Previous Post – Gay Christians Follow Up – Wendy Gritter

When people discuss (or debate) what the Bible says about homosexuality, it generally is brought up that Jesus was completely silent about the issue.  For some, this suggests to them that Jesus did not condemn it.  He did not hesitate to condemn other sin, so his silence speaks volumes.  Others argue that His silence demonstrates that He held true to the Old Testament teachings that prohibit same-sex relationships.  In other words, if He disagreed with centuries of teaching on so important an issue, surely He would have said something.  My argument is this: Jesus was not silent about homosexuality.

Before you get excited, I am not going attempt to tell what Jesus did or did not believe about same-sex attraction or gay relationships.  Neither am I going to claim that we’ve missed a reference to these topics in the Gospel records.  If the debate could that easily been put to rest, it would have been long ago.  Our problem is that in looking for some explicit affirmation or condemnation, we miss His more important response.

If Jesus had spent a life time teaching about every actual and potential theological issue, question of sin or interpretation of Scripture, He would have died an old man not have brushed the surface.  This does not mean He had/has nothing to say about these many issues, but rather than He choose to use His few years on earth a different way.  He modeled for us and called us into a way of life that would form us into a people that would be best prepared to, by His Spirit, respond to the challenges of life and mission.  It is a way of life made possible because, through His death and resurrection, we can live Christ together into the world.

Little Flowers Community is by no means a paragon of missional and moral perfection.  However, we have become a community that is welcoming and safe for people to belong- people who often feel alienated and excluded from the church, including people who are gay.  While it is not always easy to navigate, we’ve built honest, generative and uncompromising relationships with people while unabashedly live and preaching the gospel.  People who see this often ask me how we became this way.  Interestingly, it was not by design- at least not directly.

Early in our formation as a community, we became deeply convinced by the Anabaptist tradition we had adopted that we were to embrace an approach to spiritual and missional formation that was centered around the life and teachings of Jesus, seeking to live explicitly His teachings together in our community.  We wanted to do more than worship Jesus as Savior, important as that is, but we also wanted to follow Him as Lord.  And so, we started with the Sermon on the Mount.

We are still on that journey to this day and will continue on it for as long as God sees fit to work in and through our community.  While my book, “The Cost of Community” explores in great detail the beginning and foundations of that journey, God continues to shape us into His people.  Unlike an emphasis on personal piety alone, which is too often the primary (or even exclusive) focus of many evangelical churches, our shared formation is such that we are propelled into His mission as a result of living His life and teachings.  It is in this way that we have become a community that has been able to welcome the unwelcomed.

“Jesus subverted the patterns of religious expectation, where people had to align themselves first in wholeness and holiness before they could even presume to approach God. Instead, God reached out even in the midst of our brokenness to declare and demonstrate himself as our loving Father.” (The Cost of Community, pg. 147)

Yes, we need to continue to discuss and debate these issues.  If this week has taught me anything it is that we all have a long way to go to better understand each other and the God we love and serve.  However, we must recognize the the quickest way into discovering God’s heart for people and how to respond to them with radical grace and unconditional love is to become the people Jesus has called us to be.

“This is a significant paradigm shift, moving from a posture of policing to an almost maternal care for the new life being formed in our community. We bear the greater responsibility at this stage. Our behavior, not the outsider’s, must be held to a high standard. The Sermon on the Mount is critical in forming us into the kind of soil in which people can be fruitfully rooted.” (The Cost of Community, pg. 191)

So Jesus was not silent about homosexuality.  While He did not make an direct statements about the topic, He gave an unquestionably clear call to a way of life for His people- a way of life that would form us into a people who would respond to any and all circumstances and questions with love, grace and an authority established by lives of Christlikeness.

Previous Post – Hospitality, Economics & The Suffering Church

If you are new my blog or do not know me personally, you might not know a critical part of my own journey.  While in high school I came to the realization that much of my sexual attraction was for the same-sex.  Most of you will know that I am also happily married to a beautiful woman who I love with all my heart and who is the object of my desire- that is, I think my wife is the sexiest person on the planet.  With that being said, it might be easy for many people to assume that, through the intervention of God (through whatever means one imagine), I have been “healed”, “freed” and/or “changed” from my same-sex attraction.  This would be a false assumption.

In truth, my sexual orientation has not changed since high school.  If you noticed, I said that much of my attraction was for men, but not my only attraction.  I have always had a strong sexual attraction for both genders.  I think this is important to state for a couple of reasons.  First, my marriage is not a sham that I took on to convince myself or others that I was “normal”.  I did not choose my wife because I denied myself the option of men.  I choose my wife because I loved her and wanted to spend the rest of my life building a family together.

