(e)mergent Voyageurs

The Ooze Select Blogger Book Review:

“Butterfly In Brazil: How Your Life Can Make A World Of Difference”
by Glenn Packiam (Tyndale House Publishers, 2007)

As part of our ministry, we spend a lot of time and energy in spiritual formation with college age Christians from many walks of life.  Typically, there are a number of young people who come to us so filled with passion to change the world, that we fear to burst the bubble of their sweeping vision to see the greatest miracles in history occur in a matter of months (and I am only slightly overstating their enthusiasm).  It is not that we do not believe that God can move with power, as we have seen Him do so many times before, but rather that despite their best intentions, these Christians are easily discouraged at how much hard work and sacrafice Christ calls us to for even the smallest change.  How can we temper their enthusiasm without destroying their passion.

In this book, “Butterfly In Brazil”, Packiam offers an encouraging and Biblical foundation for how to live our lives with perseverance, recognizing that there are no small acts when those acts are done in obedience to God.  He shows through engaging stories from Scripture and throughout history that the smallest acts can be the seeds of amazing change.  A timely and important message in an age where it can be fashionable to want to change the world, but where few truly make the choices in their lives to see that happen.

The book seems to be written with young adult/college age in mind, which would make sense, as this is the group that Packiam works with in his ministry at New Life Church.  I also appreciated that a portion of every book sale goes to World Relief.  I have already made a list of a few people I hope to pass on this title to.

At times, the book can be somewhat overstated.  In an attempt to counter some extremes in our culture, I sometimes felt that Packiam went to the opposite extreme.  For example, in chapter 10, “Mono-purpose Halls”, in his attempt to caution against the dangers of being distracted by failing to focus on one goal/project/etc. his overstates his point to a dangerous degree.  What this chapter fails to engage is that, through the diversity of giftings and vocations, some are called to broader focuses (Loren Cunningham is perhaps the best example of how this chapter isn’t always right).

And perhaps more importantly, while he cites example of great people who had global impacts because of their singular focus, it fails to recognize that most people who have achieved such success came into their focus in mid/later life, having spent years of very diverse exploration that essentially shaped who they would later become (see “Making Of A Leader” by Robert Clinton for a powerful exploration of this idea).  I believe that our culture demands specialization too soon for young adults, making this chapter (and other lesser examples) troubling.

However, Packiam quickly redeemed himself (in my books) with the next chapter that explored the importance of doing things together as a community.  In this excellent chapter, he presents an excellent challenge to communities of mutuality (not hierarchy) and diversity (not uniformity).  Many sentences in this chapter could have been lifted from some of my own writing and preaching.

So this book gets my thumbs up.

(visit WhenTheSaints.org)

“He has told you, O man, what is good, and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice…”

Rachel, a volunteer over at Off The Map, asked me my opinion on the article “Was Jesus rich?: ‘Kings brought him gold and he travelled with a treasurer’” in the National Post (ht: Justice & Compassion blog).  The article presents the argument of many Christian leaders that Jesus was not a poor man at all, but rather wealthy, evidence (along with health and good relationships) that He was living in the fullest blessings of God.  When the primary pastor quoted is “Rev. Dollar”, you can probably guess what direction they take.

While I am not going to get into the arguments and details, let it suffice to say that I disagree with the premise they present and have strong objections to the prosperity Gospel in its many varieties.  And yet, the debate of “Rich Jesus vs. Poor Jesus” is not an adequate enough framework to explore the underlying questions.  We first need to acknowledge that, while Biblical and historical evidence helps, the record is not explicit on the subject.

Some argue that the gifts of the Maji would be enought to establish the wealth of Jesus and His family.  Certainly, such gifts would have helped, but we also must remember that shortly thereafter they fled to Egypt with little notice.  The trip and the years in Egypt would have required money.  Further, we can fairly deduce from Jesus life that we received an excellent education as a child, which also would have been costly.

