing people to Jesus? I assume Jesus has blessed you in some way. I assume you have experienced his touch on your life. That he has begun the process of transformation in your life. That he has saved you from a life of sin and hopelessness. That he has given you peace with God through faith in him. I assume that you have experienced the grace of God through Jesus Christ. That’s why you’re here and keep coming back each week.
Are you seeking to share that blessing with others? Are you inviting others to church? I hope you believe that this church is a place that you can invite others to. We are seeking to make this a safe place for people to come and learn about Jesus. A safe place to experience the touch of Jesus through his followers. To experience love from us, his hands and feet.

When was the last time you invited someone to church? I have read several books and studies on church growth and nearly every one says that churches grow through the members inviting others. In fact, many of those studies say that as much as 80% of new attendees are people invited by current members. 80%! Do you want this church to grow? More importantly, do you want God’s kingdom to grow? Do you want others in our town to experience the peace and joy and new life in Jesus Christ through faith in him? Then invite them to church!

In a few weeks we will be celebrating Easter. Easter is the perfect Sunday to invite someone to church. I am planning to do a very unorthodox message, one that I hope God will use to excite others about our church. Let me encourage you to invite your friends to our church on Easter Sunday. You may be surprised at how open they are to attending with you because you invited them.

In order to invite someone to church, you need to be investing in the lives of people who do not attend church. Do you have people in your life that you are investing in in hopes of introducing them to Jesus Christ? If not let me encourage you to begin investing in the lives of others. We need to be sharing what God has done for us with others. We need to be sharing our faith with others.

Think about how you came to be part of the church. My guess is that someone invited you. I hope that we will become a church that creates opportunities to invite others to our church.

A second question that emerges from this text for us to consider is this; are we hindering people from experiencing Jesus’ touch in any way? Do we have attitudes or actions that prevent people from coming to Jesus? Sometimes we do this and don’t even know it. Many times in churches, there is an unwritten code of conduct, of dress, of respectability, of status in the community, of influence. We are rarely aware of these unwritten codes. But we all live by them and we expect visitors to live by them as well. Without even knowing it, we may make others feel unwelcome or unwanted. Are we a welcoming church? Do we make others feel welcome? Do people feel free to be themselves here? Do they feel safe here?

Along with these unwritten codes that make others feel unwelcome, Christians can also hinder others in their behavior throughout the week Have you ever had someone say to you that they will never go to church because of all the hypocrites? Sadly, we all know that this charge against some in the church is true. And it should cause us all to take a long hard look at ourselves. Are we practicing what we preach? Are we living consistent, authentic lives all week long? Are we truly developing a relationship with Jesus Christ or are we being religious? Does the way you conduct your business draw people to Jesus? Or does it turn people off to Jesus? Does your home life draw people to Jesus? Does the way you manage anger demonstrate to others that you know Jesus?

The world is watching us. And they can’t wait to point the finger at our failures, at our hypocrisy. But if we are consistent, if we practice what we preach, if we are growing in our walk with Jesus Christ, they will see that too. How we live our lives is vitally important to the witness of Jesus Christ in the world.

Along with our unwritten codes and our hypocrisy, we can often blatantly hinder othes from coming to church. Sometimes as Christians and sadly in the name of Jesus, we are rude and judgmental. Many times we believe that Jesus has made us the moral police in the world and our job is to point out the sins of others. But if we are going to point the sins of others out, Jesus teaches we need to start with ourselves.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says that instead of pointing out the splinter in someone else’s eye we should concern ourself with removing the log from our own eye. But sadly we rarely practice this. We like to see ourselves as having it together and others are the ones who struggle. We see others as not being good enough, righteous enough, repentant enough, rich enough, powerful enough, or straight enough to come to Jesus. But Jesus commands us to start allowing and stop preventing. We need to seriously consider this question: are we hindering others from coming to Jesus like his first disciples?

A third category of question for us to consider is this: are we becoming like little children? Have you ever noticed that you always know what little children are excited about? You know what has captured their heart. They blurt it out. They talk about it incessantly. They think about it all the time.

