Energion Direct

Blog

  • "If It's Broke—Fix It!"

    by Steve Kindle

    I'm Right coverI always enjoy hearing from our foreign missionaries. They all hold in common a belief that God always precedes their arrival at the mission field, and prepares the way. This notion is fraught with theological insights. Not the least of these is that God is with people whom we may consider “lost,” yet, there God is. With charity, we can call this a relationship.
    A human characteristic we all share is the tendency to regard our culture superior to all others. This would include our religions. In America, we regard democracy as the best form of government and actively seek to democratize the rest of the (backward) world. This is certainly true for most adherents of Christianity—we want the whole world to adopt our faith.
    This is, of course, an extension into the modern world of ancient tribalism. Not only do we find the presupposition of “We are the best,” but also the accompanying fear of those who aren’t like us. Couple this with the capitalistic notion of “win or lose” and you have the recipe for constant and continuing strife among the religions and peoples of the world.
    What’s to be done about this? If you are a hardcore tribalist, you will insist on winning over all. “We have the truth and you must come to us for salvation,” is the rallying cry. Nothing will change if this predisposition dominates, and it dominates throughout the world. I find it ironic, if not humorous, that those who most exemplify this attitude are the very ones most upset when they find it in others. “Radical fundamentalist Muslims” deplore evangelistic Christianity. Fundamentalist Christians deplore “radical Muslims.” They are two sides of the same coin.
    It has been said often that the only hope for world peace is that people give up exclusive claims about their own religion and accept that they are not the only ones with the truth. This is surely at least partially true. Religious strife is as ancient as Cain and Abel (the proper way to sacrifice), and as recent as ISIL. Yet it is an impractical solution; it will never happen, at least for the foreseeable future. But this doesn’t mean that the adherents of these religions can’t take this step.
    Gandhi is reputed to have said, “Be the change you want to see.” If you feel that the answer to world peace is acknowledging the value of other’s truths, at least for themselves if not for you, then by living this out, there is one less person in the world agitating for division. Who knows? It might catch on.
    When I read in the Bhagavad Gita, for instance, “They alone see truly who see the Lord the same in every creature, who see the deathless in the hearts of all that die. Seeing the same Lord everywhere, they do not harm themselves or others. Thus they attain the supreme goal,” I marvel at the truth therein, and my soul is enlarged. I love meeting people of other Books, and often find my own self failing in comparison to their lives and loves.
    Now I know the objections to this approach are many. “The Bible says…” and “We have been given the Great Commission,” just to name two. Fundamentalists will never abandon these “truths.” It’s true that the Great Faiths are not teaching the same thing, but I believe that they are capable of producing the same kind of person—loving, considerate of the earth, peaceful—and that is the point, after all, isn’t it? In fact, if Christianity produces hateful people, willing to kill others for its “truth”, who condemn all who disagree, and hold them in contempt, why bother with it?
    If I must go into all the world and preach the gospel, I will affirm that God loves all people, that God wants all people to love each other, and that God supports all who obey the Great Commandments regardless of where it is found or who said it. And you know what? God will already be there ahead of me, teaching the world in its own way the Truth.