Second, from all my experience, relationships and years of research (from sources across the board), I firmly reject efforts made to “repair” or reverse someones sexual orientation.  This says nothing about what I believe about whether I am affirming of same-sex relationships or not, only that those efforts have been proven futile and damaging, and therefore want to be very clear that no such reparation occurred in my life.

Recently, a friend in very much the same situation as me wrote me an email and asked me a question I wasn’t prepared for.  He asked:

“Jamie, do you identify as gay?”

His question has stuck with me ever since, as the issue of terminology with respect to sexuality and specifically same-sex attraction is one which the Christian community is largely floundering over.  What does it really mean for a person to say, “I am gay”?  For many of my friends, this is an easy question to answer, but interestingly, despite how obvious the answer is to those friend, many of them come to a entirely different answer.  Let me explain.

For gay friends, both Christian and otherwise (and a few straight Christian friends), to be gay means to be attracted to the same-sex.

For most of my straight Christian friends, to be gay means to not only be attracted to the same-sex, but to affirm and participate in same-sex sexual relationships.

So which is it?  Recently, this topic came up on an intense (and somewhat controversial) panel discussion at the Gay Christian Network conference.  Justin Lee, executive director of GCN said (see full video here):

“In most of the world- certainly in most of America, and certainly for folk in my generation and younger- we’ve grown up in a world where ‘gay’ means one thing and that is ‘a person who is attracted to the same sex’.”

My friend Wendy Gritter, executive director of New Direction Ministries of Canada, was also on the panel and added:

“If indeed the term ‘gay’, in our broader culture, is received as descriptive and not an all-encompassing identity, by encouraging people to not describe themselves as gay, isn’t that inherently encouraging a lack of honesty and self-acceptance of the reality of same-sex attraction?”

These two comments reflect well the stance that most of my gay Christian friends hold, as well as some of straight Christian friends.  However, anyone who have grown up in the wider evangelical community in North America will realize that such positions run contrary to most of the understandings and assumptions with the church.  For example, another panelist, Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International (a ministry which describes itself as “the world’s largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality”), recently wrote the following for Charisma magazine:

“Celibacy is the godly option for all single men and women. Yet today, while many Christians with same-sex attractions are choosing celibacy, they’re also opting to keep the gay identity/label. This falls short of God’s best because identity matters. How we view and refer to ourselves is very important.”

For Alan, as well as most Christians I’ve encountered in the wider church, it seems that to refer to oneself as gay is to accept it as an identity defining.  This position has fueled the assumption among many Christians that to identify oneself as gay was to affirm the orientation and therefore be willing to participate in the “gay lifestyle”.  They take exception to statements like the ones that Justin and Wendy made, claiming that the word does, in fact, mean what their understanding affirms.  However, dictionary definitions do little to help the discussion, with some leaning towards one side of this argument, some to the other, while still others that affirm both.

(As a brief, but critical aside, let me encourage those who are unaware that, for the most part, referring to a gay person as a “homosexual” is not generally appropriate.  The term has come to be a derogatory expression that all of my gay friends- and myself- strongly find offensive and ask that you refrain from using.)

While I strongly agree Justin and Wendy, both for the definition of gay, but also with their convictions about the need for the church to accept that definition, I would call for caution.  While challenging someone like Alan Chambers, whose role is to represent one of the worlds largest ministries to gay people, is a prophetic necessity, we must have much grace to other Christians who find themselves in often very hostile environments where such a change is concerned.  I am not saying we should soft-pedal on injustice out of self-protection- even writing this could threaten my own financial stability in ministry- but instead recognize that this issue is first pastoral, not simply ideological.  We may to navigate like people who are bilingual, slowly helping others understand the differences.

I would argue that the most widely accepted understanding of the word “gay” is someone attracted to the same-sex.  However, the fact is that millions of Christians utilize the word with their understanding in context often isolated from the wider context.  To see change in how Christians understand and use the term will take a long time- longer than is probably right or fair.  Further, there will be some circles in which the change will not happen at all.  For Christians and Christian communities that genuinely desire to missionally engage gay people outside of the church or with gay Christians (which there are many, many, many) or even with people in the wider post-Christendom culture, this is a change we must work at diligently.

Why?  Because, we are to follow Christ, who “did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself” (Phil. 2:6,7).  In other words, the onus of connecting meaningfully with people falls to the Christian.  We do not require people to adapt to us, to our language or our culture, in order to encounter Christ.  This is not license to be amoral, but rather a foundational missiological commitment that we affirm in almost every other expression of Christian mission.