When they returned to Israel, in addition to the cost of the move, they were coming home to a land under the thumb of foreign power, in the midst of political turmoil.  Add to that the fact that first century Jews did not function like our nuclear families today, with larger extended family units, there were many expenses for the whole household.  Also, Joseph leaves the story earlier in Jesus life, meaning one primary provider would be removed.  Also, what wealth he had would be shared with more than just Jesus.

So as Jesus enters adulthood, we cannot say that He was wealthy, but neither should we say he must have been poor.  As a popular rabbi and with a following, Jesus would likely have had a fair amount of support.  Having someone care for the purse does suggest that there was a fair amount of money in that provision.  However, given other Scriptures about giving (and the pattern of the early church) makes it clear that Jesus and His followers did not count this wealth as their own.  Perhaps one of the most important factors to remember is that Jesus birth was in question.  He would have been a social outcast to many, so despite his financial status, he would have suffered from some “social poverty” that cannot be underplayed.

So was Jesus poor or rich?  In my opinion, most likely neither.  It is dangerous to build a theology of prosperity on the thin references and culturally biased interpretations that are common today.  There is far greater evidence to counter these shallow theologies in the fullness of Scripture.  Again, I will not get into the details here.

However, it is also dangerous to paint Jesus a “homeless” man.  Yes, Jesus did not “have a place to lay His head”, but in our cultural/historical context the word “homeless” is loaded with meaning that would not apply to Jesus’ situation.  Working in the inner city, homelessness is not just defined by having not home (though that would seem obvious), but rather to the broader issues of poverty.  Frankly, Jesus had the diverse support system that most of today’s homeless would greatly envy.

That being said, Jesus spent a great deal of time and energy living and loving the truly poor of His world.  By His choices He demonstrated a pattern that made issues of poverty, marginalization and injustice (and their underlying causes) significantly important to our own faith, in belief and action.  So while I do not think Jesus can be so strongly identified as a poor man as some today would like, neither can we ignore how strongly He identified with the poor.

As a missionary in an inner city context, I have a strong emphasis on Jesus’ identification with the poor and marginalized, something that I believe is Biblical.  However, I also see the danger of that emphasis going too far.  Whether it is to support a prosperity Gospel or to restore a balance against such tendencies, we must avoid remaking Jesus into images that are more convenient to our causes and purposes.

What do you think?

There are few things I wanted to catch you up on, so here they are:

First, my lovely parents, Don & Lou Ricci, celebrate today 35 years of marriage. These two have modelled the best of a loving partnership to my brother and I, for which we are very grateful. I love you Mom & Dad! Many happy returns!

Second, after years of saving, paperwork and threatening government officials (legally and non-violently, of course), my wife Kim is now in possession of her Canadian Permanent Residents card! It was a long, frutrating ordeal that has sapped us of our resources, but it is a major step in our lives. Pray for us as we try to scrounge the money for our trip back to Australia to visit Kim’s family for the first time in over 5 years. We know God will provide!

Third, last night at 10pm I had to go to the emergency room because of persistant and painful problems with abdomen. Thankfully, as we are visiting my folks in the small town I grew up in, I was able to avoid the 12 to 18 hour waiting in Winnipeg ERs. I did have to spend the night, but 3 of the staff (including the doctor) were from my home church and the pastor just happened to be through this morning, so he visited and prayed with me. I am feeling better, but I will have to have more tests in the city, so your prayers are appreciated.

Peace!

A few days ago, a close friend of mine sent me an article about the soon to be published letters of Mother Teresa which reveal the years of doubt and even crisis of faith she experienced outside of the public eye.  Made up of letters to her confessors and superiors over a period of 66 years, the bulk of the material will be published as “Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light” by Brian Kolodiejchuk in early September.