  • Love the Questions: Incubating instead of Answering

    by Kent Ira Groff

    Table Talk coverLiminality is a zone of ambivalence, ambiguity, even disorientation, as anthropologist Victor Turner’s pioneer research shows. But it’s simultaneously a “realm of pure possibility where novel configurations of ideas and relations may arise,” says Turner (The Forest of Symbols). That’s one value for practicing centering prayer, where you have no agenda except to empty the mind of thoughts, to cultivate liminal space that leaves you prepared for surprise.
    “Love the questions… live the questions,” says the poet Rilke. How can we cultivate the value of questioning? By honest praying as in the Psalms: first, to develop genuine awareness of self, others and God; second, to claim vocational empowerment—to seek an invitation in the stress; and third, to practice compassion for self and others. In Kitchen Table Wisdom, Rachel Naomi Remen writes, “An unanswered question is a fine traveling companion. It sharpens your eye for the road.”
    Among all four Gospels, Jesus is asked 183 questions, directly or indirectly. How many does he answer directly? Three! And Jesus asks 307 questions—often in response to another’s question: “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus asks, “What is written in the law? What do you read there?” (see Luke 10:25-37). By giving questions back to people, by getting them buzzing with his own questions and Zen-like parables, Jesus creates liminal spaces for churning, ruminating, incubating.
    Irritation to Invitation
    I feel the barbs of this little irritation,
    cycling round, coursing in my veins.
    Ah, is there within the irritation
    some invitation I might waste
    if I suppress it—or in haste express it
    raw? Or let it gnaw at my heart?
    If I do nothing, it will do something
    I do not intend. How can I take
    this attitude of annoyance and let it
    turn to gratitude and grace? I pray
    for a middle way. Yet well I know that
    I will come upon this neutral zone
    in a dark wood of waiting….
    There the way is incubating….
    I’m advocating the use of questions for yourself as well as for others, and not only as a method of creativity, but as a prayer practice to keep your own heart open.
    Most of you reading this spend time with friends and colleagues who turn to you for wisdom in work, in families, in board meetings, in one-to-one and community settings. By learning to convert an insight into a thoughtful question, you may offer everyone several priceless gifts.
    You slow down the rapid pace of conversation. While you’re converting your insight into a question, you have to pause—a creative, prayerful space. When you give back another question to whomever you’re with, it creates a second pause within that person. You’ve practiced kenosis—empty space—not just for your own soul but also for the other’s soul. You’ve given the gift of liminal spaces.
    Playing around with moment-by-moment emptiness can free my ego from the need to act smart. Alan Alda of TV’s M*A*S*H fame went on to host the PBS “Scientific American Frontiers” for over ten years, interviewing renowned scientists. Speaking at Chautauqua Institution, New York, Alda told how when he tried to act smart by asking brilliant questions, it didn’t work. The scientist would answer back with technical information, losing both the audience and Alda. He learned to ask dumb questions, in short, to practice “negative capability.” Experimenting with a “dumb question” frees me from needing to be the answer person by acting intelligent or by fixing my neighbor’s problems.

     

  • Felix culpa: “a good mistake”

    by Kent Ira Groff

    Table Talk coverSometimes you can reflect on a failed project or a dumb little thing you did last week—in light of St. Augustine’s concept of felix culpa. Often it’s translated, “happy fault or fortunate fault,” referring to the fault/fall of Adam and Eve, which becomes the occasion for each of us to realize the “grace in the grit” as each of us leaves the garden our own less than perfect lives. I like to translate it “a good mistake.”
    Only retroactively do we see good coming out of a failed experiment. But even to frame failure as an “experiment” begins to redeem it. Thomas Edison could say he didn’t fail, but found 1,000 ways how not to make the light bulb. Proactively, what we can do is pray to notice flecks of grace in the gaff or the goof—that it can become a good mistake.
    “Drops of experience” are never wasted, according to mathematician philosopher Alfred North Whitehead. When you lose computer data on new members or drive two hours to a hospital to visit a cancer patient who was just discharged or eke away hours learning new technology for a website, tell yourself: All that time I spent praying for new members or for folks with cancer or for our congregation to connect with tech generations.
    Here’s a really good mistake. In September 1928 Alexander Fleming returned to the laboratory of St. Mary’s Hospital in London after being on holiday for a couple of weeks. He discovered Petri dishes that his students mistakenly left in an incubator had formed mold in the dank atmosphere. Fleming noticed—and noticing is the miracle of any genuine discovery—that the mold had killed a ring of bacteria. Fleming’s surprise discovery of penicillin is a real life story of how a good mistake created the gift of healing for generations. His vacation led to his vocation.
    Micromanaging. The need to control people and situations is one of the demonic expressions of perfectionism. At the root of the demon of micromanaging lies a secret fear of shame: I don’t want another’s half-botched job to reflect poorly on my own self-competence. Another demon behind micromanaging is failing to trust in God by not trusting people.
    Humility in a strange way is actually spiritual self-confidence: confidence that you can celebrate the gifts of others, rather than belittle them, while at the same time claiming your own. It’s a God-confidence that there are enough gifts for both your neighbor and you to claim your potential for the good of the cosmos, without exploiting or belittling each other. And that’s a good definition of Greek telios: mature—even though not perfect.
    Spiritual Practice: “Let It Be” Listen to the Beatles’ song “Let It Be” (on iTunes or CD). “Mother Mary” refers to Paul McCartney’s dream of his mother, who died when he was fourteen. The title also can be heard as a subtle take on Mary’s response when the angel Gabriel announced she would bear a child—seemingly impossible: “Let it be to me according to your word” (Luke 1:38). As you hear “Let it be…” in your mind imagine letting go of an issue that you can’t control, or accepting a challenge that may want to “birth” itself in you.