Some may argue, like Alan Chambers that the “problem with being a gay Christian is that gay takes center stage. But God won’t share His throne with anyone or anything.” After all, some will say, I don’t identify as a ’straight Christian’.  yet these statements miss the fact that we live in a heteronormative culture, which means that we don’t have to say we are “straight Christians” because heterosexuality is by far the assumed reality of most people until they identify otherwise.

Therefore, when my gay friends refer to themselves as “gay Christians” they do not do so because their orientation is somehow more primary than their identity in Christ, but rather because it is all too often assumed that the words gay and Christian are irreconcilable.  It is a response to year beyond counting where gay people have had to live in fear and silence regarding their sexuality, even (and sometime especially) from the church.

So, what then do I say when someone asks me if I am gay?  My response has general been to explain that my sexual orientation is bisexual.  Does this mean I am not gay?  Not necessarily.  It depends on who is asking and what they mean by the word?  Am I happy with that ambiguity?  No, but it is my commitment to continue to have these kinds of conversations, the broaden peoples understanding so that the divergence between these two understandings becomes less and less.  It is not something I do because I owe it to my fellow gay Christians- though that is a motivation- but rather because faithfulness to Christ requires no less.

Let’s explore this with comments and questions.  However, any attacks or offensive posts will be deleted.  Thanks for keeping this a safe place.

Previous Post – Epic Fail Pastors Conference 2012

Last week, I wrote about the realities of suffering and the church.  Jesus seemed fairly clear that those who follow Him would suffer for it, suggesting that a church that does not suffer may not be following Christ as He has called them to.  Again, we are not to go looking for suffering for its own sake, but to be unwaveringly bold as we dare to live out the teachings of Jesus, to follow Him, not just worship Him.

It is all too easy for us to define our position as a “persecuted” community through the lens of things which we stand against.  In other words, as we publicly oppose abortion, it is not uncommon to be vocally rejected and despised by many people in the world.  However, while such stances are necessary (even if we have gone about it poorly more often than not), I do not believe that our true suffering will primarily about what we oppose.  Instead, following Christ will produce a community whose behaviour, even internally, will offend and threaten the powers that be.

Perhaps one of the most critical of such behaviours in early church history was the practice of hospitality, especially with respect to welcoming people of very diverse, even divergent, economic positions.  Early Christian communities were often characterized by their inclusion of the rich and the poor together.  It was not simply that both were included, but rather than the nature of that inclusion was intentionally subversive to the expectations and patterns of the world.  The poor were not condescended to or merely tolerated, but often given the place of honour, while the rich were encouraged to humble themselves in the community.

It is critical, at this stage, to understand that Jesus (and His wider Jewish tradition) held very integrated view the material and the spiritual with respect to poverty/wealth.  In other words, it is not merely a matter of if you have great wealth or no wealth nor is simply a matter of being “spiritually” rich or poor.  It was both.  Jesus affirmed that follow Him would lead to a life in which the bondage of material wealth would be loosened and our commitment to generosity, simplicity and hospitality would lend itself to an economic place that was more likely to be humble than in abundance.

This is part of Jesus’s upside down kingdom, living in a way so contrary to the way of the world that it seems ludicrous.  And yet, Jesus calls us into communities where poverty (as nuanced above) is something we are to take joy in, while wealth (again, nuanced) something that should teach us humility.  While we do not have the space to get into this in detail here, the point is that our communities should relate to the dynamics of economics differently than the world does.

However, what is most critical for us to recognize is that the rich and the poor did not just happen to be part of the same community, but were there by necessity.  Unlike today, where choosing a Christian community is akin to shopping the market, the early Christians were a minority, an often persecuted minority at that.  Thus, they found themselves together as a community of diversity.

That diversity, while perhaps a necessity in their context, was hugely formational to the nature of their community and the focus of their ministry.  The Roman Emperor Julian commented (disdainfully) on such an identity when he said that their numbers were “specially advanced through the loving service rendered to strangers, and through their care for the burial of the dead. It is a scandal that there is not a single Jew who is a beggar, and that the godless Galileans care not only for their own poor but for ours as well; while those who belong to us look in vain for the help that we should render them.” In other words, they were selflessly caring for the very people who persecuted and killed them.  And this was a threat to the empire and its interests.

All this is to say that, when we consider becoming a community that suffers for Christ, we should give special attention to how we relate to those of lower or higher economic status.  Do our church communities truly and functionally honour the poor?  Do we encourage the wealthy to humble themselves?  How often is the reverse true? These are critical questions for us to unflinchingly ask ourselves.

