Previous Post – The Disciples Prayer

Last Tuesday, at the annual Desiring God pastors conference, well-known pastor & author John Piper advocated for what he calls a “masculine Christianity,” claiming that “God has given Christianity a masculine feel.”

“God revealed Himself in the Bible pervasively as king not queen; father not mother,” Piper said. “The second person of the Trinity is revealed as the eternal Son not daughter; the Father and the Son create man and woman in His image and give them the name man, the name of the male…God appoints all the priests in the Old Testament to be men; the Son of God came into the world to be a man; He chose 12 men to be His apostles; the apostles appointed that the overseers of the Church be men; and when it came to marriage they taught that the husband should be the head.”

“Now, from all of that I conclude that God has given Christianity a masculine feel,” said Piper. “And being God, a God of love, He has done that for our maximum flourishing both male and female… He does not intend for women to languish or be frustrated or in any way suffer or fall short of full and lasting joy in this masculine Christianity. From which I infer that the fullest flourishing of women and men takes place in churches and families that have this masculine feel.”

More of his comments can be found here.

Generally, my online response to such controversies are to remain silent- not because I do not believe that such dangerous theology should not be confronted, but rather because, in the age of viral-videos and social media, I resist giving more air time to what I believe is ignorant, dangerous, damaging, etc.

However, when Rachel Held Evans called upon Christian men to respond, I felt compelled to break that rule.  Rachel’s challenge was as follows:

“There’s a double-standard out there in which a woman’s critique of patriarchy tends to get discounted as nothing more than the rants of an “angry feminist,” and, truth be told, I’ve grown a bit weary of hearing that charge each time I speak out about this disturbing trend in the evangelical church.

So instead, I’d like to challenge the guys to respond.”

Rachel is a writer whose passion and poignancy continues to challenge me to grow in faith and truth.  Without a question, she is a leader in the Body of Christ who I need to follow.  Her ability bring life to God’s truth- yes, that means she teaches from Scripture- and communicate it effectively and engagingly in our current culture and context is a gift to Christian everywhere.  And so, I felt her invitation deserved a response.

Since volumes have been written about what God (and His written Word) has to say about gender, I will not attempt to explain the details of what I believe and how I arrived there.  Rather, let me sum it up by saying that I am deeply convinced that God calls both women and men into all vocations in the Church, gifting and empowering them to walk with one another in obedience to those callings.  Therefore, I believe women are called to pastor churches, to teach Christians of all ages and gender.  I have seen such women walk in that obedience and have been blessed to submit to their authority, including and especially my wife, Kim.

Further, I believe that in a marriage relationship between a man and a woman, they are to work together in mutual submission, respecting the differences in their giftings and experience- difference that are apparent in the unique individual, not based on their gender.  There have been many times in which I have rightfully submitted to the authority of my wife.  At times it was because she was clearly more knowledgeable, gifted and/or experienced in the situation at hand or because we believe that the Spirit was leading her.  In faith, we work through our differences and, when necessary, submit to the other as we see appropriate.  It is not always easy nor efficient, but it seems to me that following Christ rarely is.

As I read the story of God through Scripture and study the move of God through the rest of history, I am deeply convinced that the patriarchy that is so prevalent is a reflection of the brokenness of sin which has been and is being reversed by the redemptive work of Christ.  That reversal is the work of the Spirit, breaking into the world and making God’s impossible kingdom a reality.  This is the work of God, the work of Christ and thus, the work of His Body.

We are called to be the living alternative to the broken reality of what we see in the world around us.  Failure to do so is to walk in rebellion against the only Saviour worthy of our devotion and the only King worthy of our obedience.  There is no more or even possibility for neutrality on this issue.  As Desmond Tutu once said:

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”

Worse than silence or supposed neutrality is identify the brokenness of sin in our lives and call it sacred.  It is seems almost tantamount to apostasy to celebrate as God’s intention the devastating consequences of our sin.

While unpopular to say so, I believe that Piper (and those like him) affirm these flawed beliefs out of the best intentions.  They are seeking to be faithful to what they believe is God’s design for His people- for all people.  This truth does not excuse them of the resulting sin- and yes, I believe it must be called sin- however, it should give us pause in how we respond to such failings.