     

  • Traces of grace in the grit: Holy humus!

    by Kent Ira Groff

    Table Talk coverA woman on silent retreat was praying when she and I heard a construction worker say, “Holy shit!” Later she and I queried: Can this pop phrase mask our human yearning for life’s “waste” to morph into wholeness—even holiness?
    Maybe some folks are “praying” without knowing it—that life’s lowest places might be consecrated: “Holy humus!” Why not use that in our liturgies? The expression can mean more than venting your spleen. We can pray to see traces of grace in the grit of our own or others’ defeats and discouragements.
    Grit Seasoning
    While I do this grit
    work, season
    the irksome pieces
    with enough
    Ahas! to remind me
    of the reason.
    The “reason” is your life mission—your “why to live,” your purpose for being on this earth, your passion (Resource Three in Clergy Table Talk). Such Ahas! come unbidden, by surprise—often right when we feel our own brokenness, even shame and unworthiness.
    In a hospital Clinical Pastoral Education training program, a new student chaplain was assigned to visit Marie Smith, a patient with terminal cancer; she had called to request a visit. It was this seminarian’s first real encounter with death. As he made his way down the hallway in the oncology unit, he was overwhelmed with the stench of necrotic flesh. Upon knocking and then entering the room, he felt overwhelmed by her ashen color. He thought he would throw up. But from somewhere in the back brain, he remembered that it can help at such times to sit down and put your head in your hands. So he sat that way for four or five minutes, and the sickness did lessen.
    But when he looked at the woman, he felt so embarrassed by what had happened that he got up and left. Feeling he had failed, he went to the meditation room to sort things out. He decided he would tell his supervisor the next day that he was resigning from the program, and maybe even quitting seminary. Perhaps this ministry thing was not for him.
    But the next morning, before he could find the supervisor, she found him. Marie had just called again: Was he the chaplain who visited her? He thought, Oh no.
    “Well, this time she just wanted to say thanks. After she called yesterday, she wished she hadn’t; she was so sick she didn’t feel like talking, and surely didn’t want any minister preaching to her.” “But somehow,” the patient said, “the chaplain who came must have sensed that. Because he just came in, sat down, bowed his head and prayed for me for maybe five minutes. And then he gave me the most loving glance, and then left. Of all my times at this hospital, this is the most meaningful visit I ever received.”
    Once when I told this story, someone asked, “But the chaplain wasn’t really praying, was he?” Another said, “Oh yes! He was praying with his gut.” His intense identity with the patient’s pain was his visceral praying, his yearning for her with “bowels and mercies” (splagchna in Greek; see Philippians 2:1, KJV).
    Buddhist and Christian metaphors convey the same reality: that beauty rises out of the garbage, that even wasted experiences can morph into new life. A Buddhist scripture says, “A sweet-smelling, lovely lotus may grow upon a heap of rubbish thrown by the highway” (Dhammapada 58-59). And where is Jesus crucified, but on a tree at “Golgotha,” the town garbage heap?

