A Taste of Things to Come: The Church in Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians

Recently, I wrote a paper for my New Testament Theology class. The assignment was to trace a theme in one of Paul’s letters. I chose to write about Paul’s teaching about the church in the book of Ephesians. It is titled, “A Taste of Things to Come: The Church in Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians.” I posted it in parts, so as to make it easier to read in this format. It is an academic paper, not a sermon, so it might have some technical terms in it, although I think it should be fairly readable. If you have any questions, let me know.

• Introduction and Background to Ephesians
• The Context of the Church: Cosmic Unity
• The Composition of the Church: Racial Unity
• The Calling of the Church: Dynamic Unity
• The Conduct of the Church: Practical Unity
• Implications for the Church Today

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 6): Implications for the Church Today

What would it mean for Christians today to take seriously what Ephesians teaches about the church?

At the most basic level, it would mean giving the church a central place in our thinking and life. For many American Protestants especially, there is a tendency to think of the church as a secondary feature of Christianity. We think the main thing in Christianity is personal salvation and growth. The church is at best sort of a helpful addition to assist this, providing means to personal salvation and growth. Ephesians shatters this small vision, placing the church in an essential place in the plan of cosmic redemption. A solid “theology of redemption should inevitably lead to a vibrant ecclesiology in so far as the essence of this redemption consists in the move away from the alienation…towards personal reunification in Christ with God and neighbour.”[1] The church is not an optional, secondary, or merely helpful institution. It is absolutely fundamental to God’s plan for bringing reconciliation to the world, both in heaven and on earth.

Furthermore, if we take Ephesians seriously, our view of the church will take on a much larger scope. If the church is “God’s pilot scheme for the reconciled universe of the future,”[2] then it is inappropriate to reduce it to an arena of personal devotion or even merely a spiritual support network. It is the place where God’s redemptive plan for all of creation is first enacted. This means the church must concern itself with all of life, from economics to politics to social issues. Our worship, community, and growth are all contributing to God’s display of his multi-faceted wisdom before the world and the spiritual forces. We dare not reduce this to mere private piety. The church does impact the world by making nice, “spiritual” people, but by radically re-orienting all the structures of life. Christ’s eschatological reconciliation will impact all of society, every realm of creation and human culture, transforming every institution. The church is the vanguard community for experiencing this transformation. If we fail to focus on the whole scope of human life, opting for an internal or merely ethical spirituality, we will fail to live out our identity in Christ.

Taking Ephesians’ teaching on the church seriously also means the direct confrontation of racism and the pursuit of practical unity. North American churches have grown content with congregational hegemony. The well-known quote is unfortunately accurate: the most racially divided hour of the week is on Sunday morning. According to Paul in Ephesians, this is an affront to the gospel because it denies the cosmic reconciling power of Christ. Bruce Fong says, “What Jesus initiated in the Church demands that there be visible unity regardless of race, language or culture.”[3] While it is not clear what this will look like in today’s context, it does mean we need to start having difficult and honest conversations with churches that are different from us, both down the street and around the world.

Even where race is not a factor, practical unity among Christians is a non-negotiable. From individual Christians to local churches to ministry organizations to denominations, Christians must promote tangible oneness. This includes the pursuit of forgiveness between divided Christians, tangible forms of cooperation in ministry, and participating in shared corporate worship across dividing lines. We must remember that in the end, all churches and Christians will be completely united in Christ. That is the inevitable result of Christ’s reconciling work. That means that right now, being one with our brothers and sisters should be a paramount concern. It is our responsibility as Christ’s people to pursue real, visible unity. To not do so “would be completely inconsistent with being God’s masterpiece of reconciliation and ultimately with his purposes of summing up everything as a totality in Christ.”[4]

The church is God’s new creation, foreshadowing the coming re-creation of the whole world. Let us live out the cosmic reconciling power of Christ so that angels, demons, and people all races will marvel at God’s magnificent wisdom and praise his glorious grace.

---

[1] Turner, “Unity,” 162.

[2] F. F. Bruce, quoted in O’Brien, Ephesians, 63.

[3] Fong, “Racial,” 572.

[4] O’Brien, Ephesians, 64.

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 5): Conduct of the Church in Ephesians

Conduct of the Church: Practical Unity (4:17-6:9)

Starting in 4:17, Paul launches into specific instructions on how the church should conduct itself, emphasizing the concrete, practical practice of unity. Throughout this section, Paul’s underlying logic remains firmly fixed to God’s unifying and reconciling purposes in Christ. He is calling “readers to live in a way that corporately expresses the cosmic unity God has inaugurated”[1] by renouncing “the old-creation patterns of alienated and alienating behavior”[2] His exhortations are aimed at things “which cause dissension and alienation within the body, that is, they are sins which work against the body’s unity.”[3] By targeting anger, brawling, unwholesome talk, sexual immorality, and drunkenness, he attacks sins that damage healthy community life. Likewise, he encourages behaviors that build up unity in Christ, such as forgiveness, corporate singing, compassion, and mutual submission. The communal logic of Paul’s instructions can be seen clearly when he condemns lying. He says “each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor.” This is not just a detached moral command. Rather, it is the natural outcome of believing that “we are all members of one body.”[4] If we belong to each other, then there is no reason to deceive each other.[5] This is an ethic rooted in our fundamental identity as people in community because of Christ.

All relationships are transformed in the context of the church, the arena of God’s redemption in Christ. This carries over into every relationship with a fellow believer, including the relationship between slaves and masters,[6] children and parents,[7] and husbands and wives.[8] These relationships all become tangible expressions of the eschatological cosmic reconciliation in Christ that the church experiences. Paul unpacks the marriage relationship most completely, connecting it directly to the redeeming work of Christ for his church by comparing the husband to Christ and the wife to the church. Marriage no longer exists in a vacuum, but instead becomes “a pledge of God’s purposes for the unity of the cosmos.”[9] Furthermore, by connecting Christ’s love for the church with God’s original picture of marriage in Eden,[10] we see that marriage is a specific arena where God’s new creation is exemplified.[11] The unity of the church which foreshadows the unity of all creation in Christ works its way into the unity of specific husbands and wives. Andreas Kostenberger explains:

“Marriage is not an end in itself; it is part of a life under God in the church and in the world. Marriage is a relationship in the process of restoration. To the extent that a married couple sees itself as part of the global eschatological movement toward ‘summing up all things in Christ’ (Eph 1:9), it will experience fulfillment and share the perspective on marriage Paul presents in the passage at hand.”[12]

Marriage is the most vivid example of this, but the same is true of all our interactions with fellow Christians. All our specific relationships are to be transformed in light of our participation in the church, the community that experiences now the eschatological cosmic reconciliation in Christ. One day God will sum up all things in Christ, and for the church that reality should begin filtering down into our specific, everyday relationships.

For all his emphasis on the cosmic, universal nature of church in Ephesians, Paul does not dodge the issue of concrete life in a local community of Christians. Paul does not want us to simply love other Christians with a vague or general sense of “oneness.” Merely having a pleasant feeling of “unity” is not enough. Paul will not let us neglect the more difficult and less inspiring work of specific relationships with a brother or sister who has a name, a history, real sin, and actual problems. How does the church display the cosmic reconciliation wrought by Christ? Through the nitty-gritty of seeking unity with our fellow Christians.

---

[1] Ibid., 148.

[2] Ibid., 190.

[3] O’Brien, Ephesians, 64-65.

[4] Eph 5:25

[5] Interestingly, not lying is part of the eschatological promises of the OT. cf. Zech 8:16.

[6] Eph 6:5-9

[7] Eph 6:1-4

[8] Eph 5:22-33

[9] O’Brien, Ephesians, 55.

[10] Eph 5:31

[11] Turner, “Unity,” 156.

[12] Andreas J. Kostenberger, “The Mystery of Christ and the Church: Head and Body, ‘One Flesh’,” Trinity Journal 12NS (1991): 93.

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 4): Calling of the Church in Ephesians

Calling of the Church: Dynamic Unity (4:1-16)

Because, in the divine economy, the church bears the special privilege of experiencing Christ’s cosmic reconciliation ahead of time, it also has a high calling which it must live up to, the call to unity. The foundation of this unity is the oneness of the blessings given to the church:

“There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”^[1]

Because of the unity of God and his gifts, the church must be one. Division is foreign to its nature and a contradiction of what God has called it to be. This unity is not a human accomplishment, but founded on the work of the triune God.

Paul is clear that this unity is not the result of uniformity, but harmonious diversity. God has given the whole church one Spirit, one hope, one faith, and so on, but he has given a plurality of gifts to the individuals that make up the church. “To each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it.”[2] Primary among these diverse gifts are apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers.[3] In the body of Christ, they “function as ligaments, providing connections between the various parts.”[4] These specific roles have been given to the church to “to prepare God’s people for works of service.”^[5] Everyone in the church has been given gifts by God that must be coordinated and used for the benefit of the whole church. Each part must do its work.[6]

It is likewise clear that the church’s unity is not a static reality, but a dynamic one. The church is constantly growing, being “built up, until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.”^[7] The church is pictured as a developing organism, “not a dead, unapproachable, mighty or rich body, but is Christ’s living and growing body.”[8] The church is a developing reality whose unity will one day be fully experienced. This is part of the tension between the church’s present experience of reconciliation in Christ, and the coming fullness of the still future cosmic redemption. At that time the body will reflect truly the image of its Head, Christ.

This dynamic, diverse unity of the church is not merely a side effect of Christ’s work. It is, as Max Turner explains, “not simply a matter of pragmatism…unity in love is the distinguishing mark of the new humanity over against the alienated world doomed to pass away.”[9] The unity of the church is at the heart of the gospel and a sign of the efficacy of Christ’s reconciling work.

---

[1] Eph 4:4-6

[2] Eph 4:7

[3] Eph 4:11

[4] Lincoln and Wedderburn, Theology, 98-99.

[5] Eph 4:12

[6] Eph 4:16

[7] Eph 4:12-13

[8] Barth, “Wall,” 110.

[9] Turner ,“Unity,” 151.

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 3): Composition of the Church in Ephesians

Composition of the Church: Racial Unity (2:11-3:13)

In Ephesians, the foremost result of the church’s experience of the cosmic reconciliation in Christ is the radical transformation of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles. In 2:11-12, Paul discusses the status of the Gentiles before encountering Christ. Prior to Christ’s reconciling work, Gentiles were alienated from Israel. Using the law, circumcision, and other cultural markers, the Jews engaged in what Tet-Lim N. Yee calls, “covenantal ethnocentrism,” keeping themselves racially and religious separate from Gentiles.[1] Because of this isolation from Israel, the Gentiles were “separate from Christ” and “without hope and without God in the world.”[2] However, because of Jesus’ reconciling work, the Gentiles can now be “brought near through the blood of Christ.”[3] Not only does Christ’s work unite people with God, it also unites people with each other, breaking down racial and cultural boundaries. Christ’s “purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.”[4] This corporate “new man” is a part of Christ’s new creation, a restoration of the original unity of all people before sin. It is not merely a mixture of Jews and Gentiles, but a new “third entity” in which “the previous ethnic and religious categories have been transcended.”[5] This is not to say that people loose their ethnic identity in Christ. Instead they are united “without destroying what they possessed culturally, racially or linguistically.”[6] Gentiles are still Gentiles. Jews are still Jews. However, as the church models “the beginning of cosmic re-unification,”[7] Gentiles can “shed the stigma of being foreigners and aliens.”[8] The church is a community more fundamental than ethnic and cultural distinctions.

In 2:19-22, Paul makes the remarkable statement that this united group of Jews and Gentiles together make up God’s eschatological temple. They are being:

“Built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.”

Here is a startling way that the church is a foretaste of the ultimate reconciliation of the cosmos in Christ. God’s dwelling is no longer exclusively among the Jews, isolated to the temple in Israel where access is denied to people lacking the ethnic markers of circumcision and Torah. Instead, God lives among the racially mixed community he has created. Paul is acutely aware of the radical nature of this claim because he has been arrested for bringing Greek Christians into the Jerusalem temple.^[9] It was truly bold to claim that a group that included Gentiles could be “filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.”[10] But, for Paul this was fundamental to the gospel. Christ’s reconciling work necessarily resulted in the creation of the church, a united, yet ethnically diverse people. That the “the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel”^[11] was a concrete display of God’s grace and “the fulfillment of the eschatological hope in its widest and most generous expression.”^[12]

In 3:10-11, Paul makes it clear that the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles in the church also plays a crucial role in God’s plan to deal with the spiritual forces in the heavenly realm. The fact that earthly divisions are being transcended by Christ’s work is a sign to heavenly forces that Christ’s work will also bring them into subjugation. God brings about racial reconciliation so that “through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms.”^[13] The church is a witness to the heavenly realm of the richly varied, beautiful wisdom of the God who is reconciling all things. Or, in other words, racial reconciliation is spiritual warfare.

---

[1] Tet-Lim N. Yee, Jews, Gentiles and Ethnic Reconciliation: Paul’s Jewish Identity and Ephesians.

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.)