Public and prophetic rebuke is often necessary in such cases.  However, there are few who seem to be able to make such corrections with the grace necessary to still reflect the God waiting to forgive their (and our) sins (and I believe Rachel is one of those few). Instead, the primary response by Christians should be one of humility, grace and unparalleled devotion to live the better alternative, at any cost.

Every generation looks back upon the Church before us and finds their failings and blind spots obvious and hard to comprehend.  Yet, like them, we are equally blind to our own failings.  The realization that our grandchildren will shake their heads at some of our failings should nurture in us a patient grace.  While it might be gratifying to “crucify” (and I do not use that word by accident) those we rightly rebuke, most are being as faithful in their flawed beliefs as we are in our own.  Yes, we need to be strong, clear and uncompromising in our correction, but love and grace must win.

As a Christian man, I am committed to submitting to Christ by submitting to the women He has called, gifted and commanded to lead His Church.  While I am grateful and humbled to do so, it should not be credited to me as meritorious in any way.  While such a commitment might be exceptional with respect to past and current realities, our measure is Christ and His kingdom.  To do any less is unacceptable.

Previous Post – Gay Christians & Missional Integrity

All guests posts represent the opinions of the contributors, not necessarily the views I hold.  However, I share guest posts to give important and varied perspectives.  Wendy Gritter is a friend who I happily invite to share here and endorse to you all.

As the Executive Director of  New Direction Ministries of Canada, Wendy has put herself into line of fire in her commitment to build bridges and to “to nurture safe & spacious places for sexual minorities to explore & grow in faith in Jesus Christ.” This post is a follow up to yesterdays post “Gay Christians & Missional Integrity”, which in less than a day has become one of the most visited posts I have ever written.  Now, over to Wendy:

_________________________________

More on Gay Christians & Missional Integrity
Wendy VanderWal-Gritter

I want to thank Jamie for adding his voice to the ongoing dialogue about honesty, authenticity and identity for those who find themselves differing from the heterosexual majority. This is a critical time in the history of the church to be intentional in articulating the many nuances and complexities of this matter.  The resolution that Christ-followers come to about their use of language, their attitudes and posture toward sexual minorities will have tremendous impact on not only how open LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) individuals will be to engage matters of Christian faith but also on others who are carefully watching how the church responds to the gay community.  Our public witness has been so hindered by the infighting and alienating responses of the church that 91% of young adults primarily describe their negative perception of Christians as “anti-gay”.   That is why it is so important that we have a constructive conversation about how to extend not only dignity and respect to those who may differ from us, but how to also demonstrate a tangible commitment to nurturing safe and spacious environments where gender and sexual minority individuals can explore and grow in faith in Jesus Christ.

For such an environment to exist, an individual has to feel able to honestly describe the reality of their life without the anticipation of a fearful, shaming or rejecting response.  Describing a reality and defining a primary identity are two different things. It is very important for individuals who experience an enduring reality of same-sex attraction to be able to speak honestly and authentically about that without continuously having to clarify and dismantle others’ assumptions.  For many young adults in particular, such a description might be simply being able to say, “I’m gay.”  By being sufficiently non-threatened to use the common descriptive language of our culture, the church demonstrates a willingness to surrender presumption, entitlement, and pride. By nurturing environments where people can be honest about the aspects of their reality that they navigate as followers of Christ without fear of judgment, we are simply living out God’s intention for shalom – a space in which people can flourish despite the limitations of our fallen world.

Many Christians seem very concerned that people would identify themselves with or by their sexuality.  However, for the majority of gay Christians I know, there is a very clear commitment to experience their primary identity as children of God, beloved, redeemed, forgiven and made righteous in Jesus Christ.  It is clear that they view their sense of self as much more than just their sexuality.  Yet as Christians lament their perception that gay people define themselves by their sexuality, it is often the case that the only intentional engagement of the church with sexual minority persons is around the issue of sexuality.  This then becomes an invitational circle that actually perpetuates an impoverished view of the nature of our humanness.

These conversations about describing reality and navigating identity don’t address the question of the appropriateness or inappropriateness of same-sex sexual relationships. That is a different conversation altogether.  Rather, this is about the more fundamental question of how our experience of sexuality affects our personhood. We as the church ought not to capitulate to a reductionistic notion that our sexuality is simply a carnal desire to have physical sexual relations. Nor should we simplistically view sexual attraction as only sexualized thought that can lead to temptation or lust.  Rather, our sexuality is our drive to overcome our aloneness – and therefore affects how we view and engage the world of people and relationships, how we express ourselves through creativity, humour, and other means of connection. Our sexuality, whether we find ourselves in the majority or minority of experiences, has the capacity to express goodness, beauty and love as we live in alignment with our beliefs and values.