  • Living in God's Evolving Creation

    Living in God's Evolving Creation

    by Dr. Robert Cornwall

    Darwin coverSince the beginning of time human beings have been trying to explain how things came to be. Today we often turn to science for answers. The most respected answers assume some form of evolutionary development occurring over vast periods of time. Those who disagree with this assessment most often do so on the basis of religion. They deem the scientific consensus to be in conflict with their reading of the biblical story, especially that found in the first three chapters of Genesis. For a significant number of Christians Charles Darwin is the enemy. To embrace evolution is to dismiss God. There are others of us who disagree. We believe that one can hold both truths at the same time. God is Creator and science suggests that evolution is the means by which that creation unfolded.
    About a decade back I signed a public letter as a member of the clergy affirming my recognition of the scientific consensus. I have tried to have my congregations observe some form of Evolution Sunday/Weekend. In part I’ve done this because I believe that the credibility of the Christian faith requires this. That is, if we dismiss science as some kind of enemy of the faith, then we hold the gospel hostage to an earlier scientific vision.
    There’s another reason why I think it is important to try to hold in proper tension my faith in God the Creator and the scientific consensus. That concerns the way in which we live on earth. The scientific consensus tells us that the earth is experiencing significant climate change. 2015 is on target to be the warmest year on record. Each year the earth seems to be getting warmer. Polar ice caps are melting. Deserts are advancing. Weather becomes more unpredictable. It is unfortunate that many of those reject this scientific consensus are Christians. They reject it in large part because they’ve already discounted science. They’ve embraced forms of pseudo-science to explain the origins of the earth. So it’s no surprise that they are attracted to forms of pseudo-science that reject the premise that humans are contributing to climate change. Some Christians have embraced the premise that since God appears to give “Dominion” over the earth to the human creation, then we are given permission to despoil the earth. Indeed, some who embrace an apocalyptic vision of the faith believe that since we’re in the last days there’s no reason not to use up all the resources at hand. Why worry about fossil fuels? Why worry about polluting rivers and streams and the air? Why worry about changing climate or depleting ozone layer?
    That is one way of seeing things, but I’m not sure it’s faithful to science or faith. Growing numbers of people, including evangelical Christians have begun rethink our relationship to the creation. They have begun to think in terms of stewardship of resources rather than dominion over them. Science can be an important partner in this effort. It can reveal to us the way in which we misuse or overuse the creation. I’m tempted to use the word resources, but that is probably not the best way of speaking. Instead, let us think of the Creation as a gift of God. As icons/images of God we’ve been given responsibility to tend the garden. To do this we need to listen for God’s voice, which can be revealed in Scripture but also through science.
    Charles Darwin found himself at odds with God, or so he thought. He considered himself something of an agnostic and even an atheist. Yet, it is said that he went to church with his wife who was a devout Anglican. So in the spirit of that expression of solidarity, perhaps we too can worship God in the presence of Charles Darwin. We do so by taking both science and faith seriously. We express this solidarity in the way we treat God’s Creation.

  • To Whom Do We Give Allegiance?

    by Dr. Robert Cornwall

    Allwgiance coverAs a child I had a classmate who remained seated as the rest of us stood to say the “Pledge of Allegiance.” While we pledged our allegiance to the nation symbolized by the flag, thinking nothing of the religious implications of our act, my classmate, who happened to be a Jehovah’s Witness, had been taught that to stand and recite the pledge would break one of the Ten Commandments—the one about having no graven images. At the time I didn’t understand why he refused to stand and say this innocuous statement, but when I think about it now it does give me pause. While his religious community refuses to acknowledge any government besides God’s kingdom (they don’t vote or serve in the military either), most of us live with a Constantinian vision.
    Most Christians don’t see anything wrong with pledging allegiance to the symbol of our national identity. In fact, many American Christians have equated their Christianity with their national loyalty. After all, isn’t the United States a “Christian Nation”? Yes, God and Country go together! The Scouts even have a badge you can earn that celebrates this. Of course, other nations have felt the same way. In fact, they have assumed that God was on their side during serious conflicts. The German Christian movement even reconfigured the Christian faith to fit its ideology. I wonder if we do the same? Do we discount the teachings of Jesus when they come into conflict with our national aspirations?
    Symbols are important. So, if you go into many churches, including my own, you will find an American flag placed somewhere in the sanctuary. I must confess my own unease with the presence of the flag, but thus far I’ve not made an issue of it. Fortunately, our flag sits at the back of the sanctuary and not in the chancel. What I find more puzzling are the churches that choose to fly large American flags out in front of their buildings. More often than not the American flag stands above the “Christian” flag (I’ve always wondered who decided this flag, with its red cross on a blue field in the corner of an otherwise white flag, should represent Christians, or at least Protestants). It seems to me that when we make the flag such a prominent symbol, we give pride of place to nation over the realm of God. I know that my Jehovah’s Witness classmate all those years ago would find all of this befuddling.
    When we say the pledge of allegiance we are expressing our loyalty to the nation in which we hold citizenship. I really don’t have a major problem with this. I’m quite happy with my American citizenship, at least to a point. I think we can have a variety of allegiances. I am, for instance, a life-long San Francisco Giants fan. When it comes to baseball, they have my allegiance. My family has my allegiance as well. I made a covenant with Cheryl some thirty plus years ago to be her husband. But, having said that, none of these allegiances is ultimate.
    For those of us who continue to recite the Lord’s Prayer on a regular basis (my congregation continues to say this prayer each week), I believe this prayer which we believe Jesus gave us is our pledge of ultimate allegiance. With this prayer offered up to God whose name is hallowed, we ask that God’s kingdom would come and God’s will would be done “on earth as it is in heaven.” There is an expectation present in this prayer that God would be engaged in something transformative, and that we’re agreeing to be part of God’s work. Yes, when we offer this prayer, we are making a statement of loyalty to God’s vision and offering ourselves as agents of that vision. It isn’t that we will bring the realm of God into existence, but we make ourselves available to God’s realm.
    I realize that some might find this affirmation of God’s realm a bit disconcerting. They might think that I’m recommending some kind of theocracy. In a way, I am, but not in the usual way of thinking. This isn’t a divine government imposed by an earthly realm. This is instead a recognition that our ultimate loyalty belongs to God, and when loyalties conflict, and they will, we must choose the realm of God. The church is called to be an expression of that realm on earth as a reflection of God’s realm in heaven. So, no I’m not advocating making the United States a Christian nation. I’m advocating that we recognize that God’s realm is present on earth as in heaven!