While some might suggest that the author seeks to discredit Mother Teresa, Father Kolodiejchuk is, in fact, a senior Missionaries of Charity member.  Further, as her postulator, he is responsible for petitioning for her sainthood, including the collection of materials such as these letters.  While she requested that most of these letters be destroyed upon her death, the Roman Catholic Church overruled her, something I am still uncertain about my stance on.

However, I find the excerpts I have read to be moving, humbling and affirming.  Mother Teresa was a woman of God from which we will continue to learn a great deal from for centuries to come.  However, she was also human, prone to the doubts and failures that all of us face.  All kinds of speculation can be made as to the cause and the quality of her doubt (and thus her faith), but ultimately she lived as faithfully to her vocation of loving God and others as she knew how.

More than ever, her humility, perseverance and love in the face of such crippling uncertainty teaches us what is possible in our own lives.  It destorys the excuses and rationalizations that we use to excuse our own faithfulness, claiming “I’m no Mother Teresa, after all”.  Unlike the saints of the past, where hagiography often paints a sweeter picture than was actual, she lived in an age where ones darkest secrets can be known to the world over in a matter of seconds.  In the end, I think this only deepens my respect and love for this simple nun.

This is one book I am likely to buy on release day.

Lately I have been enjoying some excellent books. Putting aside some of the heavier theological material I have been consuming, I decided to spend some time reading fiction. Lukas McKnight recently posted on the importance of reading fiction, so I thought I would share a bit about some of the titles I have been digging into of late.

The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri – This excellent novel tells the story of a young man born in America to Bengali parents, named for an obscure Russian novelist. Following the journey of this man and his family, the book powerfully draws the reader into the beauty, the challenges and the drama of one culture colliding with another. If you ever wonder it the challenges faced by immigrants entering into our Western culture, this book will open your eyes and heart in a very real way. Lahiri’s previous book, a collection of short stories called “Interpreter of Maladies”, won here the Pulitzer. (NOTE: There is a film made of “The Namesake”, but I recommend reading the book before seeing the film).

Gilead by Marilynn Robinson – While this book is another Pulitzer winner, I picked it up on the suggestion of Scot McKnight, who says he does not enjoy fiction that much. This warm and moving book is written as a letter to an elderly father to his very young son, retelling the story of his life. As the father is a pastor, his reflections on life are rich with spirituality, tempered with a wisdom earned through a long life. It was a restful, but engaging book that I gladly recommend.

The Road by Cormac McCarthy – When I saw this book on the shelf, the first thing that caught my eye was the “Oprah Book Club” sticker. Many might pass over the title on that alone, but not only do I respect Oprah’s literary choices, I also knew that this title had also won the Pulitzer. By far the darkest of the titles I am recommending, this story chronicles the journey of a father and son across the landscape of a desolate, post-apocalytic America. In world now void of order or governance, the powerfully written work is largely free of punctuation, proper names and chapter division, further emphasizing the loss of boundaries in the dying world. For all its darkness and despair, this book also presents a moving portrait of relentless hope driven by love. An excellent book.

The Novel by James Michener – This creative book introduces reader to the world of writing and publishing from the perspective of one of the most prolific historical novelist in America, the late James Michener. While by no means one of his best works, for anyone interested in the realities of the life of a novel, this book is a fascinating read. Broken into four parts- The Author, The Editor, The Critic and The Reader- Michener creates an enjoyable story through which the world of publishing comes alive. While the book was largely rejected by critics, any wannabe novelist would benefit from this decent novel.

What fiction can you recommend?

When I was very young, my parents sent my to Vacation Bible School run by our family church, an Evangelical Covenant Church.  While there, I learned about Jesus.  I learned that He loved me very much and that, in order to save me from my sin and from the consequences of my sins, He died on the cross, paying the price for me.  I was taught that, to accept this free gift of salvation, all I need do was “ask Jesus into my heart”.