All of human sexuality is affected to some degree by the reality that things are not fully as they should be. But, let us remember that heterosexual privilege is not Biblical. Heterosexual marriage may well have been God’s original design – but a privilege that puts others in a second class category is an evolved social construction and not inherently an aspect of the good news of the gospel that proclaims that ALL have access to reconciliation with God through the undeserved gift of grace through Jesus Christ.  We are called to imitate Christ and to therefore choose to be incarnational people.  This means we strip ourselves of privilege, status and reputation so that we can identify with those on the margins, those who are alienated or outcast and extend the good news of reconciliation in Christ.  Let us stand in solidarity with anyone who finds themselves a minority and work to create environments where their stories, experiences and sense of self can be shared openly, honestly and authentically such that they can genuinely experience the hospitality of Jesus and a sense of deep belonging and acceptance in the Body of Christ.

To do this will require a willingness on the part of the majority to deconstruct unhelpful assumptions, use descriptive yet culturally relevant language, and most significantly adopt a posture of humility so that we can truly listen and encounter the real experience of our brothers and sisters who do not fit our nice neat categories of gender and sexuality.  My prayer is that in the process of humble listening, we will learn how to extend the unconditional acceptance of another’s personhood just as Christ has extended it to us.

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 – 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 – The Zombie Appeal

“Moving toward my second decade of teaching college students, more than half of whom grow up in a church, of this I am certain: churches don’t talk about the women of the Bible. Of Mary mother of Jesus they have heard, and even then not all of what they have heard is accurate. But of the other woman saints of the Bible, including Miriam, the prophetic national music director, or Esther, the dancing queen, or Phoebe, the benefactor of Paul’s missions, or Priscilla, the teacher, they’ve heard almost nothing.”

That paragraph, from the introduction of Scot McKnight’s new ebook “Junia Is Not Alone”, sets the stage for the passionate and sound call for the church to remember the women to whom we owe so much.  With prophetic clarity, Scot shows how- in the case of Junia (if you don’t know who she is, all the more reason to buy this book)- the church has explicitly silenced their voices, erasing their memory and killing their legacy.

The book goes on to call us back together to a celebration and an honouring of these women.  McKnight offers us challenges in the face of the status quo and invites us to dare to tell the real story of God in all its honest beauty.  It is an invitation that is hard to resist.

This essay length ebook is well worth the $2.99- it is worth far more than that!  If you don’t own a Kindle, then simply download the free Kindle reader for your computer or smartphone.  Then buy this book.  This is a worthy addition to the writings of Scot McKnight, one that you will not want to miss.

Order it today!

Previous Post – Gospel of Matthew – Resonate Commentary Review

While I have not been personally involved in the Occupy Movement, I have been following it with great interest.  Not only is this international movement garnering the attention of the world, but it is also been engaged with by Christians who are passionate to do justice (as well as those who reject it’s claims and cause as illegitimate).  For myself, I affirm the heart of the movement in its desire to speak truth in collective non-violence.  Is it above reproach or criticism?  Of course not, but the much of what we are seeing echoes with prophetic authority, naming injustice and calling for change.  I find that very encouraging indeed.

However, the popular nature of these events also create challenges of their own.  Many participants see these public events and fail to make adequate connections with the foundations upon which such movements have been built.  Take for example the famous Salt Satyagrahah that Gandhi led in non-violent protest to the British salt monopoly and general occupation of India.  For all those who are inspired by this historic march and seek to replicate the change through similar events today, most are unfamiliar with the years of work by countless women and men that laid the foundation for such a movement to rise up in maturity and authority.

It is like watching an egg mature to the time of hatching: From the outside it appears as though nothing is happening, then suddenly a new life breaks forth out of nowhere.  In truth, what goes unseen is the long process of gestation, the delicate and incremental changes that led up to the moment of birth.  In the same way, the dynamic and public nature of such events like those in the Occupy Movement can draw many people who do not understand the complexity of the problems they are facing nor the solutions that will be necessary for meaningful change. None of this disqualifies the movement, but it should be a significant source of caution, especially for Christians.

However, my bigger concern lies- not so much with movement itself, but rather with tendency among some Christians to frame it as a kingdom movement.  Anyone who knows me knows that I am passionate about justice as a central aspect of kingdom work.  However, I am concerned by the trend seems to equate any (legitimate) social justice work as essentially kingdom work.  As Scot McKnight recently said:

“Justice gospelers today tend toward political activism, the summons for more Christians to see compassion for the poor and better laws and peace in the world, and toward a kingdom language.”

Like McKnight, I am convinced that the work of the gospel significantly includes working towards a just society (which I again affirm the Occupy Movement for work towards), yet also share his concern that “Justice is the inevitable result and implication of the gospel but not the same as the gospel”.  Thankfully there are many Christians engaging in the Occupy Movement who are not making this mistake, but many are confusing the two.  Too often we make the prophetic rebuke or correction the central act of doing justice.  In other words, we have allowed social justice activism to define our kingdom justice more so than the reverse.

While we will always need voices of prophetic correction in a world riddled with injustice, they are never meant to be the primary response to the problem(s).  The Story of God clearly demonstrates that such messages leave the messenger at great risk from those they call to repentance and justice.  Further, such voices are always held to a high standard, not only because they make suck rebukes in the name of God, but because any hypocrisy in the messenger threatens the authority and authenticity of the message itself.

Instead, the primary place for the work of kingdom justice is in and through the community of the crucified, the Body of Christ, the Church.  It is in living according the teachings and example of Jesus Christ, made possible by His life, death, resurrection, and empowered the by Holy Spirit, who He sent to unite us as His Body for His purposes for His glory.  As we live together with Christ- as Christ- in a broken and watching world, justice will necessarily be a product of the kingdom.  I am not suggesting it will just happen- it will require intentionality, of course.  However, it will look very different from the world in which we live- it will be an upside-down kingdom in light of the values and expectations and norm of our world.

And so, while I believe that, as Christians, we can and should be engaged in the Occupy Movement, we must be cautious not to get too caught up in the hype and excitement of the popular nature of these events.  Nor should we allow these kinds of movements to primarily define our commitment to justice.  For if we are about the gospel life that Jesus invites us to enter, we won’t have the time to make such events our primary concern.  Living the kingdom of God together, hopefully we will be otherwise occupied.

Previous Post -Sacred Roots

There has been a lot of conversation (and grief) around the recent execution of Georgia death row inmate, Troy Davis.  Davis’s case seems to exemplify exactly the kinds of cases that has brought the death penalty under scrutiny.  When reading through the details, reasonable doubt seems to be less important than it once did.  The consequence of getting something like this wrong- which has been proven to happen far too often before- are irreversible.  There is no going back, thus the need to be as absolutely sure as possible.  Sadly, courts and systems of “justice” seem more motivated by political ends than genuine justice.

The death penalty has become far more real for me over the last year.  I have started to correspond with two death row inmates in two different states.  What distinquishes these conversations for me is the content of correspondence.  While their cases come up, the main focus of our conversations center on personal interests, family, sports and books.  What makes this so significant is that these men are no longer simply “death row inmates”.  They are friends, humanized by the mundane, everyday things that highlight our shared humanity.

What further makes these friendships unique are the particular cases.  While one is admittedly guilty of the heinous murder of two innocent youth, the other- like Davis- maintains his innocence.  Having looked at the case myself (admittedly in the limited way of an amateur), I believe he is innocent.  Yet, also like Davis, he potentially faces a state execution in the coming months.  These two friends could not be more different, yet both are just that- friends.

I am opposed to the death penalty.  While I am especially concerned with the flaws in the system that all too often send innocent people to their deaths, it goes beyond that.  I believe one of my friends is innocent and know that the other is guilty, I equally oppose their executions.  Let me be clear- I do not deny that they deserve execution.  The problem is that when we measure this issue against what a person deserves, we expose ourselves to the same fate before God.  While I will not get into the theological reasons for my convictions here (that deserves more time & space), I believe the death penalty is absolutely incompatible with following Christ.

It is far easier, not to mention socially acceptable, to opposed the execution of men like Davis, whose guilt is far from clear.  As Christians, though, we are not given that kind of freedom.  Jesus calls us to a radical, all-inclusive, offensive grace and love- a grace and love without which we would be no less guilty than the vilest criminal.  So, while I applaud the many Christian voices who have risen in response to Davis’s unjust execution, I ask that we go further.  The Christian community needs to be as indignant and passionate about every execution, regardless of guilt.

