Skip to content

Category: pastoral theology

Published on Leave a comment on Thick skin, open heart

In his commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Prior speaks of prophets as having thick skin and open hearts.  I think that's a good definition.  And quite apt given our recent discussions on personality etc.

Think of Jesus, the Servant:

4 The Sovereign LORD has given me an instructed tongue,
       to know the word that sustains the weary.
       He wakens me morning by morning,
       wakens my ear to listen like one being taught.

 5 The Sovereign LORD has opened my ears,
       and I have not been rebellious;
       I have not drawn back.

 6 I offered my back to those who beat me,
       my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard;
       I did not hide my face
       from mocking and spitting.

 7 Because the Sovereign LORD helps me,
       I will not be disgraced.
       Therefore have I set my face like flint,
       and I know I will not be put to shame.

 8 He who vindicates me is near.
       Who then will bring charges against me?
       Let us face each other!
       Who is my accuser?
       Let him confront me!

 9 It is the Sovereign LORD who helps me.
       Who is he that will condemn me?
       They will all wear out like a garment;
       the moths will eat them up.

The Father gives Him words of comfort for the sheep and He is sensitive both to the Father's help and the people's need.  But He is also 'like flint' for the opposition that will come.

Often we simply have thin skin and mistake that for kindness.  Or we have a hard heart and mistake that for bold defence of the truth.  But no, Jesus shows the way - Thick skin, open heart.

.

11

Published on 11 Comments on Does the gospel create homogenous personalities?

Here's a question Rich Owen asked me.  I've included my answer, but I thought it would be great to get your opinions too.  This is the question:

To what extent does the gospel require a homogenisation of personality?
 
I'm thinking about bearing with one another, rebuking one another, kindness... the hard edge of graciousness and integrity...  but gentleness etc. So as a simplistic example...
 
Person A is really very nice. Wouldn't say boo to a goose, tends to fall in line even if reservations are bubbling in the background - thinking very positively about others, perhaps naively, so is always looking for smooth and non confrontaional paths in dealing with people. It is not always obvious what they think about things because everything is tempered with caveats because they are gentle people in every way not seeking to offend.
 
Person B is also very nice but is very gritty, calls a spade a spade etc. Doesn't fall in line without having to be persuaded. Thinks very highly of others and so in love calls things pretty black and white - calls sin sin, points right at pride and invites others to be just as direct with them. They think positively about others, but analyse and challenge - likewise not seeking to offend - but knowing how pride works want to expose it directly.
 
These personality types are partly "considered" in that is what they want to be and think is best, but they also reflect how someone naturally is - some people are more gritty than others etc.
 
Anyway - that is my already unhelpfully stereotyped situation.
 
under those maxims of bearing with one another, etc should person B attempt to be more like person A so that person A hears them better? should person A be a bit more bullish so that there is more clarity and person B knows exactly where they are going?
 
does the gospel require these people to deny self in the sense that they are naturally fluffy or gritty, and as they move towards the other, modify personality to be more like each other... a homogenisation?

Here's my answer:

I wrote a series of posts on personality, idols, repentance, gifts, service, maturity etc here, here, here and here.  
 
Basically I think there are four elements to consider:
 
1) God-given temperament.  The triune God loves diversity.  When humans make ice we make ice cubes, when the Father makes ice He makes snowflakes and all that,
 
2) Idolatry which takes hold of our natural differences and creates idols that we serve and imitate (this is an all-pervasive part of 'personality').  For instance, the world, flesh and devil take hold of a person with an above average IQ to make them worship and serve their brain, or intelligence in general, or being right or knowledgeable or whatever. 
 
3) In Christ there is repentance for this idolatry which will mean acting against type.  2) means that a naturally sweet disposition will in some large part arise from flesh-dynamics that simply want to justify self, protect from relational pain, pursue some idol of 'niceness'.  Such a sweet person's repentance will involve assertiveness, standing up for truth etc while the bruque person's repentance will involve the reverse.
 
but also,
 
4) In Christ there is spiritual gifting which will very often redeem those God-given temperaments from 1).  The same Spirit through Whom I was made is the Spirit who gifts me in Christ.  He gifts me and gives me to the body of Christ in my distinctness to be a member of this diverse church.  
 
 
1) and 4) are the pre-redemption and post-redemption celebrations of diversity.  I think the last thing God wants is homogeneity.  The devil through the idolatry of 2) shoves us into some very bland temperamental boxes.  In this sense homogenisation is satanic.  Dan Allender talks about how a woman's flesh-dynamics lead her really only to three basic categories: good girl, party girl and tough girl.  There's a billion ways of being a woman if we live out our identity in Christ, there's only a few very narrow ones if we don't.
 