However, it goes much deeper than this.  After all, unlike the early church, necessity does not require most of us to share life with people of different economic or social status.  As a result, our communities lack the powerful formation that shapes who we are and the ministry we engage in.  Such an admission requires that we ask much harder questions, such as: Might obedience to Christ call demand a re-orientation, even relocation, to intentionally pursue such relationships?  If such a response is necessary, are we willing to uproot ourselves, our families, perhaps even our churches in order to follow Him? As I am fond of saying, when God said there should be no poor among you, He wasn’t recommending segregation.

What does this have to do with suffering?  Without question, the radical reorientation I believe that God is calling His church to will threaten the powers that be, both in the world and among the religious status quo.  It is only when we begin to invite people into our homes, attempt to feed the hungry in our communities, create alternatives for economic justice- it is only in the midst of such a reorientation that begin to discover our counter-cultural Christ’s community is called to be and how many of the world’s (and the church’s) systems resist such a change.

Not every Christian is called to move into a poor neighbourhood (though far more are called to that than are obediently responding).  However, every Christian is called to live a life of generous simplicity and radical hospitality in whatever context they are called (again, not one they simply happen to be in- there is nothing incidental about place).  Every Christian is called to participate in a community that is seeking to be formed into the image of Christ- a formation that necessitates sacrificial and costly choices.

What do you think?  Am I overstating my case?  If not, what response should we give?

Previous Post – Remember Haiti

A few years ago, while reading through Church history, I was struck by how often Christian communities found themselves the object of persecution and trials.  More pointedly, it seemed that those times where the church suffered most were the times their witness was most vibrant and authentic.  While I had seen this dynamic before, I had always assumed that their suffering produced in them the notable faithfulness- and to be sure, that is a part of it.  However, I began to wonder if that was the only way the two dynamics were connected.  What if it was their very faithfulness to Christ that brought on their suffering?  The more I studied, the more I realized this was equally the case.

Jesus not only made it clear that His followers- us included- would face suffering, but that such suffering was a blessing which we should rejoice in.  This is such a contrast to the culture of comfort and social acceptability that Christians in the West largely enjoy.  Some will cite examples of Christian suffering here, like no prayer in school and the like, but these inconveniences are nothing compared the genuine suffering God’s people have faced through history.

Sadly, such suffering was not always at the hands of those who were outside of the faith.  All too often, both in Jesus day and throughout Church history, many Christians who sought to live faithfully according to the way of Jesus found themselves facing the persecution of the larger Christian community.  Jesus knew that follow Him would often put us at odds with the world and the religious authorities alike.  It was a hard truth, but one that was held firmly by His disciples and later followers.

While we do not need to out looking for suffering- nor justify legitimate rejection by the wider world due to our self-righteousness and pride- we must ask ourselves why the church in the West faces so little of the suffering Jesus promised we would see.  Some would argue that our peace is a blessing from God, linking it nationalism or exceptionalism, but an examination of history and Scripture suggests a very different conclusion to me.  While God does blessing us, we must also consider the reality that millions of others worldwide, Christians sisters and brothers included, suffering because of some of our so called “blessings”.

Why should such suffering be a blessing?  When we follow Christ in faith, even in the face of suffering, we are stripped of our pretenses and false-securities.  We realize in tangible ways that we are utterly dependent on Him, and by extension of His Spirit in us, on each other, His Body.  We are blessed because Christ works in and through us to bring us to maturity, not from a distance, but from right along side us.  For before we suffered for Him, He suffered for us, inviting us to join Him in that painful, yet hopeful and redemptive work.

Again, the challenge is not to go looking for suffering, but to instead be unwaveringly bold as together we dare to live out the teachings of Jesus, to follow Him, not just worship Him.  This might sound obvious, but the realities that such a commitment will not only put us at odds with the world, but perhaps even with the status quo of the Christian subculture.  For example, our radical obedience will, like it did with Jesus, bring us into the company of people the church has rejected as sinners, as “unclean”.  Those we love and respect in the faith might rebuke us, even reject us.  And while we are never arrogant, it may require that we defy the norms to be faithful to Christ.

I believe that we are in a crisis of faith in the western church.  We need to rediscover what it means to follow Jesus to any end He calls us to.  We need to be willing to ask the hard questions about what kinds of communities are being produced in our culture- communities of Christ or communities of consumers?  Or communities at all?  I am, however, also hopeful.  I see many people gathering together to live just such obedience.

Shall we join them?

Previous Post – Jesus I Have Loved, But Paul? Blog Tour

Two years ago today, Haiti was rocked by an earthquake magnitude 7.0 Mw, leaving hundreds of thousands dead, as many wounded and over a million people left homeless.  This would devastate any country, but Haiti was already suffering under extreme poverty.  A few months after the quake, I had the opportunity to visit Haiti with Haiti Partners (also see their Canadian office here).  Nothing could have prepared me for the devastation.  (See post about my visit here).