Growing up in a good Christian home, this language of sin, salvation and being “born again” was very familiar to me, even if I didn’t understand it fully.  My belief in God was simply a matter of acceptance, a trust I placed in the people I loved, who raised me that it was truth.  Yet, this week there was something clearly different about the presentation.  Even at my young age, I knew that they were looking for me to respond to the invitation.  And so, one night before bed, I asked my Mom to pray with me.  Kneeling by my bed, I accepted Jesus as my Saviour.

Despite the fact that this happened more than 25 years ago, I remember it like it was yesterday.  It was a significant moment in my life, something I cherish deeply to this day.  I mark it as the first and most significant milestone on my journey of faith.  That same small church still supports me, prays for me and loves me as I seek to follow God as I believe He has called me to serve Him.

It will come as no surprise to those involved in the emerging church conversation (from either side of “for” or “against” divide) that the issue of salvation has been a hot topic.  In all honesty, some of the current discussions about the atonement go right over my head (one of the reasons I’m very curious about Scot McKnight’s new book), so if asked I probably will share a fairly “traditional” understanding of the topic.  From my understanding (and in simple terms) I believe that our salvation was purchased for us by Christ suffering, death and resurrection.  As a Christian always learning, I am open to understanding the strengths and weaknesses in the nuances of my beliefs, but generally that is where I stand.

However, without diminishing in the slightest the genuine nature of my childhood experience, I have also come to see how the methods and language that we have adopted around the evangelistic process have resulted in well intentioned, but often flawed influences.  While I believe in absolute truth and that propositions are important in our understanding and proclamation of the Gospel, if we make them the primary or exclusive means of expression, I believe we can rob the Gospel of its deeper meaning and power.

Further, I think the emphasis on the evangelistic, salvation experience can become distracting from the purposes of God for His followers if we “camp out” on them.  What I mean is that, if the sum total of our faith is getting people to say the sinners prayer or ask Jesus into their hearts, we miss the fullness of what God intends for us.  These salvation experiences should be to our faith what a wedding is to our marriage, a holy, inaugural encounter with God’s grace.

Some have said to me that there is nothing more important than people entering into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.  Despite my critiques of individualism in our culture, I still believe that we indeed enter into a relationship with God on a personal, individual level.  However, we do so through our dying to self and resurrecting into His Body.  As Christ identifies His Church as His Body, we see that our salvation is more than just personal.  Further, we see clearly that we are called into submission under His Lordship because He has purposes for us, individually and together.

Jesus says He is the Truth.  He does not simply know or understand the Truth (though that is certainly an important aspect).  Rather, I believe that Jesus was demonstrating that Truth has its greatest power and authority when it is personified.  The person of Jesus is the incarnation of Truth- Truth made manifest in the spirit, soul and body; in the mind, will and emotions; in every facet of His being.  In the same way, as we are called to be like Christ, called together to be His Body, we are called to incarnate Truth in the fullness of our lives (something not achieved by merit, but by grace alone).

In this way, then, to preach the Gospel, the Good News that is a guiding theme through all of Scripture and encompasses more than just offering humanity a “Get Out Of Hell Free” Card, in word only, without the manifest authority of the incarnational Truth, sells the message short.  To this end, justice, love, beauty- all these thing must find expression in the fullness of our “proclamation”.

So does this mean that the very simplistic, well intentioned, but limited message of the Gospel that I received as a child was without worth?  Of course not!  But for the grace of God nothing we do would have any impact, regardless of the accuracy of our propositional doctrines or the authenticity of our missional communities.  As we seek to serve God more authentically, as we attempt to better understand the how and why of our faith, let us not make the mistake of dismissing or devaluing the work that God has done in the past.  Someday we will be held to the same standard and our own human failings will shine as obviously to our children as our parents mistakes do to us.

In my previous post, “Missional Dynamics”, I explored the two foundational dynamics of missional living as seen through the Old Testament Prophets (and affirmed by Christ in His “Jesus Creed”): righteousness and justice.  In the comment section, George asked an important question:

“How does a ‘missional’ Christian stand against the systems/powers of injustice in the world? What are the weapons of your warfare?”