What will that mean for you?

Previous Post – Little Flowers of Faith

In the coming month or so, my new book “The Cost of Community: Jesus, St. Francis & Life in the Kingdom” will be released.  The book chronicles the journey our missional community took through Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, allowing St. Francis of Assisi to be our likely guide.  The result is an exploration of what it means to take seriously the words of Jesus, seeking to live them out together for relationship with God, each other & service to His kingdom.  You can get a sneak peek at the the first few chapters, compliments of Google Books here.

While the book delves deeply into Scripture, it is the embedded story of Jesus’ words in our inner city community that make it so compelling.  Many have asked how they can get involved.  There are many ways, but I want to highlight one.  While we are very light on programing as an aspect of our ministry here, one core program we strongly endorse is the Justice Discipleship Training School (JDTS).  We have spent years developing this intensive spiritual & missional formation experience to maximize impact of the participant while responsibly including them in our local & international missions projects.  Check out this video about the JDTS:

Winnipeg YWAM Justice Discipleship Training School

Our next program begins on Sept. 26- that’s right, only 10 days left!  We are still looking for a couple of participants.  As my book will be part of the curriculum and I will be teaching a week on The Gospel & Community, I wanted to offer a special promotion.  The first two applicants to apply & be accepted to our upcoming JDTS will receive a $500 tuition reduction.  Further, if you can’t come, but know someone who will, if you recommend them, they will receive the discount and you will receive a free copy of my book when it releases.

We believe in this program and its ability to transform lives.  Please help us get the word out.  Tell friends.  Post the video.  Apply yourself!  10 days is plenty of time, so let’s make this happen!

I can be contacted in the comment section or at jamiearpinricci@gmail.com for more information.

Previous Post – Our Community Prayer

There seems to be more and more conversation online these days among Christians regarding gender roles, sexual identity and the like.  My own blog has been featuring several posts on the topic, such as:

-What A Godly Man Looks Like
-Authenticity: A Tale of Two Moose
-Deviant Sexuality
-Not What You’re Not: Resisting the Anti-Identity
-Intersections of Identity: Christ & Community

One sure fire way to set the blogosphere on fire with respect to these topics seems to be for men to give advice to women.  While it is not that men have no wisdom to offer women (as that would leave Jesus in a pretty awkward position), but rather that there are times where it would seem wiser for us to listen and learn than to presume to have the answers.  That being said, at the risk of violating my own rule here, I have something I want to say to the women reading here.  It can be summed up in three expressions: Forgive Me, Thank You & Please Help.

Forgive Me:

While I am still young, each year of my life seems to open my eyes (and heart) more and more to the realities of how the world treats women.  While we should never under-state the massive strides towards equality made, especially in the last century, neither should such victories distract from the critically important, remaining challenges ahead.  Even more so, I want to avoid the temptation to deal with these challenges in the abstraction.  That is why I used the expression “Forgive Me” and not “I’m Sorry”.  If your dog gets run over by a car, I can be sorry, but that doesn’t mean I’m responsible.

Therefore, to the women in my life, I’ve wronged you time and again.  I’ve used you as fodder for fantasy, then blamed you for tempting me.  I’ve taken advantage of any weakness or longing I could exploit in you, all in the hope to “cop a feel”.  Will you forgive me?

I’ve turned to your boyfriends, husbands, fathers and male colleagues before you for no other reason than it seemed natural to go to the men first.  I’ve called for equality while basking in the privilege of my gender.  I claim an enlightened egalitarianism, all the while maintaining systems, theologies and relationships that ensured your minimization and even exclusion.  I’ve too quickly dismissed the “angry bitch” while praising the “strong alpha male”.  Will you forgive me?

Time and again, I hurt you, failed you, exploited you, dismissed you.  It was wrong.  I was wrong.  I have no right to ask it, but again, will you please forgive me?

Thank You:

Looking back over my life, even a cursory glance reveals how deeply I am indebted to some amazing women.  In no way diminishing the important role of men in my life, when I consider the women who’ve shaped my life for the better against the credit they receive for such loving service, there is clearly an imbalance.  Be it my wife, mother or grandmothers, the women in my family have carried generations forward tirelessly (and all too often thanklessly).  Every church community I have been a part of has survived significantly (if not primarily) on the shoulder of women who functioned with little credit.  The world around me is filled with women- teachers, doctors, government official- to whom I owe more than I can ever repay.

