"Oh, just what the world needs. Another blog!"
I know full well that's what some people might say when they see that I'm succumbing to the vanity of thinking that people might actually be interested in reading my random thoughts and reflections. Believe me, I've thought of that. I'm well aware of what blogs can become, and not at all convinced that this blog will be any different in any sort of meaningful way. Yes, this blog could end up being little more than an exercise in triviality and futility and die a slow death from lack of interest -- either on the part of the editor, or the readers, or both.
And yet....
For all its shortcomings, the blog by nature has an advantage that lends itself to the life of the church. It's interactive. There's nothing "top-down" about a blog; when a blogger puts his thoughts out there, they are fair game. Response can be immediate, and the writer (if he dares) can be completely uninsulated. And perhaps the writer wants to respond, and then a conversation can begin. Somewhere in the stirred-up dust of conversations like that, truth is often discovered. People are changed. God's voice is heard.
We in Churches of Christ, like some other traditions, have a great history of disregarding the clergy-laity distinction. We have from our very beginnings resisted the notion that it is the responsibility of a few specially ordained men to tell us all how to live Christian-ly. But it's been said that when we did away with the clergy-laity distinction, we got rid of the wrong category. We told each other that among us there are no clergy, when what we should have been saying all along was that among us there are no laity. We are all ordained, and the Holy Spirit lives in all of us, and we all mediate God's grace to each other, and his voice can be heard in each of ours. Even the way we receive Communion in most of our churches illustrates -- unintentionally, I'm sure -- this "interactivity": we receive the bread and the cup, the tokens of his body and blood, the symbols of his grace, from one another. It's a small thing, but it means something to me that my wife can symbolically receive the grace of God from my hands, or I from hers.
My hope for this blog is that, in some way or another, it will contribute to our being able to be priests and pastors to one another. I chose the title "Crossroads" because I hope that what is said here, both by writer and reader, will in some way or the other help us in walking the way of the cross together. It's for each disciple to deny him or herself and take up their cross and follow their teacher, in whatever ways he calls us to. But it's only as we do so together, in community, that we'll be successful.
Some of you probably read other blogs on at least a semi-regular basis, and maybe don't feel you have time for another one. Others don't have time or interest for even one. I promise that i'll generally have something to say, and I'll always try to say it quickly and well. I hope you'll be willing to enter into dialogue through the comments section -- with myself and each other. Even if you aren't a member of the Northwest church, please feel free to respond to what you read; we know the church extends well past our front doors.
For now, let me leave you with a couple of questions. How could we be more "interactive" at Northwest, or how could your church be more interactive? What needs to change -- in tradition, practice, or polity -- to more fully reflect our belief that God is present in and speaks and acts through the entire church?
Thanks for joining me at the Crossroads.
Reflections on learning to walk the way of the cross at Northwest Church of Christ in Chicago
About Me
- Patrick Odum
- I'm a father, but also a son; a teacher, but also a learner; a leader, but also a follower; a preacher, but also a hearer. There's as much older brother in me as prodigal, and as much tax collector as Pharisee. I've been a priest, and a good Samaritan, and a man who fell among thieves. And I never get tired of the way Jesus calls me down and invites himself to my table.
8 comments:
"...it means something to me that my wife can symbolically receive the grace of God from my hands, or I from hers."
This is certainly a lovely picture of Christian interactivity. Yet I wonder - have you ever received "the grace of God" in the form of Communion from your wife's hands? Might this form of interactivity be, in the words of another epistle writer, "shameful"? I hate to state the obvious, but it remains that you are a man and she is a woman, and so whatever fellowship you may have is not completely interactive. I fully support the idea that we all need to fulfill the role of clergy by ministering to one another. That said, we cannot deny that our meetings together will never be fully interactive as long as one sex is consigned to a subordinate position. Some forms of ministry are decidely one-sided.
How then can we say that "God speaks and acts through the entire church" when an entire sex is prohibited from speaking and acting in worship, not to mention other venues of church activity?
Nina, I guess that's exactly the kind of thing that I'm driving at when I ask:
"What needs to change -- in tradition, practice, or polity -- to more fully reflect our belief that God is present in and speaks and acts through the entire church?"
In point of fact, I think it's not hard to see evidence of God doing exactly that, even in a church that places limitations on the kinds of ministry that women are enabled to do. The question you're asking, I think, is whether our organizations, polity, and formal structures reflect the biblical idea that "In these last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people...Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days."
The problem, of course, is that the biblical witness sometimes seems contradictory, and as a community that gets our identity from the Scriptures we can't just ignore those texts that seem to limit women because they're uncomfortable to us. That's where interactivity comes in, when those who are fairly comfortable with "the way we've always understood that text" and the status quo can hear from others who aren't so content -- and even more effectively, can see how God is leading them and blessing their ministry. Those experiences then push us to go back to the texts and read them again.
Perhaps the problem is our preconception of "church" that vests all the authority and leadership, and thus all the "important" work, in those who stand on a podium on a Sunday morning. If we didn't assume that, maybe our discussion would go in a different direction.