[2] Eph 2:12

[3] Eph 2:13

[4] Eph 2:15-16

[5] Andrew T. Lincoln and A. J. M. Wedderburn, The Theology of the Later Pauline Letters. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 93

[6] Bruce Fong, “Addressing the Issue of Racial Reconciliation According to the Principles of Eph 2:11-22,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38/4 (Dec 1995): 572.

[7] Turner, “Unity,” 144.

[8] Fong, “Racial,” 575.

[9] cf. Acts 21:28-29; Eph 3:1; See Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993.), Eph. 2:14-16.

[10] Eph 3:19

[11] Eph 3:6

[12] R. J. McKelvey, The New Temple: The Church in the New Testament, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), 118.

[13] Eph 3:10

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 2): Context of the Church in Ephesians

Context of the Church: Cosmic Unity (Ephesians 1:3-23)

The opening of Ephesians presents a sweeping picture of cosmic salvation that sets the backdrop for Paul’s view of the church in the book. After greeting the readers, Paul opens his letter with an exuberant praise of God for the glorious salvation given in Christ. He paints an expansive picture of God’s grace over the course of his eleven-verse berakah, reaching the “high point of the eulogy” in verses 9-10:[1]

“And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.”

From the very beginning, God’s plan has been for all things to be summed up under the rule of Jesus Christ. Because of sin, the world is currently in a state of alienation, brokenness, and hostility, rather than the original harmony of Eden. Just has he promised in the Old Testament, God is reversing this state of affairs, bringing creation “back from warring alienation into peaceful unity.”[2] More than simply saving individuals, Christ’s work accomplishes large-scale healing for the entire created order, both in heaven and on earth. It ultimately brings about “the reintegration of the whole cosmos rent asunder by sin” in which all things find their proper place under the rule of Jesus.[3]

The benefits of Christ’s cosmic rule are focused on the church. Paul asserts that “God placed all things under [Christ’s] feet and appointed him to be head over everything,” a huge claim of the supremacy of Christ. He continues, however, saying that the benefits of this accomplishment are “for the church.” Why? Because the church is “his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”[4] The wide-ranging effects of Christ’s cosmic redemption bless the church because it is the community that has been joined with Christ and is filled with his powerful, reconciling presence.

Although this cosmic reconciliation is primarily eschatological, occurring “when the times will have reached their fulfillment,” because it has already been achieved and inaugurated in Jesus, it can be experienced, in part, right now. Because of the presence of the Holy Spirit, God’s people can have both an assurance and a foretaste of the coming cosmic redemption.[5] Thus, the church is the arena in which the eschatological reconciliation can be seen and experienced ahead of time. It is “the first installment of cosmic reconciliation.”[6] The entire book of Ephesians can be read as an exposition of this reality, as it depicts what the life of the church looks like in light of the church’s present experience of future redemption in Christ.

---

[1] P. T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians. (Leicester: Apollos, 1999), 92.

[2] Max Turner, “Mission and Meaning in Terms of ‘Unity’ in Ephesians,” in Mission and Meaning, ed. Antony Billington, Tony Lane, and Max Turner. (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1995), 140, 141-142.

^[3] Giles, 134.

[4] Eph. 1:22-23

^[5] Eph. 1:13-14

[6] Turner, “Unity,” 157.

A Taste of Things to Come (Part 1): Introduction and Background to Ephesians

The church is a foundational reality in the thinking and ministry of the apostle Paul. Unlike most modern readers, whose instincts are often individualistic, Paul has communal and corporate realities at the forefront of his thought. In each of his letters, Paul consciously spoke into the lives of Christian communities, not merely individual Christians. In his letter to the Ephesians, it is clear why the church is so important to Paul. Max Turner says that “in no Pauline letter is the church so remarkably prominent.”[1] Markus Barth says that “Ephesians is in its very essence a church letter.”[2] Ephesians shows us what a high view of the church Paul actually had. As Kevin Giles puts it, “Nowhere else in the New Testament do we find such a lofty ecclesiology.”[3] For Paul, the church was not a mere side-effect of the gospel, but an integral component of God’s unfolding salvation-history. This paper will explore the theme of the church in Ephesians, showing how it fits into the book’s cosmic vision of salvation in Christ and how that context impacts the concrete life of the church.

Background to Ephesians

Among Paul’s letters, Ephesians yields the least amount of information about the specific situation it addresses. In fact, it is not even certain that the letter was written to the church in Ephesus, as the label “in Ephesus” is missing from 1:1 in some of the best manuscripts.[4] Because of this and the general lack of specific names, places, or problems in the letter, scholars cannot come to a firm sense of what circumstances, if any, Paul aimed to address.[5] It is likely that the letter was at least partially intended to be circular, going to multiple churches in a region. As a result it lacks the specificity of other Pauline letters, like Galatians, Corinthians, or even the very similar letter to the Colossians. At best, some have suspected that Paul was addressing a church where some tensions existed between Jews and Gentiles, as this is a prominent theme in the book. Even so, it is difficult to read Ephesians against any particular background, and the letter functions as more of a general overview of Pauline teaching. This is probably why, when discussing the church, Ephesians tends to focus on the universal church, rather than a specific congregation.[6]

---

^[1] Max Turner, Max “Ephesians, Book of,” in Dictionary for the Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. by Kevin Vanhoozer (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 189.

[2] Markus Barth, The Broken Wall. (London: Collins, 1960), 17.

^[3] Kevin Giles, What on Earth is the Church? (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1995), 132.

^[4] D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, Introduction to the New Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 309-311.

^[5] Ibid., 312

[6] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 112. Paul’s presentation of the church in a more universal sense, rather than local, is somewhat unique to Colossians and Ephesians. Specifically, the church is portrayed as an eschatological and heavenly assembly. See P. T. O’Brien, “The Church as a Heavenly and Eschatological Entity,” in The Church in the Bible and the World, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1987), 88-119. Against this view, see Giles 125-51, I. Howard Marshal, New Testament Theology. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004), 392

Baptism: A Foundation for Community

People talk a lot about community these days. It is a hot topic in the contemporary church. Everyone is talking about it. How do we get it? What does it look like? What techniques or programs will encourage it? What does Christian community look like? These are great questions and conversations, and I this is an issue I care deeply about. I have read a lot about it and I am working hard to figure out how community functions in my own life. And yet, in all of the conversation and thinking, I think there is one aspect of Christian community which just has not been factored in to the discussion: baptism.

In the Bible, baptism is viewed as one of the foundations for why true Christian community can exist.