Two sets of Scripture come immediately to mind with this question- Ephesians 6 and 2 Corinthians 10.  Let’s look at some of the specific verses in each chapter:

“Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power.  Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.  For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” (Ephesians 6:10-12, NIV)

And:

“For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.  The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.  We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.  And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.” (2 Corinthians 10:3-6, NIV)

In the Evangelical tradition in which I was raised, these verses would be interpretted to mean that to fight inrighteousness and injustice meant primarily to pray against the “principalities and powers” and live moral lives as an example to the world.  It was suggested that, because our enemies are not “flesh and blood”, we should not resist human injustice (for God would judge them in the end).  At times it even meant that we must concern ourselves with “spiritual matters” (aka prayer, salvation of souls, etc.) and not the “fleshly matter” (politics, poverty, materialism, etc.).

I believe these well-intentioned interpretations dangerous dilute the Biblical mandate for righteousness and justice.  It is built on the false premise of a dualistic view of reality, a gnostic division between the “spiritual” and “fleshly” or natural world.  The resulting consequence of this worldview is a Christianity built upon moral righteousness, but neglecting a significant aspect of what the mandate to live justly means.

While the Ephesians 6 reference teaches us to avoid demonizing people, it does excuse us from confront people who cause and/or perpetuate injustice.  Jesus clearly refused to back down from His prophetic vocation to publically expose and rebuke the abuses of power that furthered the suffering and exploitation of the poor, the marginalized and the lost.  He reflected the prophetic pattern of the Old Testament, yet rooting it in the essential motivation and foundation of love.

The 2 Corinthains 10 reference reminds us that our weapons are not those of the world.  We do not use vengence, violence, etc. to achieve justice, but clearly the weapons we do use are not weak, passive or ineffective.  So what are the weapons we use to fight injustice?  There are many approaches, so let’s look at a few:

1. Opposite Spirit:  I believe with great conviction that one of the most powerful weapons against injustice is living lives in the opposite spirit of that which we seek to overcome.  In the face of greed, vengence and individualism, if we live generously, with grace and through genuine community we have an impact that is significant.

This is perhaps the most difficult, as it requires that we do not allow ourselves to participate in injustice.  It means every aspect of our lives must explore these possibilities.  What good is it to stand against the exploitation of the poor workers, then participate and support businesses that perpetuate the very poverty we seek to overcome?

2. Bringing Light:  Exposing the darkness of injustice to the light of truth is also very important.  This can be done in many ways.  Through research and study, we will begin to see the hidden injustices around us, both large and small.  As we become more aware, it is our duty to bring that awareness to others, teaching them to alter their lives accordingly.  Further, we must speak out publically against these abuses.

While I believe that protest can be one effective way to bring the light, it can also easily get out of control.  I also believe that its effectiveness has diminished in the last few decades, where in the past it has accomplished a great deal.  It can be attractive to many because of its dramatic nature, but unless you are sure it is effective and can be done appropriately, there are many other approaches that are preferable.

3. Prayer: While I said earlier that we cannot minimize our approach to prayer, I did not want to suggest that it was not an important aspect of our warfare.  Rather, I simply did not want us to use this central approach to justify the neglect of our broader call to fight injustice.  Prayer and spiritual warfare are essential, not only as we come up against the powers, but also in centering our own intentions and spirits as we enter battle.

The thing to remember, however, is that we should never ask God in prayer for that which we are not willing to be the answer.  If you ask God to see injustice stopped, the poor cared for, the marginalized embraced, then you must be not only willing to be that answer, but actively pursue God’s will in the matter.  A general rule of thumb is that, unless God says otherwise, our default expectation is that, if we can be, we should be the instrument of God’s purposes.

What other weapons must we use?