Therefore, to the women in my life, thank you very much.  Thank you for teaching me what it means to be a good person.  Thank you for helping discover my true self in a culture that taught me that self was not “acceptable”.  Thank you for doing the dirty work of caring for me- through blood, sweat, puke and tears.  Thank you for loving me enough to say “wait”, “stop” and, above all, “no”.  Thank you for creating the culture of our family, carrying forward our stories and handing them down to me.

Thank you for your wisdom, your strength, your power and your leadership.  Thank you for you patience and grace, when I didn’t deserve it or acknowledge it.  Thank you for showing me God through a lens I am completely incapable of discovering without you.  Thank you.

Please Help:

I need you.  For the uniqueness of each individual and the uniqueness of the womanhood you carry as a reflection of the God in whose image we are made- we need you.  In a world where the abuse, neglect and minimization of women is bearing the fruit of violence, hate and inequality, we need you.  As the Church we have not only significantly cut ourselves off from the nature and character of God as reflected in women, but have we distorted our own masculinity as a result.  And so, please help me discover what it means to be a man, a person, a Christian.  I cannot do it without you.

Please help me see my own biases, subtle and explicit.  Please lead us through leadership of every kind.  Please help us become what God has called us to be together.  Please help me, because I cannot become the man God created me to be apart from the women He created you to be.  I need you, now more than ever.

And so, please forgive me.  Even this post is probably laced with assumptions, biases and missed issues.  Thank you for what you have done and will do for the kingdom.  Please help us move towards a future that better reflects the nature that God created man to display: Created in His image, both female and male.

Previous Post – Deviant Sexuality

Recently on the Out of Ur blog, Skye Jethani posted a two-part post entitled “Has Mission Become Our Idol?” (Part One and Part Two).  Related to his forthcoming book “With: Reimagining The Way You Relate To God” (Thomas Nelson, Aug. 2011), Jethani expresses strong concern with a pattern he sees increasingly common among Christians today:

“When we come believe that our faith is primarily about what we can do for God in the world, it is like throwing gasoline on our fear of insignificance. The resulting fire may be presented to others as a godly ambition, a holy desire to see God’s mission advance–the kind of drive evident in the Apostle Paul’s life. But when these flames are fueled by fear they reveal none of the peace, joy, or love displayed by Paul and rooted in the Spirit. Instead the relentless drive to prove our worth can quickly become destructive.” (source)

Warning against what he calls “missional activism” (or “missionalism”, borrowing from George McDonald), Jethani believes that making the mission of God central to our Christian identity not only fuels the fear of insignificance in those who can’t measure up, but also replaces God as the central focus of our faith.  Tying our sense of worth and identity- even our acceptability before God & others- to the works we should do for God is a recipe for burn-out, addiction and a misdirected faith.  In part two of the series, he goes on to use the famed Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) to illustrate how God calls us to something different (more on that shortly).

Jethani’s cautions are valid (as I affirm in my post, “The Miracle of Justice”).  After all, so much of Jesus’ teachings (as well as those of His apostles) underlined the fact that we do not find identity or security in fulfilling external acts, but only through entering into relationship with Jesus Christ through His redemption.  However, I feel that Jethani goes too far in his analysis, confusing that pursuit for identity with a commitment to mission itself.  While he acknowledges the importance of active mission, in his attempt to place God before mission (a valid and necessary distinction), he drives to large a wedge between the two.  The resulting (potential) divorce poses a greater danger to the wider church than the one he warns against in the first place.  Let me try to explain where I see this happening.

To illustrate his point, Jethani relies heavily on the Parable of the Prodigal Son.  Comparing the two sons, he says:

“The older son lived for his father. And for his service he expected a reward. In this way he really is no that different from the younger son. Neither boy was particularly interested in a relationship with the father, instead both were focused on what they might get from him. The younger son simply took what he desired while the older son, being a more patient and self-disciplined person, worked for it. Their methods were night and day, but both sons desired the same thing and in neither case was it the father. In other words, both sons sought to use their father. Both were jerks, one just happened to be of a more socially-acceptable variety.” (source)

Jethani goes on to say that the older son’s sin was obviously not his desire to be obedient to the father, but rather that he sought his significance and worth through that obedience.  While such a lesson might be drawn from the story, this is where I believe Jethani departs from the more central concern of the parable.  Less to do with significance and worth, Jesus was confronting the Pharisaical arrogance that their security (and seniority) before God was defined by their adherence to the Law- note, adherence more than obedience.  Further, it was the pride in their adherence over and against the unclean, unacceptable “sinners” that inspired Jesus’ telling of the parable in the first place.