Yet, what was equally amazing was the spirit of the Haitian people.  I remember listening to the WOZO Choir (see above) practice and how they symbolized the beauty of the country and its people.  Through the work of Haiti Partners, I encountered a people with a determination and hope that was humbling.  I cannot overstate my endorsement for this organization.  They are worthy of your daily prayers and regular support.

Kent Annan, my friend, fellow Likewise author and co-director of Haiti Partners, has written two powerful books that I encourage you to buy:

“Following Jesus Through The Eye Of The Needle: Living Fully, Loving Dangerously”

“After Shock: Searching for Honest Faith When Your World Is Shaken”

Also watch this update by John Engle, also a friend and co-director of Haiti Partners:

Previous Post – What Is The Church? The Rule of Paul

What Is The Church? Introduction

What Is The Church? Discernment & Discipline – 1

What Is The Church? Disciples Breaking Bread Together – 2

What Is The Church? Baptism & the New Community – 3

What Is The Church? The Fullness of Christ – 4

What Is The Church? The Rule of Paul – 5

Conclusion

Each of these five practices- or rather especially, when these five practices are seen together- lead us to living into the gospel in the whole of our lives and before a watching world.  It is when we see these happening- not as expressions of ritual formality or rigid moral obligation- it is then that we begin to encounter God at work in His world and participate with Him in building His kingdom.

The way each of these practices are engaged helps us dismantle an approach to church life that is built by the assumption (conscious or otherwise) that the “Christian life” is somehow lived apart from the “real world”.  Many people have told me that what we are trying to do a Little Flowers Community is commendable, but surely not very realistic outside of Sunday worship.  It’s upside-down to the real world, they say.  However, we stand with Matt Woodley:

“Maybe the world as we know it is upside down, but we’re so used to it that it seems right side up. When Jesus announced the coming of the kingdom (Mt 4:17), he initiated a revolutionary movement to set things right, to restore this upside down, off-kilter, broken world by turning it right side up.” (from “Gospel of Matthew: God With Us”, IVPress 2011)

Thus, becoming this living alternative in a world where “common sense” suggests otherwise is part of our identity and purpose as a people of Christ. The very fact that it is so very different from the world is what gives it the evangelical authority, offering the hope of a new life never before considered.  For some, this will offend and threaten, thus Christ’s frequent reminders that we should expect and take joy in our suffering for His sake. You cannot make such an absolute allegiance to Christ without alienating the expectations of the state, society, economic systems and much more.

However, many will be drawn to this new way of life as one of hope and peace.  The beauty of it is that, while distinctly Christian, these practices hold powerful appeal to a watching world, providing a way into the life of Christ that doesn’t require them to don the garments of Christendom, but instead can enter in with their own celebrated individuality and gifting.  It is simultaneously counter-cultural where necessary, yet redemptively affirming of who we are as individuals and groups.

Some will say that these practices fail to make the verbal proclamation of the gospel a central practice.  I would suggest that this way of life invariably produces such proclamation as the natural fruit of a life lived in the Spirit.  Further, such proclamation is given authority by the credibility of the people proclaiming it- not only from their love and devotion to Christ, but also in light of the humility and confession in the face of their sin and brokenness.  Rather than a practice that comes alongside these five, I would suggest that proclamation is an overarching given to this kind of Church life.  (As an important aside, the challenge also lies with what we are to be proclaiming as gospel.  To that end, I cannot more strongly endorse to you Scot McKnight’s book “The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited”.)

In our experience, which I do not suggest should be universally applied, such practices have worked best when a community of faith is of a size that allows for the time and energy to embrace these practices.  Further, it requires a willingness to allow for the inefficiency that such formation demands for the great good of the fruit that will be produced in the long term.  It also requires a posture of humility, where the standard of righteousness is emphasized graciously inward, not as a standard for acceptance and embrace (see my post, “Believing, Behaving, Belonging”, which I also explore in more detail in my book, “The Cost of Community”).

These practices are not meant to describe all of what the church is.  Further, they will be practiced differently in different contexts.  Yet, we believe that they provide an essential foundation for being the people of God together, living into our identity and purpose as Christ’s Body.  It is when this is done that God is given the greatest glory before a waiting and watching world.

Does your community embrace these practices in this way?  What would it take to do so?