Are we childlike in our excitement about Jesus? Has he captured our hearts? Are we childlike in our enthusiastic devotion to him? Or have we grown up? Have we stripped our relationship with Jesus of its passion and replaced it with religion that’s prim and proper. Have we lost our passion and enthusiasm for Jesus? Have we become dignified and dead?

Look at the picture of Jesus in this passage. He is childlike in this scene. All the cares of the world are gone. He is one his way to the cross, making his final trip to Jerusalem and he knows that execution awaits. Yet he stops and hugs children. He holds them. He laughs with them. He blesses them.

Do we have time for the least important in our world? Will we bring them to Jesus?
This leads to my final question. As a church are we welcoming children? What kind of facilities are we devoting to children’s ministry? How much of our budget is dedicated to children? Do we recruit and train quality teachers to work with kids? Are we creating a safe environment, a loving environment for children? Are we reaching out to unchurched kids?

Are we people bringing people to Jesus? Let me challenge you this week. Do you know an unchurched child in your neighborhood who you could invite to church? Let me encourage you to invite that child to church. Bring that child here for Jesus to touch.

The Brick Testament

2006-07-20T15:07:00.000-06:00

Just found this in a Google search. Looks very funny!

The Brick Testament

Hospitality and our "enemies"

2006-05-24T12:57:00.000-06:00

Several weeks ago, Soulforce Equality Ride came through Colorado and stopped at my alma mater Colorado Christian University. I was very pleased to see how the school handled the riders. This article from Christianity Today points out The Power of Hospitality

In an increasingly polarized political culture, shouting slogans is predictable, not newsworthy. As biblical Christians find themselves at odds with various groups, it's worth remembering that "fighting the culture" is more effective with meals and washbasins than it is with posters and bullhorns.

More goofy evangelicals

2006-05-15T13:50:00.000-06:00

Christianity Today has a fascinating and disturbing article concerning Patrick Henry College and the recent depart of 9 professors. Take a look:

Shakeup at Patrick Henry College - Christianity Today Magazine

On March 8 another Source article, this one by Noe and Culberson entitled "The Role of General Revelation in Education," again prompted the administration's response.

"A common misconception among American evangelicals, and one that cannot be supported by the Scriptures themselves, is that the Bible is the only source of truth," the article began. "We argue that this misconception amounts to a blasphemous denial of Christ's words in Matthew 5 that 'he sends rain on the just and the unjust.'"

The 900-word article argued that "a Christian must refuse to view special and general revelation as hostile to one another. Nor should he hesitate to learn from a pagan. There is much wisdom to be gained from Parmenides and Plato, as well Machiavelli and Marx."

The article prompted a 2,600-word response by college chaplain Raymond Bouchoc, sent to students, faculty, and staff. The response, endorsed by Farris and Sanders, discussed seven "harmful implications" that could be drawn from the professors' article and claimed the piece "diminishes the import of Scripture."

Does acknowledging that the Bible is not the only source of truth reduce the significance of Scripture? What are your thoughts?

McLaren on The DaVinci Code

2006-05-09T14:34:00.000-06:00

SojoMail sent out a great interview with Brian McLaren concerning The DaVinci Code. His comments, true to his form, will probably prove to be rather provacative. Below is a teaser:

SojoMail

One of the problems is that the average Christian in the average church who listens to the average Christian broadcasting has such an oversimplified understanding of both the Bible and of church history - it would be deeply disturbing for them to really learn about church history. I think the disturbing would do them good. But a lot of times education is disturbing for people. And so if The Da Vinci Code causes people to ask questions and Christians have to dig deeper, that's a great thing, a great opportunity for growth. And it does show a weakness in the church giving either no understanding of church history or a very stilted, one-sided, sugarcoated version.