So yes broadly speaking I think repentance will look different for different people. (e.g. party girl should take responsibility, good girl should let go, tough girl should sweeten up.) But that's not because there's some 'average girl' in the middle that Christ is shepherding womankind towards!  Following Christ will mean expressing our God-given, Spirit-redeemed diversity not squishing us into some homogenous mould.  
 

Some follow-up questions to consider:

  • If the gospel doesn't create homogenous personalities then why do our churches, not to mention our ministry training bodies, churn them out?? 
  • Why is 'being nice' the bland medium that defines so much of our Christianity??
  • Is there space for confrontation in our homogenized churches?? 

 

.

Published on Leave a comment on Reflecting the Lord's glory

What's this verse about?

And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into His likeness with ever-increasing glory...  (2 Cor 3:18)

Is it about enjoying private devotional experiences with Jesus so that we become like Him?   That's a popular interpretation.  And it's half right.  But it's really not the full story.

The NIV footnote says that 'reflect' can be translated 'contemplate'.  But I think 'reflect' is a better translation.  It's a word that means 'showing like a mirror shows'.  The question is this - Is the mirror-like-ness telling us about how the beholder looks at the mirror?  Or is the mirror-like-ness telling us about how the mirror itself reflects outwardly?

My guess is the latter.  Our faces are like mirrors reflecting outwardly to the world the glory of Jesus.

This fits the context.  Paul has been reminding us about Moses's face-to-face encounters with the Lord (2 Cor 3:7,13).  He put a veil on to stop the Israelites seeing this fading glory.  We though (as v18 says) have unveiled faces.  And so what happens?   Others see the glory of Christ as we reflect it out to the world.

So this verse does indeed depend on our having devotional experiences with Jesus - just as Moses did (e.g. Exodus 33:7-11).  But that in itself will not transform us into Christ's likeness.  Reflecting Christ's glory out into the world - that will transform us.

Which is what the next two chapters of 2 Corinthians are all about.

Too often we think of holiness as one thing and mission as another.  Really they are mutually defining and mutually achieved.  Just as God's own being is a being in outreach, so our Christian character is a character in outreach.  To divorce the two is disastrous.

One of these days I'll write some posts on holiness in mission as parallel to God's being in becoming.  One of these days...

.

Published on Leave a comment on Reflecting the Lord’s glory

What's this verse about?

And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into His likeness with ever-increasing glory...  (2 Cor 3:18)

Is it about enjoying private devotional experiences with Jesus so that we become like Him?   That's a popular interpretation.  And it's half right.  But it's really not the full story.

The NIV footnote says that 'reflect' can be translated 'contemplate'.  But I think 'reflect' is a better translation.  It's a word that means 'showing like a mirror shows'.  The question is this - Is the mirror-like-ness telling us about how the beholder looks at the mirror?  Or is the mirror-like-ness telling us about how the mirror itself reflects outwardly?

My guess is the latter.  Our faces are like mirrors reflecting outwardly to the world the glory of Jesus.

This fits the context.  Paul has been reminding us about Moses's face-to-face encounters with the Lord (2 Cor 3:7,13).  He put a veil on to stop the Israelites seeing this fading glory.  We though (as v18 says) have unveiled faces.  And so what happens?   Others see the glory of Christ as we reflect it out to the world.

So this verse does indeed depend on our having devotional experiences with Jesus - just as Moses did (e.g. Exodus 33:7-11).  But that in itself will not transform us into Christ's likeness.  Reflecting Christ's glory out into the world - that will transform us.

Which is what the next two chapters of 2 Corinthians are all about.

Too often we think of holiness as one thing and mission as another.  Really they are mutually defining and mutually achieved.  Just as God's own being is a being in outreach, so our Christian character is a character in outreach.  To divorce the two is disastrous.

One of these days I'll write some posts on holiness in mission as parallel to God's being in becoming.  One of these days...

.

Published on Leave a comment on The Bible and God

Ok, so the bible is not God.  But then, what is the relationship between God and the written word?

I'll devote quite a big proportion of next week to that question as I blog about preaching.  But for now let me explore an analogy with the sacraments.  Marc can shoot me down - he's doing a lot of work on this subject.  But let me have a go anyway.

Here's my thought - we tend to veer between two mistakes: a Catholic and a Zwinglian view of the bible.

The Catholic view is to see my bible reading working ex opere operato (by doing it, it's done).  I advance the book mark and it is has worked.  The words go in (sort of), my reading plan gets ticked off - job done.