Previous Post – What Is The Church? The Fullness of Christ

What Is The Church? Introduction

What Is The Church? Discernment & Discipline – 1

What Is The Church? Disciples Breaking Bread Together – 2

What Is The Church? Baptism & the New Community – 3

What Is The Church? The Fullness of Christ – 4

In the previous post we explored how baptism into the Body of Christ draws us together in a generative mutuality, where every person is gifted within the context of the whole.  Such a posture resists hierarchical leadership formation, preferring instead a community of consensus that trust, empowers and submits individuals in their gifting as circumstance dictates.  Such a way of life is a witness to a watching world in its promise of acceptance, love and participation in the the life of God and His community.  In this next post we will engage with the practice of the open meeting, what Yoder calls the rule of Paul.

“Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to someone else sitting nearby, let the first person be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and be encouraged.” 1 Corinthians 14:29-31 (NRSV)

For the Apostle Paul, the community was the place in which God’s will was to be discerned, specifically in the very act of common worship.  Further, it is in this context of the worship community that discerning the meaning of Scripture is primarily engaged.  It does not deny academia nor those with unique giftings of teaching, but rather sees those dynamics as in submission to the primary hermeneutic of the community.

It is critical to note that this practice in worship is a natural expression of our identity in the fullness of Christ.  In other words, it is born out of our nature as a people, not primarily as an order for worship.  The implications are this: such a formation of communal mutuality must therefore shape how we function in life in general- our families, businesses, schools, etc.  While we haven’t the time or space to exploring the complexity of this aspect, it is critical that we do not limit this to the worship context alone.  Instead, the worshipful posture of God’s people should touch every aspect of life.

In the post “What Is The Church? Discipline & Discernment”, I shared some ways in which Little Flowers Community engages this practice.  There are times when this approach is chaotic, messy and (seemingly) inefficient.  However, we remind ourselves that such struggle is a product of our brokenness, not inherent to this practice.  In other words, we must resist the impulse to escape into the easier approaches of hierarchical leadership or even democratic decision making.

It is interesting that prior to Pentecost, drawing lots was an acceptable way to discern God’s will, including the choice of who would replace Judas among the twelve.  Proverbs 16:33 says, “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.”  In other words, they did not see casting lots as handing things over to chance, but instead trusted in God’s divine intervention to guide the results.  This is a critical point: the disciples would rather trust God’s intervention into drawing lots than to presume upon His will by voting.  Yet, since Pentecost, the fullness of Christ dwells within His people, allowing us discern His will together.

Such a practice acts as a signpost to a watching world that there is something greater than any one individual- even something greater than the sum of our parts.  However, it also extends an invitation into a life of incredible purpose, hope and love.  This is the fullness of life that Christ promises.  This is not to suggest there is a formula that always works and that other methods- even voting- will never work.  Rather it is about the affirmation of who we are in Christ and how that leads us to live.

What does it mean to worship together as a people of Christ?  How do you engage in the fullness of your community in worship and in life?

Previous Post – What Is The Church? Baptism & the New Community

What Is The Church? Introduction

What Is The Church? Discernment & Discipline

What Is The Church? Disciples Breaking Bread Together

What Is The Church? Baptism & the New Community

In the previous post we explored how baptism is less about a personal expression of faith, but rather the public declaration of a new, all-encompassing allegiance that take precedence over all other commitments.  Further, it is a witness to a watching world as we enter into that common life of unity with each other through the humility of repentance and the transformation and hope of grace.  In this next post, we will look at the practice of communities living out their giftings together- what Yoder calls living into the fullness of Christ.

Growing up in a rural community, we often had times where our church couldn’t provide a youth group, so we attended programs offered by other churches.  Therefore, throughout high school, I spent more of Friday nights at a local Pentecostal youth group where I heard a great deal about spiritual gifts, especially speaking in tongues and prophesying.  While my more conservative evangelical community talked about the gifts, it wasn’t with much depth or attention.  It was only years later that I realized that there was more to these dynamics than I had experienced in these two extremes.

However, when the people of God live into their gifting- and it is clear that every person is divinely gifted in some way- they manifest the diverse unity celebrated in baptism.  The Apostle Paul not only affirms that every member brings gifts into the community, but that God’s order often elevated the less honoured members.  The servant is the greatest.  The last will be first.  While we give lip service affirmation to these truths, the functional expression and respect for various giftings in the church rarely reflect that we truly believe (and thus live) these truths.

The challenge in our context comes when we equate individual gifting with individualism.  In other words, people can use the idea of their unique gifting/calling as an excuse to define their commitments and activities outside of community accountability.  Again, built upon the previous post on baptism, we see that our undivided allegiance to Christ and His Body- the community- demands that our giftings be used alongside of and in mutual submission with others in the church.

This leads to an important tension that we must be aware of.  On one hand, this diverse giftedness pushes strongly against leadership models that place expectations on one or a few people to do for the community when they are gifted to do together.  It requires that we all equally own the responsibilities of leadership.  On the other hand, we must avoid the misconception that such mutuality of leadership means no one person should ever be a primary leader.  Instead, we recognize that through circumstance, maturity and calling, there are times that the community honours certain members by submitting to their authority for the greater good.  However, this submission, in and of itself, an expression of shared leadership and not an abdication of responsibility.

At Little Flowers Community, I function as the pastor as an expression of my giftings and sense of vocation.  However, I hold no more power in the community than any other on the merits of that role or gifting.  I am one of many diversely gifted leaders who has been entrusted and empowered to walk out my gifting alongside others doing the same.  We lead by consensus as much as possible, while at times trusting different individuals or groups to take primary leadership as we discern in them the gifting and calling to do so.  (It should be noted that we find democratic means of decision making to be unhelpful, but that is a topic that deserves fuller attention at another time).  It is far from efficient, but the process reflects the formation of being one Body together, seek to let Christ be our head through the guidance of His Holy Spirit.

As a watching world sees us function in this way, they see a beautiful alternative to the systems of religious professionalism that can, intentionally or otherwise, suggest that relationship with God is attainable through the intermediate of pastor, priest, husband, etc.  Further, when the “lesser” gifts (by the measure of the world) are given honour and respect, it offers a stunning affirmation of individuality in a world that pushes us to define our worth in competition and comparison with others.

Yoder suggests that this practice is the one that has most been resisted or ignored by the church.  Why?  Perhaps because this commitment would demand the greatest reforming of how we do life and ministry together as the church.  Such a change could make many feel very threatened and insecure.  However, it is critical, both for the life of the church and its witness in the world.

Have you see this fullness of Christ lived out in community?  What would it take to embrace this in your community?

Previous Post – Top 10 Posts of 2011

What Is The Church? Introduction

What Is The Church? Discernment & Discipline

What Is The Church? Disciples Breaking Bread Together

In the previous post in the series, we explored the significance of the Eucharist in communion.  Looking beyond (though not ignoring) the layers of ritual, tradition and history, we remembered that Christ called us to remember Him through the shared meal of His disciples.  Further, that meal itself becomes a witness of the gracious and humble unity of the church to a watching world.  In this next post, we will engage what Jesus calls us to when He commands us to be baptized into His Body- what Yoder calls baptism and the new humanity.

Like with communion, the individualism in our culture has made baptism primarily an expression of individual piety.  While it is, of course, very personal, it is to be, first and foremost, an act of the person entering into a new community.  In 2 Cor. 5:16-17, some translations say being in Christ makes you a “new creature”, yet Yoder argues that it is more accurately translated in a larger, plural context, such as seen in the NIV:

“So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (emphasis added)

In other words, everything is changed.  Centrally, baptism radically calls us to a transformed fidelity.  Where are our allegiances?  When we emerge from the waters of baptism, we emerge as part of the singular new creation, namely as the Body of Christ.  We are His (and in a way, we are Him), thus making all other commitments, loyalties and identity second to the faithfulness we devote to Christ.  It should be noted that this is not license to neglect other commitments, such as family, but rather that all other commitments come under the primary commitment to God.  It is our strongest tie through which all others are either subservient or cut off.

This radical faithfulness to Christ then extends to each other as members of His Body, for we are no longer irreconcilably “other” to each other.  Instead, our otherness finds place and identity as unique and diverse expressions of the member of Christ’s Body.  Yet, our otherness mired in sin always divided us.  It would tempting to seek unity through the eradication of otherness, but that would be no different than walking out on spouse and children because we say they violate our commitment to Christ.  Our otherness is caught up in the new creation, becoming, through the grace and redemption of Jesus, a central aspect of our unity.

Thus, such faithfulness- and love- for God and each other requires a commitment to forgiveness, grace and humility.  We are to leave in the waters of baptism any enmity, fear, hate- anything that holds on to a concept of otherness- ours and/or others- that divides rather than unites.  This sounds far easier than it is- race, gender, socioeconomic differences, sexual orientation, etc.- each seeks to become the exception to the rule, allowing us to reject, alienate or subjugate the other.  The new creation in which we are reborn is a kingdom life and such dis-integration has no place.

Many members of Little Flowers Community are already baptized.  When we explored this new meaning, a few people suggested that we all get re-baptized.  Unfamiliar with Anabaptist history, they did not see the humour in their suggestion.  However, their desire for living into a baptism of this understanding is laudable.  Our commitment to pursue that shared life of the new creation is an important aspect of how we live in and relate to our neighbourhood and city.  While far from perfect, our community models a life of redeemed (and redeeming) otherness in some exceptional ways.