On the other hand, it's important for me to say I don't think anyone can learn good church history from Brown. There's been a lot of debunking of what he calls facts. But again, the guy's writing fiction so nobody should be surprised about that. The sad thing is there's an awful lot of us who claim to be telling objective truth and we actually have our own propaganda and our own versions of history as well.

Let me mention one other thing about Brown's book that I think is appealing to people. The church goes through a pendulum swing at times from overemphasizing the deity of Christ to overemphasizing the humanity of Christ. So a book like Brown's that overemphasizes the humanity of Christ can be a mirror to us saying that we might be underemphasizing the humanity of Christ....

I would like to see churches teach their people how to have intelligent dialogue that doesn't degenerate into argument. We have to teach people that the Holy Spirit works in the middle of conversation. We see it time and time again - Jesus enters into dialogue with people; Paul and Peter and the apostles enter into dialogue with people. We tend to think that the Holy Spirit can only work in the middle of a monologue where we are doing the speaking.

So if our churches can encourage people to, if you see someone reading the book or you know someone who's gone to the movie, say, "What do you think about Jesus and what do you think about this or that," and to ask questions instead of getting into arguments, that would be wonderful. The more we can keep conversations open and going the more chances we give the Holy Spirit to work. But too often people want to get into an argument right away. And, you know, Jesus has handled 2,000 years of questions, skepticism, and attacks, and he's gonna come through just fine. So we don't have to be worried.

The conversation surrounding The DaVinci Code continues. What are your thoughts? Do you think Christians are looking for an argument? Do you think the average Christian is uneducated concerning church history and would be greatly disturbed if they started to learn?

End of the "E" Word?

2006-04-28T15:18:00.000-06:00

It's so nice to feel affirmed by others in my reaction to the word evangelical. Here's a tease from a great article calling for the end of the word evangelical.

Christianity Magazine: Editorials - Editorial comment on christian issues by John Buckeridge: Church finances and christian giving

I’m an evangelical – but sometimes I’m reluctant to own up. I’m not alone – in a survey conducted for Premier Radio and the Evangelical Alliance 87% of the sample describe themselves as evangelical but only 59% reveal their ‘evangelical’ identity to others (News page 8). Not that we’re ashamed of the gospel of the Lord Jesus or being identified as Christians, it’s just the ‘evangelical’ tag that we sometimes struggle with.

So what should evangelicals who don't like the word call themselves? Any ideas, suggestions?

Students, Staff Involved in Fatal Crash - Taylor University

2006-04-28T15:09:00.000-06:00

This is a terribly tragic incident. May we all be in prayer for the families and friends of these 5 people.

Taylor University officials report that a van carrying professional staff and students was involved in a collision with a semitrailer on Interstate 69 near Highway 18.

Dr. Blomberg and the Gospel of Judas

2006-04-25T17:29:00.000-06:00

Dr. Craig Blomberg reviews "The Gospel of Judas". Here's a quote to encourage your engagement:

Denver Journal - 9:0211 - The Gospel of Judas.

The acceptance of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John cannot be reduced simply to the choices of the winners in ancient ecclesiastical politics. But the vehemence with which some people keep repeating this mantra shows that in our increasingly postmodern, ahistorical world, history today can be rewritten and re-invented by those who shout the loudest, whether or not they have the necessary supporting evidence!

So what do you think about all of this?

Conservatives and liberals : Living with tares

2006-03-07T11:56:00.000-07:00

The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) that I pastor, is struggling with the issue of "living with tares." We are a conservative church in the midst of a liberal denomination. What do we do? I found this article insightful. Here's a quote:

Living with Tares - Christianity Today Magazine

Why do I not join those who have left or are leaving? Why do I stay? Serving a broken and divided church is a hard calling, and I do not minimize the difficulty of the task or the inevitable disappointments that I will encounter on the journey. But the Lord, for his good purpose, has (I humbly believe) thrown into one church Christians of radically different and sometimes theologically incompatible perspectives. Is it possible that in the midst of this painful discontinuity, he may do a work that none of us can foresee? It is in that hope and in remembering that he is Lord of the church and in charge of the big picture that I follow Jesus in the Episcopal Church.