My response?  Disengaged duty.

The Zwinglian view is to see my bible reading as memorialist.  Christ is essentially absent from these words, but they're a jolly good reminder of Him.  And if I employ my imagination and proper meditative techniques, if I think these words into moral, pastoral and theological categories then my thoughts will carry me to Christ. 

My response?  Pietistic duty.

On the first understanding, I don't need to do anything but go through the motions.  The second understanding is a reaction to the first in which I take the spiritual task into my own hands. 

But what if Christ is really and already present through the words of Scripture.  The words aren't Christ Himself.  But neither are they separate such that I must bridge the gap.  Instead, the words are carrying me to Christ who they constantly proclaim (John 5:39).

It's not just reading comprehension.  But neither is it my job to make an otherwise dead letter living and active.  Instead the bible is already a living and lively word ever proceeding from the mouth of God and ever offering to me the Bread of life. 

The bible works on me.  Not apart from faith.  But not by my works either. It is His work - His spiritual work - that is ever offered to me.

Here's what I say to people from the Book of Common  Prayer as I give them communion:

The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for you preserve your body and soul to everlasting life.  Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for you and feed on Him in your heart by faith, with thanksgiving.

And you say - typical Anglicans, straddling all the positions!  Well - Jesus does say 'This is my body.'  And He does say 'Do this in remembrance of me.'  It's just that this is not the centre of communion.  Feeding on Him in our hearts by faith as we feed on the bread between our teeth - this is. 

So as we read our bibles we acknowledge, this IS the word of God.  And we acknowledge that this reading will cause us many subsequent thoughts that bring us to Jesus in manifold ways.  But essentially as we read the Scriptures we are being fed spiritually there and then with the Bread of life.  

My response?  Believing expectancy. 

 

Does that work as an analogy?

.

Published on Leave a comment on "My Body Hell"

Last night I caught the end of a wonderful documentary about Marlie Casseus from Haiti.  She suffers from a rare disease called Polysostotic Fibrous Dysplasia.  A 16-pound growth overwhelmed her whole face to point she could barely breathe and was about to go blind.

She was ostracized by her community - many considering her to be demon-possessed. (Some websites I've read have made much of this "primitive" reaction to her).  But, by contrast, she has been well loved by her family and her church.  And Marlie loves Jesus - she was able to speak about her faith a number of times.  It was very moving.

A Christian charity arranged for her to fly to Miami to receive life-changing if not life-saving surgery.  Here are the results:

Marlie's new face

 

Here's what I found so incredibly awful though.

In the commercial breaks there were adverts for the show that went on immediately prior to this documentary. The title of this other show was: “My Body Hell”, suggesting a similarly sobering subject.  Not so!  This other programme dealt with the ‘living hell’ of nipple hair and relative breast size. Apparently such concerns can have devastating implications for one’s date-ablility index. 

It was indeed truly hellish. But not in the way the programme makers intended.

It got me thinking about those 'primitive' Haitians who demonized Marlie for her physical deformity.  They've got nothing on the body Nazis of the West.  We'll demonize anyone's physical imperfections, beginning with our own.

A sense of perspective please.  And a sense of hope that the Christian community can be different.

.

Published on Leave a comment on “My Body Hell”

Last night I caught the end of a wonderful documentary about Marlie Casseus from Haiti.  She suffers from a rare disease called Polysostotic Fibrous Dysplasia.  A 16-pound growth overwhelmed her whole face to point she could barely breathe and was about to go blind.

She was ostracized by her community - many considering her to be demon-possessed. (Some websites I've read have made much of this "primitive" reaction to her).  But, by contrast, she has been well loved by her family and her church.  And Marlie loves Jesus - she was able to speak about her faith a number of times.  It was very moving.

A Christian charity arranged for her to fly to Miami to receive life-changing if not life-saving surgery.  Here are the results:

Marlie's new face

 

Here's what I found so incredibly awful though.

In the commercial breaks there were adverts for the show that went on immediately prior to this documentary. The title of this other show was: “My Body Hell”, suggesting a similarly sobering subject.  Not so!  This other programme dealt with the ‘living hell’ of nipple hair and relative breast size. Apparently such concerns can have devastating implications for one’s date-ablility index. 

It was indeed truly hellish. But not in the way the programme makers intended.

It got me thinking about those 'primitive' Haitians who demonized Marlie for her physical deformity.  They've got nothing on the body Nazis of the West.  We'll demonize anyone's physical imperfections, beginning with our own.

A sense of perspective please.  And a sense of hope that the Christian community can be different.

.