To avoid any shallow romanticism about these dynamics in our community, let me be clear: the unified otherness we seek to live into is complicated, messy and prone to failure.  We are all too often tempted ignore our differences.  Other times we are drawn to drown out differences towards some “ideal” of unity that is merely uniformity.  Perhaps most tempting to us is to put on the guise of celebrating our diversity without ever facing the hard and defining work that such difference invariably requires of us.  It requires repentance every time.

However, when we do the hard work that baptism calls us into, we have the opportunity of living a unity that is neither triumphant or idealistic.  It admits our failures, forgives our oppressors, unites around a singular devotion, yet all the while holds onto the best of redeemed diversity.  If we dare to live this way before a watching world, baptism and the new community of Christ is a powerful witness.

If you’ve been baptized, what did it mean to you?  Has your understanding changed?

Do you believe baptism of this kind can be a transforming witness to the world?

Previous Post – What Is The Church? Discernment & Discipline

In the previous post we explored what it meant to be a community of discernment and discipline, positing an alternative community and leadership structure over and against the more coercive power structures of hierarchical systems.  Further, we saw that it produces communities of humility and confession that represent a missional witness to a watching world.  In this next post, we will engage what it means to participate in Eucharist (or Communion or the Lord’s Supper).  Yoder calls this practice as the disciples breaking bread together.

As a child, when we sat in church during a communion service, I would hear Jesus’s words to “do this in remembrance of me”.  While I knew that He said this while sitting at a table (albeit, all of them sitting crowded on one side), I presumed that He leading His disciples in the familiar practice that was happening in front of me.  In time, I learned that centuries of ritual, conflict, culture and tradition stood between my communion experience and the table where Jesus broke break with His disciples.

The change started when I began to understand the Passover feast (which we do not have the time to explore here).  What stood out to me about this practice (along with many other Jewish traditions) was that this deeply sacred meal was integrated into the context of life and home, not set apart as a ritual largely set apart from life.  The need to “sacramentalize” the so-called mundane aspects of life became very clear.  However, even then, because of how Jesus’s followers went on to engage in this practice, it was clear that Jesus was not simply calling us to remember Him during Passover (which is only an annual event).

Instead, Jesus was calling His followers to remember Him when we came together as His people to share a meal together.  Yoder wrote in an essay:

“Our history of centuries of speculation and controversy about what happens to bread and wine when a certain special person speaks certain special Latin words over them obscured from our memory for a long time the fact that the primary  meaning of the Eucharistic gathering in the Gospel and Acts is economic. It was the fulfillment of the promise of the Magnificat that the rich would give up their advantages and the poor would be well fed. Luke’s report probably is intended to signal the fulfillment of the mandate of Deuteronomy that “there should be no poor among you.”

In our western culture, food (and meals) are far less significant, often nothing more than entertainment.  Thus, the idea of pulling Communion out of the ritual of the church worship context and incorporating it into a common meal would seem to diminish its sacredness.  Instead, we are called to rediscover and reinvest the sacred into the shared meal.  In fact, the way church gathers should arguably reorganize around this central act of worship, where hospitality return as an essential practice of the faith.

At Little Flowers Community, the shared meal is the central act of worship in our church.  Each brings what they can for a very eclectic collection of food that we share freely with one another.  Rich, poor, mentally ill or social awkward- all of us come together in the round, explicitly for our shared love for and devotion to Jesus, and celebrate Him through “feasting”.

However, the intimacy, celebration and unity that is displayed in that shared meal is a deeply attractive experience.  As people outside of the church meet us, see that intimacy, participate in our common meal, they taste and see the goodness of God.  They are not drawn by the piety of the group, but rather by the genuine love and community.  Communion, then, becomes a beautiful invitation (and opportunity) for people to begin to enter into the redemptive work of Christ.

And what better way to demonstrate the fullness of the redemptive work than Communion?  As we remember Christ’s sacrifice, we celebrate the hope of reconciliation with God.  Further, as the means of that reconciliation is to die to self and to be resurrected together as His Body, it also opens the door for genuine relationship with one another.  In this love of God and others, we can truly discover the fullness of life as individuals, uniquely known and love by God and others.  Even the redemption of creation is celebrated as the bread and wine- substance of the earth itself- is the medium by which we enact this work of restoration.

For many, participating in Communion is a private piety between the individual and God.  Has that been your experience?  Has that changed?  If so why?

What does Communion mean to you and your community?