So what do you think? Should conservative, evangelical churches and pastor's stay in liberal denominations?

Wray's close call

2006-03-02T16:00:00.000-07:00

I haven't blogged in a long time. I'm really enjoying my silence. I have been reading a lot of great books and praying about my future and the future's of the churches I serve. I have become rather self-conscious about my blog and what I have written, mostly because of the possible pending search and call process. How will my blog effect that process? My brother thinks I should delete it. I 'm most concerned about my thoughts being taken out of context by others. Oh well, I'm probably over-analysizing!

So what has prompted this post? This local story and some photos I took. I couldn't resist.

Rocky Mountain News: Local

Yuma County Sheriff Sam McCoy said arching power lines caused by high winds yesterday may have sparked a 23,000-acre prairie fire that injured four firefighters and burned at least seven buildings.

Power, Possessions and Stewards

2006-02-01T17:14:00.000-07:00

These are challenging words from Andy Crouch concerning possessions and power.

Learning from Fools - Christianity Today Magazine

Possessions and power are instruments of blindness. They endanger our very souls. The only safe thing to do with them is to forsake them, to put them beyond use, beyond the reach of our foolish dreams.

Rich aliens: possessions and God's Kingdom

2006-01-13T14:00:00.000-07:00

This is a very interesting article on the relationship of church and culture. Listen to these challenging words:

Too often, of course, the contemporary church simply mirrors the culture. Increasingly, we are less a holy city drawn together around Christ and more a part of the suburban sprawl that celebrates individual autonomy, choice, entertainment, and pragmatic efficiency.

Sadly, I feel this statement is true. This morning I finished the excellent book God & Your Stuff: The Vital Link Between Your Possessions and Your Soul. In this book, the author Wesley Willmer, argues that the use of our possessions is our trademark as Christians and a test as stewards. Willmer argues that "if Christ is not first in the use of our money, he is not first in our lives." Jesus said it this way, "where your treasure is, there your heart is also." By this challenging standard, no wonder the church mirrors culture typically just creating a christianized subculture of the larger culture. Sadly, most in the Christians in the church mirror cultural attitudes toward money and possessions. Few Christians call into question our materialistic lifestyles.

And it is in large part the clergy's fault! Pastors have not been trained in a theology of stewardship and therefore are not training the church. My seminary education did not include a mandatory class on stewardship. And the church I grew up in tended to preach the subject when it was necessary.

This year I am planning on preaching on stewardship once a quarter. It will not be a desperate appeal for funds. It will be an invitation to discover the powerful spiritual discipline of giving. And hopefully, slowly but surely, the folks in my church and their pastor will begin shattering the mirrors of culture in our lives.

Technorati Tags: theology, materialism, money

The last bag of tortilla chips in town...

2006-01-09T10:14:00.000-07:00

There are some unique experiences to living out in the sticks. Last night I had a particularly funny one.

At about 5pm, my wife asked me to go to the grocery store for a few items: tortilla chips, bananas, cheese, and a lime. The plan was to have nachos for dinner. All was going well until I turned down the chip aisle. I wish I had my camera with me. There were very few bags of chips left and not a single bag of tortilla chips.

"No problem," I thought, "I just go to Alco next door."

There were no tortilla chips at Alco. "I'll check Ampride," I thought.

After waiting at the train crossing for the train to pass, I entered Ampride. No tortilla chips! The last possible store is 7-Eleven.

There at 7-Eleven was one bag of Tostitos bite size tortilla chips! Dinner was saved!

Just another day living out in the sticks!

Commercialization, Aslan, Hobbes, and the Church

2006-01-06T16:34:00.000-07:00

This is a fantastic article, dealing with commercialization and Narnia. It is utterly amazing to me how the church is seen as an opportunity to make a buck selling worthless books and tons of unecessary knicknacks!