Practically speaking, that's why what I said about receiving communion from my wife is important to me -- and yes, I receive the grace of God from my wife's hands every day, probably, and our usual practice in communion reminds me of it. I can't think of a place in the Bible where anyone calls that shameful.
Thanks for your comments, Nina. I think you raise some very valid points.
"That said, we cannot deny that our meetings together will never be fully interactive as long as one sex is consigned to a subordinate position. Some forms of ministry are decidely one-sided."
I must say that I don't agree that because women are not standing up in front of the congregation leading the worship service that that automatically implies a subordinate position; since worshipping God in spirit and in truth does not require a physical position or placement during the worship service. That said, we are and should be as fully interactive during worship as we allow our hearts and minds to be.
Of course, if God can make an animal talk so that he can say one thing to one man, certainly a woman could also tell men and women what God wants them to know. If a woman who wanted to preach (from a pulpit) in a conservative christian church told me that God called her to do it, I would never presume to tell her He didn't; because if she is doing that (or trying to) she's suffering a lot because of it.
But, getting back to what I believe you were originally saying Patrick, I believe we have to make sure our own "world view" is as closely in line with Christ's as we can. As christians living in the world, it's so easy to align ourselves with our neighbors, our political opinions, or just other people that we admire and respect and thus leave ourselves open to judging other people or the world through those eyes instead of through Christ's. One relatively easy solution for this problem, I believe, is for christians to continue in study and meditation on God's word daily lest we forget who we really are. Of course, there are many ways to do this. There are various Bible study groups as well as individual study. But, as we learn more about God, we automatically learn more about ourselves and we can see whether certain views that we may have held on to for a long period of time are really in line with what God is teaching us. Of course, it is sometimes very hard to give up some of our time honored traditions. This is where I believe repentance comes in. It can be hard to admit to being wrong; especially about something that we thought was so visceral to our lives that we couldn't imagine changing. But, repentance does keep us pliable in God's hands. As christians, we must continue toward's perfection by keeping our hearts and minds pliable for our Savior's hands. On the other hand, study doesn't always mean that we need to change something. Sometimes it just keeps us "rooted and grounded" in the truth that we have already learned from childhood.
I think you hit on something very important, Barbara, when you said, "we are and should be as fully interactive during worship as we allow our hearts and minds to be." I think a lot of the time we've allowed form to displace function -- "let's create a worship service and then surely worship will happen." Perhaps one of the results of this has been a preoccupation with who is in a formal leadership position and who is excluded. As you point out, Barbara, the reason for Jesus' statement about worshipping "in spirit and in truth" is that he wanted to challenge the assumption that worship is about place or form.
So maybe we're saying that for the church to be more "interactive," we need different contexts and settings for gathering than just the Sunday morning "worship service."
Patrick,
Where can I find more information on what makes your church different from others. What are your beliefs?
I'm a few months late in responding, sorry, but I hope someone reads this.
I really need to talk about this "woman" issue, because I feel like it is perhaps the major point of conflict for me in relation to God's Word. (I'm not even talking about marriage, but where the Bible makes comments about what women are or should be in relation to all men, in the church.) I'm sure I'm not alone in this. My previous comment may have sounded a bit militant, but in fact, I have no position on this issue. For years, I have decidedly suspended my opinion on the matter. The problem is not simply that I'm "uncomfortable" with certain ideas, as I've tried to convince myself, but rather that my conscience won't let me accept them. I "feel" that they are wrong, but I don't accept those feelings in my mind as truth - that is, I won't boldly declare any position at all except "It could be." This is getting old. And, to respond to some of the comments: I agree, worship is about a lot more than who is standing up in formal roles; everyone has the opportunity to participate. Truth be told, I feel completely content with our current practice. Honestly. However, just because I feel content with it doesn't make it right.
So then, let's elevate the conversation above the discussion of feelings, and, as you aptly suggested, go back to the texts and read them again. Let's start with one that I referred to in my earlier comment, I Corinthians 14:34-35 -- and it reads (NKJV):
"Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church."
Keeping in mind the context of this passage, please, would someone tell me why this instruction is good?
Nina~
This scripture is good mainly because it is of God!
I also think it is imperative that we acknowledge that God has created male and female different for a reason. We are meant to compliment and complete one another. We are equal in the eyes of the Lord because we are all his children. However, we have different roles in relation to His church....and that's ok!
I truly believe that when we understand and fully accept that God knows all and has developed us for His purpose, we are able to accept that God uses us in various ways to plants seeds that He may later sow.
Please know that God has us (as females and males) ministering everyday through our actions as we strive to live as Christ did, even when we fall far short of our goal. However, he has laid out a plan in His words of scripture for how we can most effectively do this. God, in his creation of man, created a figure of leadership and logic. This naturally lends itself to formal positions in the church. In women, He created a figure of emotion and a nurturing nature. The naturally lends itself to raising up Godly children each day. These roles lend themselves to different forms of ministry, but we all minister daily :)
Praise God for your wondrous gifts!!
Keeping in mind context, remember that women often lead men astray from their Godly calling during biblical times. This may explain the use of the word "shameful" in this scripture.
Cool website, I hadn't noticed crossroadsnorthwest.blogspot.com previously in my searches!
Continue the excellent work!
Post a Comment