  • The Unsettling Voice of Public Faith

    by Bob Cornwall

    Cover1The day that Pope Francis addressed a joint session of Congress, and through them the American people, I’m sure that some felt this was an unwelcome mixture of church and state. It is true that the Pope is a head of state (Vatican City is a recognized nation), but he wasn’t speaking as head of state. He was speaking as a religious leader who has become for many a voice of conscience in a world being torn asunder by political and religious turmoil. Critics, many of them Catholics, faulted him for taking up an issue such as climate change. He should stick to religion they said, though many of those same critics would welcome his support for their own causes. Those who lauded him for his strong stand on climate change and immigration may fault him for not going all the way the other direction.
    So, here’s my take on things. It is difficult to separate faith and public life. Faith is personal, but it is not private. That is, if faith has any bearing on our lives it will influence the way we live our lives public. It should cause us to stop and consider the way we vote, spend our money, engage in human conversation. Christianity and Judaism both affirm two great commands – love of God and love of neighbor. Jesus brings the two together, but both appear in the Hebrew Bible. The Golden Rule emerges out of this call to love one’s neighbor.
    I believe that faith has a place in the public square. I have engaged in community organizing for quite a number of years. I’ve lobbied politicians and government officials, seeking to encourage them to pursue the common good, a good that I believe is rooted in my faith. The temptation, of course, is for me to so align my social justice work with political affiliation that little daylight exists between faith and politics. What that happens, I put myself in service to political ends that might not in the end serve the common good.
    When I listened to the Pope speak and read his message to Congress, I found him to be appealing to our better angels. He spoke of his concern for the least of these – women, children, the poor, the immigrant, the refugee. He called on us as a nation to remember our own immigrant roots. He embraced his role as bridge builder and called on the nations to pursue policies that would bring peace and justice. The problem for many in America (and elsewhere) is that we want to label people. We want to impose a sense of order on them. Therefore, pundits try to cast the Pope in political terms, and therefore on a left/right axis. The problem is that he doesn’t fit. He may seem to stand with the left on many economic issues, but his support for family might resonate more with conservatives. His championing of attempts to ameliorate the challenges of climate change put him in line with the left, but he remains theologically conservative. Those who understand his demeanour will say that he places the emphasis on mercy rather than on toeing the line. That’s not liberalism; that’s simply being gracious.
    As a good preacher, Pope Francis is able to bring into the conversation sources of wisdom that lie beyond religion. In his speech he simply attempted to bring to our attention what should be our national vocation, and that is to pursue the common good. Thus, he pushed Congress to do just that:
    Each son or daughter of a given country has a mission, a personal and social responsibility. Your own responsibility as members of Congress is to enable this country, by your legislative activity, to grow as a nation. You are the face of its people, their representatives. You are called to defend and preserve the dignity of your fellow citizens in the tireless and demanding pursuit of the common good, for this is the chief aim of all politics. A political society endures when it seeks, as a vocation, to satisfy common needs by stimulating the growth of all its members, especially those in situations of greater vulnerability or risk. Legislative activity is always based on care for the people. To this you have been invited, called and convened by those who elected you.
    Most Americans want to see this nation being one of greatness. It may be aspirational or maybe it’s self-delusion. The question is, what is greatness? The Pope challenged us with these words:
    A nation can be considered great when it defends liberty as Lincoln did, when it fosters a culture which enables people to “dream” of full rights for all their brothers and sisters, as Martin Luther King sought to do; when it strives for justice and the cause of the oppressed, as Dorothy Day did by her tireless work, the fruit of a faith which becomes dialogue and sows peace in the contemplative style of Thomas Merton.
    There are some in our nation who believe that there should be no wall between church and state, and by that they usually mean that they want their version of “church” to define the “state.” In an increasingly pluralistic nation where the Protestant hegemony no longer exists and even Christianity lacks the dominance it once had, that is probably not going to happen (without imposing religion on an unwilling populace). Others would see religion completely banned from public life. Put it in the home and the religious building, but don’t bring it out in to the light. Others of us, believe that faith and public life not only can coexist, but the public square needs these voices (I put the emphasis here on voices, for there are many different faith voices). The question is, can these voices speak in a way that lifts up the common good without compromising one’s deepest values?
    Perhaps the best sign that such is possible is seen in the decision of Pope Francis to skip lunch with the nation’s power brokers (leaders of Congress) so he could have lunch with the homeless. Some commented that he seemed a lot happier in the company of the latter than the former! That may be truly unsettling!