It is the reason people of all races, socio-economic statuses, and genders can be united in Christ. Because when we were baptized we were united and “clothed” with Christ, each attaining an identity that transcends our diverse backgrounds, making us all equally children of God:

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:26-28)

For local churches and the worldwide community of Christians, what should motivate us to remain united? It is the fact that if we are all share the same central things:

Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:3-6)

Why is there only one body? Because all of us share the one faith, the core of Christian theology that we all agree on. We all have the Spirit empowering us and giving hope. We all have Jesus leading us as Lord. We all have the Father, whom we love and worship over all. I think most of us would say that these are strong reasons to maintain unity. But, there is one other thing included here. We should maintain unity because we are all baptized.

Here is another place where it is good to imagine Paul preaching in one of our churches. Imagine he came in and said, “I want to tell you a good reason why the black people, white people, Arabs, Jews, Hispanics, and Asians should root out racism. I want to tell you why men and women need to drop the gender wars. I want to tell you why the rich should start taking care of the poor like their own family. I want to tell you how people with different gifts and viewpoints can cooperate. Here is why you should strive for real, rich, deep unity in your church…drumroll, please…because everyone of you is baptized.”

Huh? Are you talking about my church, Paul? Wait, we’re not all baptized. That reason doesn’t work for us.

Here is an aspect of baptism that does not always jump out at us in our individualistic age: baptism does not simply join you to Jesus, it joins you to Jesus’ people. Baptism unites you with the Church, the body of Christ. If you are a baptized Christian, you have no reason to not be embedded in the community of faith. It is like signing adoption papers. You get a new Father, but you also become siblings with all of your Father’s other kids.

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him. (I John 5:1)

This is why it is so significant in the book of Acts when the Gentiles are baptized. When the first Gentiles believe, God sends the Holy Spirit on them in power, showing definitively that God had accepted them. When Peter saw this, he realized what this meant. If God had welcomed the Gentiles into fellowship with himself, how could the followers of Jesus deny the Gentiles fellowship with themselves. The logical conclusion for Peter, was baptism:

And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (Acts 10:45-47)

The following chapters make it clear that this decision to baptize is not just about the Gentiles’ vertical relationship with God, but their horizontal relationship with the other Christians. Chapter 11, and even more chapter 15, show that considerable debate went in to figuring how to allow these Gentile believers into fellowship with the Jewish part of the Church. Baptism compels us to welcome others who have been baptized.

Perhaps a solid theology of baptism could be of help in combating racism, social injustice, economic exploitation, and sexism. Could elevating the significance of the commitment that baptism represents be helpful in promoting church unity? Could baptism be a good starting place for talking across denominational lines? It seems that Paul would make it a factor if he were here.

Even on a personal level, it is worth considering that, if you are baptized, you are joined to your fellow Christians. They are your family. Maybe that is a good enough reason to go and ask for forgiveness or offer forgiveness to them. Maybe it is a good enough reason to start actually being committed to the community of faith.

Living Intentionally in the Suburbs

Normally, this kind of post would go on my Tumblr, but since it fits so nicely with the stuff I’ve been talking about here (relating to “The Experiment”), I thought I’d post it. It is a list of ten ways to live intentionally in the suburbs. (found via Steve McCoy)

Forgiveness, Ritual, and the Barbie Dreamhouse

A month or so ago in Ecclesia, we were studying the book of Philemon. We were looking at from three different angles. 1) From Paul’s angle, as the mediator helping to reconcile two estranged people. 2) From Onesimus’ angle, as one needing forgiveness. 3) From Philemon’s angle, as one who must forgive an offense and be open to reconciliation. All in all, it was a cool way to look at the book, which, honestly had not received much of my attention in the past. This three week series was really the most I had ever thought about this little book. It certainly is not an insignificant letter to have preserved in the New Testament, given its powerful window into real-world application of the Gospel.

During one Sunday service, we were discussing forgiveness and what made it difficult to do. The group of people I was talking to brought up how it was easier to reconcile as a child because the adults always made you do it. You know, you would do something like invade your sister’s Barbie dream house with an entire brigade of G.I. Joes, scattering grossly disproportionate plastic body parts and miniature fashion accessories around the room. (Hypothetically, of course.) Your sister cries. Mom comes in, and she says “Say your sorry for messing up Marta’s toys.” And you say, “Sorry, Marta.” Then your sister says, “It’s okay.” And it is done. Every time, like clockwork. It was simpler that way. Problems could be resolved through this simple formula. But, it isn’t that simple for adults.

As our group talked, we realized that part of the problem for adults is we don’t really know what to say when we need to ask for forgiveness. Children have the same problem, of course, but adults know it so we give them words to say. We feed them lines. It is obvious that they are not equipped to do the hard work of reconciliation on their own, so we lay out a path for them to follow. We give them prescribed words to train them how to do it. In other words, we give them a liturgy.

Let me make three observations about this childhood liturgy of reconcilliation:

First, the ritual creates an opportunity for children to do something that would otherwise be very difficult for them to do. I remember being a kid, after I did something mean to my sisters, feeling really frustrated. I usually knew I had done something wrong. I knew my sister was upset. I knew she would stay mad until something changed. But, I didn’t go and apologize. Between pride and not knowing what to say, I usually just kept playing, pretending nothing had happened. But then, when one of my parents intervened it actually felt like a relief. It wasn’t that I didn’t want reconciliation. Its just that it was hard. I needed a higher authority to step in and be the catalyst for reconciliation. In some ways, I was happy to get caught. I know this probably makes me sound like a weird kid, but I’ll bet with a few moments reflection, you be able to relate to that feeling. If not as a kid, as an adult, we’ve all felt relieved sometimes to have an authority force us to deal with things we didn’t know how to resolve.

Second, sometimes the ritual is hollow. Sometimes you just said “sorry” to get things over with, not because you really felt bad for what you had done. The words were meaningless. This can be true of all liturgies. Sometimes they are empty words that we say because we think we have to. Of course, there is always that danger with any of our actions. All ritual can be more or less meaningful, but that doesn’t mean we get rid of ritual. In past generations standing for the flag, taking your hat off for the National Anthem, and saying the Pledge of Allegiance every morning in schools were standard rituals. It was not that the people doing them had to be in the throes of patriotism every time this happened. People just assumed that if you did these things regularly, you would develop a true loyalty to your country. And for many people of the previous generation, it worked. In my generation, which placed much less emphasis on these rituals, we have a seen a decline in patriotism. Which, leads to the third observation of the childhood liturgy of reconciliation.

Third, the ritual is intended to form the child into the kind of person who can actually do the things they are expressing. Our goal in this little ritual is not to make kids say the words “I’m sorry.” The goal is to make them into people who are able to recognize and express when they have wronged someone else. The words are training wheels. They shape the children into people who can ask for and offer forgiveness. Kids who never have to say their sorry to their sister generally become spoiled brats. They don’t learn early on that they are sometimes at fault. They also don’t learn that if they ask for forgiveness, it will be offered. But, if they had the “Say Sorry Liturgy”, it might have become part of them. This is the goal of all liturgies. Rituals are meant to shape us, our thoughts, our feelings, and our actions until we become the kinds of people who mean and do the things the ritual symbolizes instinctively.