A Tale of Two Kitties - Christianity Today Magazine

In an age in which any notable spiritual movement immediately begets a plethora of associated products (calendars, Bible covers, journals, T-shirts), the logic and form of commercialism demand our critical attention, not merely our easy acceptance. When does the logic of commercialism not make sense? When is it a problem to turn certain ideas or realities into merchandise? When is defying popularity and consumer demand an act of integrity? When should form outweigh marketability? When should a lion remain bookish, and a tiger remain cartoonish?

Great questions for us to consider (even though I really liked the movie!).

Technorati Tags: Narnia, commercialism, church, culture

Pat speaks, God listens!

2006-01-06T08:26:00.000-07:00

Pat strikes again! Yesterday, Robertson suggested that Sharon's stroke is God's judgment. This guy is truly unbelievable!

``God considers this land to be his,'' Robertson said on his TV program ``The 700 Club.'' ``You read the Bible and he says `This is my land,' and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, `No, this is mine.'''

Sharon, who ordered Israel's withdrawal from Gaza last year, suffered a severe stroke on Wednesday.

In Robertson's broadcast from his Christian Broadcasting Network in Virginia Beach, the evangelist said he had personally prayed about a year ago with Sharon, whom he called ``a very tender-hearted man and a good friend.'' He said he was sad to see Sharon in this condition.

He also said, however, that in the Bible, the prophet Joel ``makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who 'divide my land.'''

Sharon ``was dividing God's land and I would say woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the EU (European Union), the United Nations, or the United States of America,'' Robertson said.

Technorati Tags: religion, evangelical

Finding True North

2006-01-04T15:28:00.000-07:00

This is a great article. I have felt much of what the author feels. Many times serving small churches (especially after serving in large even mega churches) is difficult especially when it comes to comparing what you are doing with others. But I know God has called me here.

Yet I do not know for how long. In September 2005, the session of the Presbyterian Church I serve voted to end the yoke relationship with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). This decision is effective when I leave. Yet both churches are not in a hurry to see me leave. Kind of a crazy situation.

This is why this article is so great. Especially powerful are these thoughts:

As appealing as the church may have been, we had not been given the liberty to leave. I chose to remain at my post.
I had several other opportunities to change churches. Most of them seemed like "better" opportunities—larger congregations, more staff, nicer locale. Some were opportunities I had solicited.

In most cases the thing that kept me from accepting a call, even when I wanted to say "yes," was the lack of a personal sense of release. Yes, this is subjective. But I did not feel that I could go until I sensed that the Holy Spirit had said, "You are dismissed."

So that's where I am. Praying, waiting, seeking God, asking, "Am I dismissed?"

No Church? No Problem

2005-12-29T11:39:00.000-07:00

Sorry I've been gone so long. I think I burned out on the whole blogging thing and needed some time away. I am seeking to bring more balance in to many areas of my life. We'll see how it goes.

Here's an interesting quote from an article at Christianity Today called No Church? No Problem.

Unlike the Great Awakenings, which brought people into the church, this new movement "entails drawing people away from reliance upon a local church into a deeper connection with and reliance upon God." Already "millions of believers have stopped going to church," so Barna expects that in 20 years "only about one-third of the population will rely upon a local congregation as the primary or exclusive means for experiencing and expressing their faith." Down will go the number of churches, donations to churches, and the cultural influence of churches.

This doesn't sound too good for job security for pastors! But I hope it spells great things for the advancement of God's Kingdom. What are your thoughts about this trend?
Filed in: church, trends

Ben Witherington on The Problem with Evangelical Theology

2005-12-05T16:24:00.000-07:00

Recently I wrote about Ben Witherington's new book The Problem with Evangelical Theology. Thanks to D.P. here's a quote from Ben Witherington's blog concerning his book and what he hopes will be achieved by it:

It is my hope that this book which I have written will stir up a lot of discussion, not defensiveness or furor. I think in the 21rst century we need to learn to do our theology in a more Biblical way, not just use the Bible as a justification or proof text for the theology we want to do anyway. If we manage to do this then perhaps those two reformation principles will come alive again-- in reforming ourselves, we may become more Biblical persons, thinkers theologians, ethicists. And this would be an exceedingly good thing. The time for posturing, pretending, and polemics should be over.