Last year, when representing YWAM at local church on their missions weekend, Kim & I had the opportunity of listening the guest speaker, James Cantelon. During his message he shared a story about his time pastoring a significant and large Evangelical congregation in Jerusalem. An all too common experience in his position was to respond to Christians showing up at his door with “prophetic words” from the Lord, most of them bizarre. Inspired by one such encounter (where God supposedly spoke to a woman in Texas through her teddy-bear telling to go to Jerusalem), Cantelon decided make a thorough study of the Old Testament prophets/prophecies, a common source cited by these delusional fanatics.

What emerged for him was a surprise. He already knew that Biblical prophecy had far more to do with “forth-telling” than “fore-telling”, but he saw two themes consistent throughout- a call for Israel to a) return to right relationship with God and b) return to a right relationship with their neighbours. In essence, the message was about righteousness and justice. (For a fuller exploration of his ideas, get his excellent book “When God Stood Up: A Christian Response To AIDS In Africa”).

I believe that this is clearly reflected in the Jesus Creed (ht: Scot McKnight) to love God and love your neighbour. It is easy in our culture, where the word “love” is thrown around so flippantly, to fail to see the connection between love and justice. Certainly we know that being unjust would be unloving, but we fail to see how significant the connection between the two is. In a study of Scripture, we begin to see the theme of justice being central in its emphasis on protecting, serving and loving the marginalized and standing against the systems/powers of injustice in the world.

When we consider, then, what it means to fulfill Christ’s command to love God and others, we must read it through this more thorough Biblical understanding. No longer are we able to see the so called “social gospel” as secondary (or wrong) compared to the “salvation of souls”. Without the whole message of the Gospel and the transformative life of righteousness and justice it requires, we end up preaching and living an anemic expression of faith.

Of course, just as we in the Evangelical church have erred with out under-emphasis on justice, so too can we risk swinging to the opposite extreme of under-emphasizing righteousness. Notice, I am not saying over-emphasizing or over-valuing either, as I am not sure, ultimately, that is possible. It is should never be one at the expense of the other, but both mutually being the life blood of missional, incarnational living.

Therefore, as we seek to discover and live out all that it means to be missional, I believe it is critical that we see these two foundations as critical within that. To incarnationally fulfill our vocation as the Body of Christ, the Church, we must remember and embrace the mutually dependent dynamics of righteousness and justice.

What do you think?

There has been some excellent discussion in the blogosphere of late wrestling with the challenging task of defining the word and concept “missional”.  As a topic that I am very passionate about, I have been enjoying what I been reading.  Brother Maynard has been producing significant quantity (and quality) as he wrestles through some of the ideas and Ed Stetzer is beginning a series on this challenge as well.

While I am planning on weighing in more thoroughly in the weeks to come, I thought I would collect a few of the posts I’ve written that lay out a foundation to my understanding.  I hope you will check them out if you haven’t already read them:

What Is Missional… To Me: This article is my first full post tackling what missional meant to me.

The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional: This is, perhaps, my most thorough look at what I hope to see the church become as it relates to missionality.  I further develop the concepts in a follow up series (Part 1, Part 2 & Part 3).

Missional And Emerging: These two posts- Redemptive Taxonomy & Why I am Missional, Emerging and Emergent- explore the relationship and differences between the concepts of Missional, Emerging and Emergent.

Being Missional In An Age Of Liminality: This post is a more pragmatic look at how missionality requires us to evaluate and change in our expression of community, service and ministry given the shift in time and context.

Pattern Of Missionality:  This three part series specifically looks at what being missional looks like in the context of our missional “third place”, The Dusty Cover bookstore & cafe  (Part 1, Part 2 & Part 3).

Exploring Micro/Macro- Missionality: In this post I try to help navigate the often confusing terrain of the missional conversation by making a distinction between micro- macro- missionality.  It was a follow up, of sorts, to my post on missionality & location.  Possibly my favourite post on this theme.