So, here are my thoughts in light of this.

• Maybe adults need a “Say Your Sorry” formula. We need a liturgy of reconciliation. There are many times when I would happily reconcile with someone, but honestly, I’m not sure how to do it. I don’t have the words. I don’t know how to bring up the topic. It is always awkward, and this is often because we just don’t have a space in our culture to ask for forgiveness. Unlike the kids, there is usually no higher authority making us reconcile, and there is no formula for doing it. It might help if there was. Maybe we assume that adults should be mature enough to do this on their own, but I, for one, am not. I could really use some help. I know that when I have made space and been given words, I have done a much better job keeping my relationships in tact. While we were dating, my wife and I had a monthly (at times weekly) ritual of sitting down and deliberately asking, “What have I done recently that has hurt or offended you?” It was a standard question and a space that made it much easier to resolve lingering issues, and our relationship progressed because we did it. Otherwise, things might have festered. What if Christians provided spaces and words for people to reconcile? What if we had formulas for the process of forgiveness? The goal would not be to reduce forgiveness and reconciliation to mere words, but to open up a space for it to happen more easily. I wonder how different our communities might be if we had a regular time and ritual for this?

• Let’s give children a good liturgy of reconciliation. If this little ritual is going to shape our kids to be able to reconcile in the future, lets make sure we train them well. Let’s not settle for “Say your sorry.” Let’s use the right words. Let’s have them “Ask for forgiveness.” Let’s make them confess and own their offenses. Let’s make the offended child offer “forgiveness,” not just say “It’s okay.” The words we use matter. Over time, they will develop a sense that there is more than just annoying behaviors and flippant dismissal. There are wrongs and there is forgiveness. There is sin and there is absolution.

• Lets not underestimate the rituals in our lives. We are all children learning how to live well. The reality is, we never outgrow the need to be given words or to have our hearts trained through ritual. Until Christ returns, we will need to train our thoughts, affections, actions, and words. This is what liturgy, ritual, and symbols help us do. It is why I say, “I love you” before I hang up the phone with my family members. It is not because we always have tender moments that inspire such words every time they call, but because regularly saying those words forms our relationships. It is why my Dad always said, “Jesus loves you and so does Daddy” every night before I went to bed, because he knew that by hearing that repeated, that knowledge would become a part of my identity. It is why I pray for my wife every morning before she goes to work and open the door for her every time she gets in the car. Rituals matter. The liturgies of our lives make a difference. The make us who we are.

I know, I know, all this is strange coming from from a lifelong low-church emerging type, but I think there is truth to it. In a society that is informal to a fault and stripped of official rituals, this may be worth recovering. At the very least, in the absence of good rituals and liturgies, we have to ask what takes their place? What are the things that form us? What are the rituals that shape us by default? These are questions for another post, another day.

The Experiment: Technology Helps Us Have the Right Conversations

It can be difficult trying to coordinate four individuals and two families living together. Granted this is not really that many people, it still can be complicated knowing when people are going to be in and out. Plus, it can be hard communicating with everyone about things that need to be done or issues that need to be discussed. That is where technology is helping us become a better community. In particular, Google Docs and Google Calendar.

With Google Calendar, each family in our apartment has made a calendar of family activities and shared it. This way, we know when people will be around, when they will be out, when it is good to plan to have people over, and when we can get together and talk about how things are going in the apartment.

With Google Docs, we plan ahead for the conversations we need to have at our next “Family Dinner.” We plan to eat one meal together per week to discuss how things are going. Prior to this, each of us updates a shared spreadsheet on Google Docs. It is a simple document, with a column for positive things, negative things, and other issues. Anything might come up on that from who is or isn’t keeping up their chores, how to handle mail distribution, how to make sure we pray together, or when why we still haven’t beaten a game on the Wii. By doing this, we all can think about things ahead of time and be ready to discuss things at our dinner. We also make sure that we don’t miss anything important that needs to be talked about.

This may be the sort of thing that could be useful families and roommates or even married couples. Having a regular conversations about how things are going and clear communication are crucial for all close relationships. Many, including myself, have lamented how technology often causes us to withdraw from community and makes us more detached from the people around us. Here is a case where technology, especially newer collaborative and social technologies can have the opposite effect.

The Experiment: The First Couple Weeks

So far, Michelle and I have been living with our friends (Brian and Jenna) for a little less than a month. It has gone fast because all of us have been busy. There are two teachers and a student in the apartment who all started school in the last few weeks. Between that, church stuff kicking off along with a couple of family events and business trips, we honestly haven’t seen much of each other. With that being said, let me make a few observations.

• First of all, it doesn’t feel that weird. After the boxes were cleared and the pictures hung, it felt pretty normal. There were a few strange moments at night when I have felt like I was supposed to go home to my own place, but after a week or so, that went away. Sometimes I feel like I am visiting my friends’ place, especially when using some of Brian and Jenna’s stuff (i.e. the TV, especially since we did not have one until we moved in with them). However, we had refrigerator rights with Brian and Jenna before moving in, so that helps. Overall, though, it feels pretty normal at the moment.

• We have more privacy than we expected, at least Michelle and I feel that way. I haven’t had a chance to see how Brian and Jenna feel. Sure, we can’t walk around the apartment in our underwear, but on the whole, Michelle and I feel like we have our own space and time. One thing that helps is that we have in place two nights a week when one of the couples will be out for the evening so the other couple can have the apartment to themselves. That helps. So, on Mondays, Brian and Jenna hang out with their family. On Tuesdays, Michelle and I go to her parent’s house. We already had these nights with our respective families, but it has taken on the added purpose of leaving space for each other to have privacy. Also, it obviously helps that we don’t share bathrooms, and we also each have our bedrooms set up to include a love-seat so that we have our own private sitting area, if we need it. Michelle and I also have a table where we can eat meals alone if we want. We haven’t used it yet, but if we needed to, we could.