Published on Leave a comment on 1 Corinthians 9 sermon – part three

...Continued from here.

To offer the gospel for free and for everyone requires huge sacrifices on our part.  To offer it for free will put great pressure on our time and money - Paul had to work a second job.  To offer it freely for everyone will require huge sacrifices of personal comfort.  It will require that we leave our own comfort zones of 'people like us' and enter deeply into the cultures and sub-cultures of others. 

That's what Paul addresses from v19:

 19Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.

And then Paul gives some examples:

20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.

Paul grew up Jewish.  He called himself a Hebrew of Hebrews.  Circumcised on the 8th day. Of the tribe of Benjamin.  Paul was a Pharisee.  You know those pious religious types who kept every law and made up more just for fun?  Paul was one of them.  But then, as v1 reminds us, Paul met Jesus.  Jesus turned Paul’s life around.  And Paul realizes it’s not about the law.  It’s not about legal obedience.  It’s not about circumcision or eating the right food or observing special days or jumping through any of the hoops of the OT law.  It’s about Jesus.  To be saved – to be right with God - trusting Jesus is IT.  It’s not: trust Jesus and do your best.  It’s not: trust Jesus and be circumcised.  It’s not: trust Jesus and take a pilgrimmage to Bognor Regis.  It’s: trust in Jesus.  Full stop.  And all that religious stuff has every danger in the world of getting in the way of simply trusting Jesus.  And so Paul writes the most damning critique of Jewish practices in all the bible.  He says ‘If you think Jewish practices and religious observances get you to God, you’re headed for hell.’  It’s Jesus and only Jesus.  The book of Galatians is all about this.  He even says at one stage: ‘If you think getting circumcised will bring you closer to God – I hope the knife slips.’  (Gal 5:12).  He actually says that.  You couldn’t find a person more opposed to Jewish practices as a road to salvation.

But what does he say in v20 here?  He says when I’m with Jews, I’m like a Jew.  I dress like a Jew.  I eat like a Jew.  I go to all the Jewish festivals.  I even pay for others to go to Jewish festivals.  And here’s how much Paul is flexible.  In Acts 16, Paul goes with another gospel worker called Timothy into a predominantly Jewish area.  Timothy’s mum was a Jew, but his dad was not.  So Timothy had not been circumcised.  You know how flexible Paul is?  The man who wrote: “If you get circumcised to get closer to God – I hope the knife slips”- he circumcised Timothy.  Not to get closer to God, but to get closer to the Jews.  Not to save Timothy – to save those Jews.  Paul didn’t want all his conversations with the Jews to be ‘Why isn’t Timothy circumcised?  His mother’s a Jew, don’t you care about the Old Testament?’  Paul didn’t want his conversations to be about foreskins – he wanted his conversations to be about Christ.  So he said, “Timothy... mate. You’re going to have to take one for the team here.”  That's the kind of costly flexibility that's called for.

Imagine I’m invited to a high Anglican church to preach – and I say ‘I won’t wear your priestly robes, because wearing robes doesn’t get you closer to God.  And so I show up in a T-shirt and shorts.  I might think I’m demonstrating the gospel to them: “It’s not about robes, it’s about Christ.”  Are they going to listen to a word I say?  No and actually my refusal to wear robes makes robes the big issue.  Robes don’t get you closer to God no.  But not wearing robes doesn’t make you closer to God either.  So wear the robes and preach the gospel.

I once spoke to a group of Muslims from the bible.  After I read from the bible I didn’t have anywhere to put the bible and so, I put the bible on the floor by my feet.  Every widened eye was fixed on my bible and jaws were on the floor.  This was how the Christian treated his holy book??  And they didn’t listen to a word I said.  I might think I’m prioritising Christ by being careless about my religious and cultural practices.  Actually when I’m careless about my religious and cultural practices, THOSE practices become the issue and no-one listens about Christ.

How far do you go?  Well if you were living among Muslims and everyone fasts at Ramadan, it’s the holy thing to do, would you fast?  Would you fast to Jesus, while they fast to Allah?  That's an issue to seriously consider.  If you’re a woman and all the Muslim women wore a burkha, and to wear less than a full burkha was to cause offence. Would you wear a burkha or at least a hijab or some other headscarf?  You'd have to seriously consider that woudn't you? 

Again, here’s the fascinating thing.  If you don’t fast, all your conversations are going to be about fasting.  If you don’t wear a head covering all your conversations are going to be about clothing.  If you do fast, if you do wear the clothes – then any conversations about food and clothes get off on the right foot.  Because you say, ‘I’m doing it for Jesus, let me tell you about Him.’

To be conitnued...

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer