Another great post by Andrew Jones, re: the prosumption idea that I blogged about a few months back. Andrew has been on top of this concept for a lot of years.
In other news, this will probably be the last of my blogging for a while. Wedding happens next Friday evening. Let the craziness begin! I'm expecting lots of memories and good times, though. After coming back from the honeymoon, Kristy and I will spend Christmas with her family in Denver and then head up to the Great Northwest to spend time with friends and family there. On the 14th of January, we'll have tonnes of people over at my parents' church in Longview/Kelso for a wedding reception. Back to The Springs on the 17th.
. . . . Maybe I'll try to squeeze in a few posts between now and then.
.jpg)
29.11.05
22.11.05
More Good News from England
Got some more encouraging news from England the other day. That event that Luke Royce is putting together is moving forward really well. Big shout out to Chris Curtis for agreeing to speak. Chris is the perfect choice for the job and will be a big encouragement to Luke and the others in making that event a big success.My guess is that Jon West put together this promo poster. Click here to see more of Jon's work. (Also, click on the image for a larger version.)
Keep up the great work, Luke & Jon and Co.!!
21.11.05
Thoughts from John 14
I've been enjoying my time in the Gospel of John lately and just the other day I came to chapter 14, where Jesus is laying some things out pretty clearly to His boyz. After He'd explained quite unambiguously that if they'd seen and known Himself, then they'd seen and known God the Father, Philip pipes in and says, “Jesus, just show us the Father and it’ll be all good.”
About half of Jesus’ response to Philip is in question form. One can almost sense the frustration in Jesus here. “I’ve been with you for the last 3 years and you still don’t realize who I am? Do you not believe me even when I explain it plainly to you?”
It would be easy for us to think poorly of Philip and say, “What a bonehead! If I was one of Jesus’ disciples I totally would’ve believed everything Jesus said. And then I would’ve smacked Philip upside the head.” However, I think what we see in Philip is a normal, s-l-o-o-o-w, human process of absorbing truth into our lives. Sometimes we get these “mutations,” where God cements his truth into our hearts such that it finally sticks and our character is formed in supernatural ways. But most of the time, it seems that we have to keep learning and re-learning the same things over and over again until they get absorbed into our lives and we begin to embody His truth. I wonder if a crucial part of our spiritual formation as Christ-followers is recognizing this process and adjusting our expectations accordingly, while continuing to be proactive in that journey.
About half of Jesus’ response to Philip is in question form. One can almost sense the frustration in Jesus here. “I’ve been with you for the last 3 years and you still don’t realize who I am? Do you not believe me even when I explain it plainly to you?”
It would be easy for us to think poorly of Philip and say, “What a bonehead! If I was one of Jesus’ disciples I totally would’ve believed everything Jesus said. And then I would’ve smacked Philip upside the head.” However, I think what we see in Philip is a normal, s-l-o-o-o-w, human process of absorbing truth into our lives. Sometimes we get these “mutations,” where God cements his truth into our hearts such that it finally sticks and our character is formed in supernatural ways. But most of the time, it seems that we have to keep learning and re-learning the same things over and over again until they get absorbed into our lives and we begin to embody His truth. I wonder if a crucial part of our spiritual formation as Christ-followers is recognizing this process and adjusting our expectations accordingly, while continuing to be proactive in that journey.
19.11.05
Ambassador's Briefing
Just about every month, GEM missionary Ruth Robinson sends out a report on a broad range of European issues, made up of various news articles and other sources. I've found the briefing very informative and helpful in understanding current events across Europe. Click here for the current issue, as well as the archives from the GEM web site.
18.11.05
11.11.05
Cool, Thoughtful Art
Found this little online art gallery, thanks to a post over at Jonny Baker's blog. Art that makes you think is the best kind, in my opinion, though I realize that artistic expression can be important merely for it's intrinsically aesthetic value. (warning: some of the art on that page may be offensive to some.)
Speaking of Jonny Baker, he's got another great post from a few days ago in his creative and innovative worship tricks category. Attaching a video projector to the outside of a subway train?? Good stuff. Check it out here.
Speaking of Jonny Baker, he's got another great post from a few days ago in his creative and innovative worship tricks category. Attaching a video projector to the outside of a subway train?? Good stuff. Check it out here.
More Healthy Critique of Evangelical Theology
There's a new book out called The Problem with Evangelical Theology that seems to ask some great questions and tackles key controversial theological issues with a recklass indifference to stepping on the toes of traditional doctrinal views. Sounds like my kind of book. We need more discussion/writing that challenges the comfort of our conclusions that our theology gives us, without challenging us to think more deeply and love God with all our minds.