• One important logistical problem we ran into early on was one that we had anticipated ahead of time, but still was a little awkward. We knew that there may be times when the guy from one couple found himself alone with the girl from the other couple. From the example of Joseph in the Bible, we know that this is something worth avoiding. We are supposed to be “above reproach”. (And although the verse my father often quotes about “avoiding the appearance of evil” comes from a mistranslation in the KJV of 1 Thessalonians 5:22, we know that it is still good advice most of the time.) So, we tried to come up with a way that this could be dealt with.Our basic idea was that the guy would take responsibility to displace himself until someone else came home or the girl left. Along with that, he would call his wife so that she knew what he was up to. It seemed like it would work. It turns out it is easier said than done. During the first week of living together, when it was still summer time for those of us on the school schedule, Jenna and I often found ourselves at home alone together. Sometimes, I would simply displace myself by walking down to Borders or running and errand. Other times, we would call Brian and Michelle and find out how long until they would be home. If they were already in transit, we would stay put and not worry about it, since it would be less than 10 minutes until someone else was home. These were easier situations to handle, and they mostly happened in the afternoon or at lunch time. The more awkward times were when one of us would sleep in (it was summer after all) and then wake up without realizing the other person was still home and Brian and Michelle had gone to work. It wasn’t as easy to just leave the apartment when you just woke up. So, it required more communication ahead of time about what our schedules were. We didn’t quite get it right before school started, but now our schedules make it so that we hardly ever run into each other at all, so that problem has gone away. We may have to figure it out again when Thanksgiving and Christmas break come around. I explain all this to highlight two things. First, there are definite logistical elements to community. Good relationships are facilitated by things like procedures and boundaries. Relationships are hindered by poor logistics. Good attitudes are not enough to live in community. Structures and logistics matter. Second, it also highlights one of the major obstacles for communal living in a co-ed situation. It simply is not enough to say, “I trust my wife/husband/friend to not do something inappropriate.” We know, simply by statistics, that adultery and other more subtle forms of infidelity are real threats today, even for Christians and people of character. Good intentions or values are not enough, and planning for that helps. Even if just so that there are there is not unspoken uneasiness about these types of situations.

• Meeting the neighbors has been interesting. One of our goals in community is to extend it to others, namely, our neighbors, by meeting them and welcoming them into our home. So far, we really have only met one of our neighbors. His name is Dan and he is the maintenance guy for the whole apartment complex. We first met him on the day after we moved in. We were putting up pictures and bookshelves at about 9:30pm, and we were playing some music. It wasn’t that loud, but he could hear it through the wall, and he has a young daughter who was sleeping. So, he stopped by and asked us to turn it down. That sucked, not because we wanted to play music, but because it was a bad initial impression. A couple of days later, I talked with him about it, and things were cool. But then, there was this loud clanking pipe noise in our wall that woke up the lady who lives above us. She kept complaining to Dan, and over the last few weeks, he has come over to our place a few times a week to find the source of the noise. I feel bad for him, because he hasn’t been able to find it, and the lady upstairs seems to be pestering him. Instead of calling in to the central office like everyone else, she just knocks on his door whenever she wants, even if it is at night. In the process of trying different things, he has adjusted our sinks, replaced our air conditioning unit, cut open our ceiling, and ultimately replaced something in our toilet, which, so far, has finally solved the problem. So, I’ve gotten to know him a little bit through all this. I think we’re going to have him, his wife, and daughter over for dinner now that it is all done.

So, those are my fairly mundane thoughts so far. I’m sure things will get more interesting as we go. We’ll start going through the stages of community, which include chaos…but I’ll explain that in a post later this week…and we’ll have to grow and change. I’m looking forward to it in a weird way. I’ll let you know how it goes.

An Experiment in Community

Ten days ago, my wife and I, along with two good friends, started an experiment in community. We moved in together. It may seem a little odd at first, I know. Two couples who have both been married two years or less, moving into an apartment together. It is not something that happens every day, but we did it. We aren’t crazy hippies, just ordinary people trying to live in real community in a way that honors Jesus. Here is a little background.

Two years ago, when Michelle and I got married, we moved into an apartment close to Wheaton College where Michelle was finishing up grad school. We chose it based on proximity to my job and her school, and cost. It was very cheap. Up until that time, we had both lived either at home or in college housing. We had lived in dorms and apartments with other students, and overall we loved it. The college lifestyle of being close to friends, having plenty of time to talk and share life, as well as the common purpose of getting an education made community flourish. Coming out of college, we had made some really close friends. I was close to one of my roommates in particular, Brian, who ended up being the best man in my wedding. We were excited that he and his wife, Jenna, were going to be living in the area after college, just like us. They had an apartment a few towns away, and it only took about 25 minutes to get there. It was a little out of the way, but not too far for good friends to keep up. We expected to see each other a lot.

But we didn’t. Life rushed in. Work was busy. School was busy. We were tired and our schedules were filled. We found that it took a lot of work to get together with friends. We had to plan weeks in advance just to hang out or have dinner together. It didn’t matter how good of friends they were, it seemed like maintaining relationships was complicated. Even with friends that lived closer (and, truth be told, I lived in the same building as a couple of good friends as well as my sister and her husband), either they were busy or we were busy all the time, and so we ended up not doing much together. Over time, Michelle and I felt more and more isolated. We got lonely, and honestly, depressed. We felt like we had a lot of friends in college, but just a few months into marriage and work, we just couldn’t seem to connect with people anymore.

We talked about it with older adults around us, which made matters worse. I repeatedly heard adults say things like, “You should really savor your college years because they are the best years of your life. I had such great relationships in college. They were really special. You will never have friends like that again.” Now, I understood that they were trying to say that college is a great time that should be enjoyed to the full, and I agree. Your college friendships are special, probably because it is a time when you are forming your opinions and lifestyle in major way. But, it made me nervous to hear people comment that their friendships were never quite as good for the rest of their life since graduating. We thought about our parents, and we realized that most of their friends were from their young adulthood, and that most of their stories were from when they were college-aged. As they got older, they had less friends. My parents told us that this was normal and that we’d get used to it. That didn’t settle well with Michelle and I. We did not want to live lonely.

People talked about college community as something that was unnatural and artificial. People live in dorms or houses with their peers in mass. They are thrown in with dozens of others with whom they share life with in an close environment. In the real world, there is nothing that corresponds to the communal living of college. However fun it was for a time, it is a passing experience. Enjoy it for the time that you can have it, then savor the memories for the rest of your life. And yet, I couldn’t shake the feeling that the communal living of college felt more natural than the isolated lifestyle I was experiencing after college (and that the older adults around had seemingly resigned themselves to). It was a breath of fresh air, really, to live with people. It felt like the way things were supposed to be.

When I read the Scriptures, I also found that they discussed life in community a lot. Most of the New Testament seemed to be about community life in various churches and how the Gospel impacted the way they functioned as a group. The early church community in Acts stuck out a lot, too. It was extremely communal and close. Of course, when I asked people about these passages, just like college-life, they would say they were unique situations for a particular time in the church’s life. They weren’t for all times. They weren’t for now. Draw general principles from them, but don’t use the Acts community as too close of a model. We’re not communists. And yet, even when I tried to get general principles from Acts, the more seriously I took them, the more I realized I could only follow them if I was living in a fairly close community. It was the background assumption for just about everything commanded to groups in the New Testament; they were sharing life together.