So how can we do theology in a more biblical way? What would it mean to be more biblical in our theology?

Just for fun: the graphic above comes from a shirt.

Filed in: quotes, books, theology

Reading reflections - Paul Among the Postliberals

2005-12-01T16:44:00.000-07:00

A friend and I are currently reading this book. Here's an interesting quote from the end of chapter 1:

That message and missions [Paul's mission to the nations] is precisely about God's deliverance of the Gentiles from their former religious-sociopolitical allegiances, in order that they might give their unreserved loyalty (pistis) to the one God of Israel who has invaded their world in Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit, in order that they might become a new people, under a new Lord and a new regime called the kingdom of God, the body of Christ, the ekklesia. That is justification. The Gentiles share in this new people and new regime by being baptized into the body of Christ and, in their newfound freedom from other gods and other lords, by becoming obedient and faithful to their Lord, repeating the pattern of his obedience and faithfulness in their whole way of life, in body and in soul, social and personal, active and passive, economic and political, within the body of Christ and as the body of Christ. That is faith. Their justification, therefore, is or ought to be immediately marked by a specific and visible way of being and living in the world as a social body. Every letter of Paul is oriented to that end; one searches in vain for any section within those letters that is not oriented to it. (emphasis is original)

At the core of this book and the first chapter is the discussion of the "rendering of the Greek phrase pistis Christou Iesou (Gal. 2:16 and its variants elsewhere)." Is this phrase to be understood as faith in or toward Jesus Christ with Jesus Christ as the object of the faith thus translating the phrase "faith in Jesus Christ" or is it a subjective genitive thus translating the phrase "the faith(fulness) of Christ."

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this issue and especially on the quote concerning faith and justification. Are those definitions that you can live with? How do you understand pistis Christou Iesou? Why do you understand it the way you do?

Filed in: books, quotes, theology, bible, hermeneutics

Catholic AnalysisCatholic Analysis: Full Text of New Document on Priesthood

2005-11-30T10:07:00.000-07:00

The Catholic Church is getting a lot of press on the newly released Document on Priesthood. Here is an excerpt containing the most controversial portion:

(20) The spiritual director has the obligation to evaluate all the qualities of the candidate's personality and to make sure that he does not present disturbances of a sexual nature, which are incompatible with the priesthood. If a candidate practices homosexuality or presents deep-seated homosexual tendencies, his spiritual director, as well as his confessor, have the duty to dissuade him in conscience from proceeding toward ordination. It goes without saying that the candidate himself has the primary responsibility for his own formation.(21) He must offer himself trustingly to the discernment of the Church, of the bishop who calls him to orders, of the rector of the seminary, of his spiritual director and of the other seminary educators to whom the bishop or major superior has entrusted the task of forming future priests. It would be gravely dishonest for a candidate to hide his own homosexuality in order to proceed, despite everything, toward ordination. Such a deceitful attitude does not correspond to the spirit of truth, loyalty and openness that must characterize the personality of him who believes he is called to serve Christ and his Church in the ministerial priesthood.

So here's an interesting question. If, for the purposes of this discussion, some people are predisposed genetically to homosexuality, but they vow to be celibate as a priest, and indeed they truly remain celibate, then should they be banned from ordination and serving as a priest? Is this fundamentally different from a celibate heterosexual being ordained and serving as a priest?

Another intriguing way of wording this question is this: If some people are genetically predisposed to homosexuality, then would God call these people to serve as celibate priests?

What do you think? I can see arguments for both sides.