  • Hospitality and Our Global Context

    by Chris Freet

    Hospitality coverThe following is an excerpt from the book A New Look at Hospitality as a Key to Missions      p. 3-4.
    ——————————————————
    A key issue concerning the American church and the role of hospitality involves the role of migration, immigration and refugees. Today, most nations face issues related to globalization. The world is becoming smaller and smaller. A person can be anywhere on the globe via plane in about a day. Technology enables people to communicate across the world with the click of a button. This has greatly impacted the movement of people groups. For example, M. Daniel Carroll R., in his book dealing with immigration in the West from a Christian perspective, observes, “The greater part of Christians now live outside North America and Western Europe. Some characterize this movement of Christianity’s center of gravity as the…‘globalizing’ of the faith’” (Christians at the Border, p. 60). Similarly, Andrew Walls also notes, “By 1980, the balance [of Christianity] had shifted again, southwards; Africa is now the continent most notable for those that profess and call themselves Christians.” (The Missionary Movement in Christian History, p. 6) This shift brings with it contemporary issues which the Western Church will have to work through. Not least of these issues involves the role of hospitality and the American church’s place in welcoming others from around the globe.
    Awareness of this southward shift is present and still growing in the West. The landscape has changed but continues to evolve. What role will the West take in this as a result? One point is clear: The American church can either embrace the shift or deny it. If the latter is chosen then the American church could potentially miss out on a great spiritual opportunity—perhaps even spiritual renewal. If “pride-of-place” is maintained by the American church, thus fighting against or ignoring the global shift within Christianity and all the potential benefits and opportunities for growth, then stagnation or even further decline among some segments of American Christianity seems possible. As Ogletree warns, “Ethnocentricity is egoism in cultural mode” (Hospitality to the Stranger, p. 49). Further, Carroll reminds us that a surprising number of immigrants, migrants and refugees are Christians (Christians at the Border, pp. 60–61). This information is potentially vital for the American church which currently finds itself in the midst of figuring out where to land in issues related to immigration. Indeed, many scholars, including Soong-Chan Rah, hold strongly to the conviction that “immigrants and ethnic minorities are saving American Christianity” (The Next Evangelicalism, p. 74). To fail to pay any attention to this reality in America could possibly mean to miss out on the work of God in this nation.”
    Have you seen or heard of any local churches welcoming and ministering to diaspora people groups? How has your local church welcomed the stranger or foreigner? How might God want to use diaspora people groups to breathe new life in the Western church?