So, I chose not to believe what the adult world seemed to be telling me, that I was doomed to a fairly isolated life of work and my immediate family. Michelle and I vowed to pursue a future that was full of rich and fun friendships. We would do whatever it took to have long-lasting, life-impacting, close relationships.
Our first step was to talk with our friends about intentionally moving closer together and making space in our schedules to spend more time with each other. We thought it would be a long shot, but we talked to as many people as we could about doing it. As people’s leases ended, a bunch of us slowly moved into a large apartment complex in town. Eventually, about 14 people from our church moved in, and before long we were having bi-weekly dinners with everyone. About two or three times a week, my wife and I would have dinner with a handful of friends that lived nearby. It was incredible. Over the past year, our lives have become so much more full of relationships, and it has become more natural to develop friendships because people live close by. It is easy to stop in or invite someone to come over to hang out. Our first small experiment in community went great.

But then finances got in the way. We were hit with a one-two punch. First, the apartment complex raised their rates about $130. It moved them out of our price range on our current salary. Second, I quit my job as a pastor to go to grad school and Michelle got a job as a teacher. Even though Michelle makes more money than I did, pastors receive a tax break on housing (ala the old-time parsonage). As a result, even if our rent had remained static, we wouldn’t have been able to afford to live in the same place.

It felt like a punch in the gut. We had just gotten a more community-oriented lifestyle going, the key being our close proximity to friends. And now, simply because of money, we were going to be forced out of the neighborhood we had helped organize. So, we talked to our friends. We asked them if they could come up with any solutions to help us continue to live close to them. We didn’t come up with much, but someone, half in jest, tossed out the crazy idea of having us move in with them. And something clicked.

My old roommate, Brian, and his wife, Jenna, started talking with Michelle and I about the possibility of moving into a larger apartment in the same complex and sharing the rent. It would save them money. It would save us money. And even more than that, it would move our ideals of community forward rather than backward. We talked through a lot of details as well as friends, family, and people around us, and we realized it might just be possible. So, that is what we did. For the next 7 months, we will be living together in a two bedroom, two bathroom apartment with a kitchen, living room, and an office. We expect it to be an interesting experience. I will be blogging about it for the next six months. I’ll tell you about people’s reactions to the idea, the problems we have to deal with, the insights we learn, and the funny experiences that it generates. I will also try and give some of biblical and theological foundations for community, as well as exploring church history, other cultures, and different groups that exist today for their insights into communal living.

We don’t know how this will go, but we have high hopes. We think God is in it, but we’ll find out. The bottom line is this. We are trying. Most people just do what the rest of the culture is doing. They live on their own. We think Christians should be more creative. We don’t think our idea is for everyone, but we do think that pursuing creative forms of community should be for all Christians. We see how it goes.

The Trinity and Relational Evangelism

Theologians have speculated for ages about the relationships that exist within the Trinity. How do the Father, Son, and Spirit interact? What is the nature of the interdependence? How does the Son derive his life from the Father? In what way does the Spirit flow from the Father and the Son (or perhaps just the Father, if you are in the East)? In some ways, it is all very strange stuff, but in other ways it is the most fundamental of conversations. The entire Universe and all that happens in it, in some way or another, is an outgrowth of the life of the Trinity. If we really want to know why things are the way they are, we will have to grapple with the Trinity.

One of the ideas that has been tossed around for centuries concerns the Holy Spirit. There have been some theologians who have attempted to explain what it means for the Holy Spirit to proceed from the Father and the Son. Some theologians (first in my mind is Jonathan Edwards, although, there are others who have examined this idea) who propose that the Holy Spirit is the personal love that exists between the Father and the Son. The Son and the Father love each other so deeply, that their relationship, their connection, actually constitutes a real person. While I’m not sure how much of this is just speculation and how much of this is worth believing, I do find it stimulating to think of the implications of this.

One implication came out in a conversation that I was having with two other pastors at the church a few months ago. We were discussing why it is that people tend to come to know Jesus more frequently through relationships, rather than preaching, reading books, tracts, or TV. We all know that if you really find out why people came to believe in Christ, all of them would have a significant relational component to their story, even if they came to a crisis of decision because of a sermon, book, etc. Everyone was lead to Christ through real connection with a Christian. Why?

As we talked about this, I put together two ideas. First, the Holy Spirit is the one that grants faith to the hearers of the Gospel. And second, that the Holy Spirit is thought to be the person that constitutes the relationship between the Father and the Son. So, I asked, “What if the reason people come to Christ in relationship is because the Holy Spirit, in himself, is a relationship? We experience a slice of the life of the Trinity whenever we are in relationship, and so that is where encountering the Holy Spirit is most potent. The Holy Spirit is relationship, therefore relationship awakens people to God.”

The idea stuck with me after that conversation, and it continues to ring with a sort of truth for me. Of course, there is the risk of depersonalizing the Holy Spirit is Edward’s conception of him, so this may be going to far. But, nevertheless, I think the idea that God exists in relationship, and the Holy Spirit is somehow an expression of intertrinitarian love, explains why relational evangelism works.

Thoughts?

Why Don’t We Encourage More?

I work on a team of three high school ministers. Mark coordinates small groups and adult leaders. I preach and coordinate student leadership teams. And up until recently, Deb headed up our missions trips, retreats, and girls discipleship. That all changed when Deb moved to California at the beginning of this month.

It was a happy and sad thing. Deb had been working at our church for 13 years in youth ministry. She was one of my youth leaders when I was in high school. It is hard to think of our youth group without her, because she has always been around. That kind of faithfulness and dedication is hard to find these days. So it was rough on a lot of when she left. But it was also good, because we know it was the right step for her. She was ready for a change, and I think she’ll thrive in her new life.

Just before Christmas, when Deb officially stopped working at the church, we had a goodbye party for her. People who had known her and been touched by her ministry came to tell stories and share encouragements about her time here. It was really amazing to hear all sorts of people talking about the good that one person’s life made. It was funny, too, because even though it felt good to do, it was not something that we normally did. People were telling Deb how much they loved her and why they would miss her. There were stories about how girls on the fringe of our group were welcomed in by her. People talked about her care and encouragement. We told Deb how she had helped us become more in love with Jesus. There were the expected tears and hugs, and the good laughs that come whenever you know someone long enough.

Deb seemed to really appreciate it. But then we started to think about it. This was the sort of thing that most people don’t ever get to experience. Most people don’t really get to hear what kind of impact their life has made on people. Someone said it seemed like a funeral…not in a bad way…but in the sense that it was the time when we actually said how much someone mattered to us. Normally, we just keep that sort of thing inside, only to mention it when someone dies. Deb said that it felt like heaven, because God let her see the impact of her life on others and she could see how God had used her.