Filed in: catholicism, ordination, ministry, church, theology

C.S. Lewis and the consolation of religion

2005-11-29T11:17:00.000-07:00

From the Writer's Almanac for November 29, 2005:

It's the birthday of C. S. (Clive Staples) Lewis, born in Belfast, Ireland, (1898), the author of the children's series about the land of Narnia. He also wrote The Screwtape Letters (1941), in which he wrote, "The safest road to Hell is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts." He was a confident Oxford philosopher, not at all prepared to find himself a Christian convert. To his friend Owen Barfield he wrote: "Terrible things have happened to me. The 'Spirit' or 'Real I' is showing an alarming tendency to becoming much more personal and is taking the offensive, and behaving just like God. You'd better come on Monday at the latest or I may have entered a monastery." He said, "Talk to me about the truth of religion and I'll listen gladly. Talk to me about the duty of religion and I'll listen submissively. But don't come talking to me about the consolations of religion or I shall suspect that you don't understand."

This is rather timely as the release of Narnia is a little over a week away. I love Lewis' quote on "the consolations of religion."

In our town, we buried 70 people this year. That may not sound like a lot until you know that our town has a population of only 2200! We lost 3% of the town's population by death this year!

And talking about the consolations of religion does very little for deeply grieving people. In fact, I've seen it do much more harm than good. Sometimes words seem so shallow when the pain is so deep!

As a pastor, I find that I often need to give people permission to be angry, to question, to allow themselves to hurt. Sometimes I have to help kick start the grieving process and give them permission to keep it going as long as they need. Many of my pastoral visits following the funeral are sitting with someone, holding their hand, allowing them to weep, and weeping with them. I believe one of the greatest "consolations of religion" as Lewis puts it, is presence. "The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood" (John 1:14, The Message).

More and more, I am convinced that in our ruggedly individualistic, independent, disconnected and fractured society, becoming flesh and blood, and moving into the neighborhood is one of the greatest challenges and opportunities for the Church today.

So how do we move into the neighborhood? And if we do it well, what price is there to pay? What will we sacrifice to make it happen?
Filed in: quotes, C.S. Lewis, ministry

Messy Scriptures - The Story of the Sacred Scroll

2005-11-28T13:55:00.000-07:00

Here’s a quote from Dr. Jim Dixon, senior pastor of Cherry Hills Community Church in a message he delivered entitled “The Story of the Sacred Scroll.” This quote comes in the context of discussing biblical infallibility and inerrancy:

But you see, there is a problem with these words. A problem with the word infallible, a problem with the word inerrant. And the problem is these words are not found in the Bible. The Bible doesn’t use these words to describe itself. Now the concepts behind these words may be found in the Bible, depending on how you define those concepts, but you see the Bible doesn’t include those words.

And there’s a deeper problem. The deeper problem is that the words inerrancy and infallibility, they tend to kind of give you a static view of the Bible. And the Bible proclaims of itself it is not static it is dynamic, it is active, it is alive. I mean this is not some kind of a carcass you can perform an autopsy on. The Bible is living and active.

Of course the word the Bible uses to define itself with regard to its authority is inspiration. All Scripture is inspired of God. But the Greek word, the Greek word is theopneustos which literally means God-breathed. That’s what the Bible says of itself, all Scripture is God-breathed. The breath of God is on this book.

His discussion of these doctrines really resonates with me!

So what do you think? Do you agree that there is a problem with these words, with these concepts? Do these concepts cause us to see the Bible as static rather than dynamic?
Filed in: quotes, theology, scripture, bible

The Underrated Spiritual Secret

2005-11-24T10:33:00.000-07:00

Before we eat turkey and watch the Broncos beat the Cowboys, take some time to read this great article on the spiritual discipline of being grateful. Here's a quote to whet your appetite:

Developing the meditative habit of constantly whispering thanks to him—no matter the situation—is, in fact, a mustard seed of life-changing power. Radical, for it goes to the root of who we are. Small, seemingly insignificant, yet it has the power to change our lives and blow our socks off, right in the midst of the everyday. When we really give God thanks in everything, we are acknowledging that he is sovereign and that we trust him. And we find that it changes us.

Go Broncos!
Filed in: spiritual discipline, holiday