     

  • Hospitality and the Western Culture

    by Chris Freet

    Hospitality coverOver the last five to ten years or so there appears to be an upsurge in the focus upon hospitality within the Western church culture. Whether it is in the form of books (of which there seem to be many), lectures, or seminary/college courses, hospitality is experiencing a renewed interest for which I am personally grateful. In my last post I mentioned that in the pages of scripture, especially the New Testament, hospitality seems to be a defining characteristic of the church. While this renewed focus on hospitality is very welcome, I think any blind application of it could meet with frustration unless we first examine briefly our Western culture.
    Throughout the Majority World hospitality seems to be more natural or at more ingrained and a regular part of the lifestyles and cultures. Within our Western culture there are certain mindsets, world views, or manners of thought which need to be at least noticed if the Western church desires to embrace the Christ-like characteristic of hospitality. Our Western emphasis upon individualism is one that is usually referenced in many sources as something that works against hospitality. But what other mindsets might we hold onto without realizing it that may work against the practice of hospitality? In my book A New Look at Hospitality as a Key to Missions I mention individualism along with other possibilities. Here are just a few:
    Time and Hospitality
    While on a visit to Kenya in 2012, our hosts jokingly commented that most Westerners are captive to “the power of the watch.” We can see this in such phrases as “Time is money.” We like things to be neat and orderly. If we can’t schedule it then it most likely stirs up feelings of chaos, disorder and even confusion. The practice of hospitality may involve messiness and unpredictability. After all, we are talking about an encounter with a stranger who bears the image of Christ.
    Order, Control and Hospitality
    Similarly related to the issue of time is order and control. Hospitality, according to biblical record, appears to have an element of surprise. Whether it is the example of Abraham or Lot (Genesis 18, 19) welcoming the strangers in a moment of surprise, or New Testament believers welcoming missionaries and seeing them on their way (3 John 8; Hebrews 13:2), surprise seems to be the norm. However, within our Western culture we value control and order. We plan everything and as a result, we don’t seem to do well with surprise. We need to clean the house first, after all.
    Can you think of any other Western mindsets or thoughts that could work against the practice of hospitality? How have you shown hospitality to a stranger?

     

  • Hospitality as a Hallmark of Christianity

    by Chris Freet

    Hospitality coverIs hospitality something that has, in a sense, been co-opted in the West? Perhaps a quick Google search could shed some light on this for us. The result of this search brings up websites pertaining to restaurant and hotel management topics and issues. It would indeed seem that hospitality in the West has become an industry focused upon making a profit. When compared with the teachings of Christian scripture it would seem that there is a divide between biblical hospitality and what is passed off as hospitality within our Western culture today.
    Defining Hospitality
    A simple definition of hospitality is “welcoming the stranger/other.” Our cultural understanding of hospitality seems to thrive on welcoming the stranger, but for a small (or not so small) fee. The Western business model of hospitality appears to view the stranger/other as a commodity or a “consumer” rather than a blessing or an opportunity to build bridges with someone who may be different in some way. I understand that our culture is not equated with the Church, so I want to be careful not to equate the two. However, has the Church in the West been effected by this business approach to hospitality? I think if we take an honest look at ourselves we could say “yes, we have.”
    God as Host
    I think (and I argue in my book) that hospitality is rooted in the very nature of God himself. Within the creation account according to Genesis chapters 1 and 2, we witness what I call God’s “great invitation” to humanity. The Garden belongs to God; it is his “home” into which he invites humanity. In this great invitation, humanity finds identity, purpose and life. These elements reside at the core of the practice of hospitality. Whenever a stranger is welcomed in, a space is created in which these elements begin to work, thus changing both guest and host in profound ways. In light of this, the fall of humanity recorded in Genesis 3 can be viewed as humanity rebelling against God’s hospitality. The result of this is a closed door, a significant picture within the realm of hospitality.
    Hospitality and the Church
    In the pages of the New Testament we see that hospitality is mentioned numerous times (cf. Acts 28:7; Romans 12:13; 1 Timothy 3:2; 5:10; Titus 1:8; Hebrews 13:2; 1 Peter 4:9; 3 John 8). Within each context the focus is on the practice of hospitality within the life of the Church. Hospitality is to be a hallmark of the Christian faith. In part, it is tied to the reality and it is a reminder that we, too, are strangers in this place so the church needs to welcome the stranger/other. The church is to show hospitality to (1) other believers and (2) those outside the Church. As followers of the God who has shown hospitality to us, especially in Jesus Christ, we are to be a people that imitate God by showing hospitality to those around us.
    In what ways have you, your family, or your Church family experienced or practiced hospitality?

Energion Direct
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.