So my question is, why don’t we do this more often? Why don’t we tell people the impact they have on us. Why does it feel so odd to tell someone the impact they had on us? Why is it something that we wait until people are gone to say? Why is it something that only death and moving bring out?

I especially wonder about this in ministry. A lot of pastors burn out. I understand why now that I have tried the life out. Without trying to whine, I have to say this is a hard job. It takes a toll on you emotionally, mentally, and even physically. You always hear about complaints (or about people who heard people complaining…Sidenote: I love how people always couch their complaints in the terms, “A bunch of people have been saying…” or “I have talked with some people and they think…” Look people! Just own up to your own beefs and claim them as your own you wimps…anyway…). In ministry, you hear about problems. But it is rare to have encouragement. You don’t always know what your work has done. Why don’t we tell people when they impact us?

I don’t do a good job myself, even though I know how needed it is. There are lots of people who I really appreciate, and they’ve impacted me greatly, but I don’t know if they know how important they have been to me. Why don’t I say anything? I suppose there is something embarrassing about saying things like that. For some reason, you feel vulnerable to just compliment or encourage someone. It is weird.

I even wonder why we don’t have parties to honor people more often. Jesus said that a prophet is not honored in his hometown. What if, as Christians, we tried to reverse that trend? What we went out of our way to honor the people (clergy or lay) that God is using to do hard work? Wouldn’t be cool if we had more parties to honor just one person? What if churches voted a couple times a year to honor an individual who had made a difference in their life, and then they all threw a party for that person and told stories about why they loved them? I think we’d see more people excited about the community, more excited to serve. There would be less burnout. It wouldn’t just be good for the people honored, but it would be good for those doing the honoring. They would have aspects of what God is doing illuminated that they would have never seen. They would have practice getting the focus off themselves and onto someone else. They would learn to appreciate different kinds of gifts. It could be great.

Reflections at a Funeral

Last night, I attended the funeral for the wife of our senior pastor, Carol Bugh. It was a very moving service and a fitting celebration of a life well lived. It was held in Edman Chapel on the campus of Wheaton College, and the entire main floor was full. The stories of her life and the testimony of her children were incredible. Her death was truly a deep loss for our community.

This was the first funeral where I was struck by the brevity of life. Part of it was because of how young Carol was. She was only 50. Her children are all under 25, including a son who is in 6th grade. We all expect someone that young to have plenty of life yet to live. Part of it was also the fact that I am now married, and I feel a little bit more like an adult then I did at any of the other funerals I have been to. It dawned on me that I didn’t know how much time I had left to be with my wife, to be with my family, or to be with my friends. Life is unexpected, and it goes faster than we know. All life-long relationships end some time. It is a hard thing to think that one day, either Michelle or I will die. It was in our vows. To be married means that one of you will face the loss of a spouse. I know I took the vow a year ago, but I didn’t realize what it meant until this week. Michelle pointed out that it is interesting that we use so many flowers in funerals. Although they are beautiful, they don’t last long. In a few days, most of them will be withered away. They are the image that the Bible uses to show how quickly our lives pass.

Funerals are very self-conscious events. They happen rarely enough and they are sensitive enough that most people are unsure of what to do when they are at one. Maybe it is just because I am young and haven’t been to enough, it seems like most people are unsure of how to act at a funeral, and so they are very self-conscious. Even though we know we are supposed to wear black, many people are still unsure about whether or not their clothes are appropriate, and they feel self-conscious about that. I, for one, never know what to say at funerals, and I think most people don’t either. I suspect that most people don’t know how to act, how to stand, where to look, or how loud to talk. For an event where we are supposed to be thinking about the life of someone else, at least for me, a lot of time is spent thinking about myself.

They are self-conscious events, though, for another reason, and I think this one is an appropriate self-consciousness. Funerals naturally make us think about our own death, as well as our own funeral. As we contempate the legacy of another person, we wonder what kind of legacy we will leave ourselves. As long as we don’t get too obsessed with this, I think it an appropriate reflection that we need to go through every now and then. We need to ask ourselves, “What will my funeral say about my life?”

Carol’s funeral said that she lived a good kind of life, full of meaning, love, and frienships. She invested in people. She learned. She trained up a godly family. She drew people to Christ. She supported the church. She prayed. She laughed and played and savored life. She did it right. It was obvious to everyone there that this was a life we should emmulate. I couldn’t help but hope that my life would turn out so well. I have been thinking about what I need to do now in order to become the kind of person who ends life well, whose life is a testimony to the goodness and glory of God.

This morning, I met with my boss, who is also a friend and a long-time mentor to me. He told me that the funeral made him think about how he was living his own life. He pointed out that Carol was not an actvity-driven person. She was not highly involved in every program of the church. She did not fill her life up with lots of things to do just to do them. But, she did fill her life with relationships. Hers was a relationship-based life, not an activity based life. Story after story from friends and family showed that what drove Carol were people, connections and relationships were the heart of her existence.

So many of us spend our days doing things. We are focused on tasks. We are driven by our projects, our meetings, and our activities. We are shaped and defined by the things we are officially involved in. We get connected to ministries at church so that we can officially be “doing ministry.” We see our purpose in the things we accomplish. But, what if our lives were driven by relationships? What if loving people defined what we did? What if our relationships were not defined by what we were involved in, but what we were involved in flowed out of our relationships? I am so task-driven and project-focused some times. I define my world by what needs to be done and what I am responsible for. What if I defined my world by who I loved? Seriously.

I want to live in such a way that at my funeral, there will be stories, not of what I did in life, but of my friendships, my family-life, and my relationship with God.

The Riddle of Christian Community

One of the ways I think about things, whether it is ministry, theology, or just how to live well, is in terms of riddles. I try and see the problems and situations in life in terms of fundamental tensions or questions that need to be answered. They are my riddles. One riddle that I think about frequently, but still have yet to find an adequate answer is this:

How do you have a community that is both intimate and open without sacrificing one or the other substatnially?

I think this is one of the fundamental riddles of ministry. Christians are called to love one another, but also to be open to anyone who might wish to join their fellowship in following Jesus. I have seen it a hundred times in small groups and Sunday School classes and groups of friends. You have people who start to get to know each other really well, and they end up closed off to any new people. You have a group of people who are open to newcomers and very good at reaching out, but their community tends to stay shallow. One has intimacy; the other has openness. To find a way out of this riddle would solve some huge issues in ministry.

Is there a way of thinking about community that helps this? Is there a picture or principle that illuminates the issue so that the deadlock can be broken? Are there examples of communities that are both open and intimate? Have you experienced any communities who overcame this tension?