The complexity of what Jesus is saying in this (and the two preceding) parables cannot be overlooked.  While a general sense of what Jethani is suggesting might be true, I do not believe it is at the heart of this parable is calling us to.  I wish I could spend more time unpacking it, but instead I will highly recommend Kenneth Bailey’s must read book “The Cross & the Prodigal: Luke 15 Through the Eyes of Middle Eastern Peasants” (IVPress, 2005).

Asserting by the father’s response (Luke 15:31-32) that what he (and thus God) wants above all else is our presence with Him, Jethani asserts:

“What brought the father joy was not the older son’s service, but his presence–having his son with him. This is what the father cares about most, not his property or which son receives more of it. While the sons are fixated on the father’s wealth, the father is fixated on his sons. This is what they both failed to understand, and it is what both Christian consumerism and Christian activism fail to grasp. God’s gifts are a blessing and his work is important, but neither can or should replace God himself as our focus.” (source)

On the face of it, who could argue with such a statement?  Of course God’s primary concern is with His relationship to each of us.  It is not about what we can get out of God, nor about what we must do for Him.  We must love God, and such a love requires presence, to be with God.  In this, I have no argument with his point.  However, when we read the father’s response to the older son, there is something we should not miss:

“‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours.  But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’” Luke 15:31-32

That the father links in a single sentence the affirmation of his sons presence with him and that all he owns is also the sons, should not be overlooked.  Yes, the father wanted intimate, loving relationship with his sons, but his sons presence included being with his father in the family business (thus the reference to shared ownership).  Unlike today, that affirmation of shared ownership is not akin business partners with equal shares in their business, but something far more meaningful.  The son’s shared ownership of all that the father had was an affirmation of the fathers acknowledged blessing and acceptance of his son.  This is what makes his reconciliation with the younger son so radical, as that son had relinquished his right to sonship in the act of liquidating his inheritance.  Further, the father longed for the brother to join him in welcoming home his brother and in the celebration if his return, which is, in fact, itself central to the mission of God.

The point here is that Scripture doesn’t so quickly divide between presence with God and participation in His mission.  In fact, we are reminded again and again that it is in participation in God’s mission that we are genuinely encounter the presence of God.  While this doesn’t invalidate Jethani’s legitimate caution against idolizing mission, his means of responding to it produces a division that is not present in the very parable he uses to make his point.

Why is this an important division to address?  While there is a need to address the dangerous trend of those seeking identity and significance through activism rather than relationship with God, the solution is not to minimize mission.  The very act of dividing presence with God as separate from participating in His mission will only further separate people from that very presence.  Instead of framing presence with God as a higher calling than participating in mission, we need to help people understand that the motivation for participating in God’s mission is that very presence, which then accomplishes the task of reducing the tendency to earn God’s approval through activism.

While the risks that Jethani point out are real and must be addressed, I am convinced that the opposite extreme- that of people justifying the mediocrity of their active participation in God’s mission- is a far greater risk to the church today.  I fear that these articles might unintentionally contribute to this problem by present the unnecessary division.  Thus my response here.

My relationship with my wife requires intimacy and presence.  Yes, that includes (significantly) time and energy to be with her alone, relishing in each others presence.  However, just as important (and with much, much higher frequency), our presence with one another happens as we share life together fulfilling the so-called “mundane” tasks of life together- raising our children, keeping our home, earning our wages- all with a commitment of love, service and self-sacrifice.  It is the very intimacy and love that we share that motivates us to serve together towards our common vocations.

In the same way, I believe that the best response to the trend that Jethani points out is not to create a hierarchy of priority between presence and mission, but rather to encourage an active presence with God that significantly (though not exclusively) includes participation in His mission, motivated by love and relationship, not fear, striving or pride.

I’d love to hear your thoughts, so please weigh in below.