I particularly like what author Ben Witherington says in this interview with CT:
"I think part of the problem is that we are still doing theology in an Enlightenment frame of mind, as if it were a string of ideas that we should logically link together, and once we've produced a nice logical circle, then we're home free. The truth is that life is a lot messier than that, and the Bible is more about stories than the history of ideas that are embedded in the stories."
(HT: Rhett Smith)
I particularly like what author Ben Witherington says in this interview with CT:
"I think part of the problem is that we are still doing theology in an Enlightenment frame of mind, as if it were a string of ideas that we should logically link together, and once we've produced a nice logical circle, then we're home free. The truth is that life is a lot messier than that, and the Bible is more about stories than the history of ideas that are embedded in the stories."
(HT: Rhett Smith)
9.11.05
Thoughts on Christendom & Mission
I've been reading (or rather, feeding on) a book that has been opening my eyes to the way that outside forces, other than Scripture, have shaped the modern day evangelical church and adjusted the very fabric of our purpose from being missional to being institutional. Last night in particular, some things really began clicking in my own heart and mind as Darrell Guder gave a very concise description of this shift:
"I have stressed that the concrete presence and action of Christians in the world was their witness, their way of carrying out God's mission by demonstrating what the gospel was. Now, Christian activity was gradually being recast as the disciplines of Christian behavior that would prepare one for heaven. Rather than reading the canonic Scriptures as equipping for mission, the church began to understand them as sacred texts that provided guidance for spiritual improvement and perfection." (p. 111)
Guder explains in chapter five how the christianizing of the Roman empire by Constantine led to the current model of Christianity called "Christendom." When the Protestant Reformation came along, the leaders of the movement (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.) addressed the errors in the Catholic church regarding salvation, ecclesiology, etc., but never challenged the “Christendom” paradigm as a whole. In fact, they kept the “Christendom” model intact and, in Guder’s words, “maintained the Christendom focus upon the management of each soul’s salvation on earth in preparation for heaven.” Guder goes on to say that German theologian Jürgen Moltmann was right when he “does not think that the Reformation succeeded in changing these patterns inherited from the Constantinian turn.” (quoting Arne Rasmussen, p. 114.)
There are so many implications and directions to go in discussion of these things. For now, I’ll just affirm how much sense this makes to me personally. In the last several years, I’ve had this nagging sense that the way we manage and organize (and debate) the evangelical body of doctrinal truth is not altogether a precise treatment of God’s truth as a whole. Take, for example, the categories of systematic theology, such as soteriology (the doctrine of salvation), pneumatology (the doctrine of the Holy Spirit), hamartiology (the doctrine of sin), eschatology (the doctrine of the end times – a modern day classical favourite), etc. After being introduced to all of these “-ologies” in Bible college, I couldn’t help but wonder if I had stepped into a science laboratory. That’s why it hit home when I read this statement from Guder: “The theological disciplines were profoundly re-shaped by the intellectual environment that adopted and adapted the scientific method as authoritative.” (p. 116)
The special emphases on “the end times” and securing our place in heaven (while somehow devaluing the mission we are to be about as God’s people on the earth NOW) coupled with the emphasis on Jesus birth, death and resurrection (while devaluing the significance of his life and ministry BEFORE arriving at the cross) has never really been adequate in my own heart and mind.
I could go on to think through issues of the Body of Christ with the modern day attractional models intended to bring people from outside the Church into it’s meetings and functions. And I could talk about the interesting ways that I’ve heard pastors communicate spiritual maturity in terms of faithful attendance at the meetings of the church and the great time and energy poured into buildings and facilities. Then there’s the funny tensions that exist in evangelical circles regarding our relationship with “the world” and even our definitions of “the world.” (I still get funny looks from some Christians when I say I’m not a big fan of “Christian music, whatever the heck that is” and that I’ve been spiritually inspired by a lot of non-Christian artists in music, film, and literature.) Perhaps these tensions are all likely the result of the “Christendom” model of faith handed down to us through centuries, finding it’s source in Constantine’s christianized Roman empire.
There's a lot I'm still wrestling with and pondering over. That should do it for now. Comments and questions and contributions to the discussion are welcome!
7.11.05
Good, Healthy Conversation within Emerging Church
I'm of the opinion that there is a lot of good, healthy conversation going on in what is known as "the emerging church," particularly when the conversation is on more of a theological level that informs praxis effectively. However, I'm increasingly discouraged by comments and attacks that come from the self-proclaimed gatekeepers of evangelical Christianity. These are mostly men who have contributed much to the academic and pastoral circles of the Christian faith in the last 30 years or so and who deserve respect and a listening ear. However, oftentimes, the things that they are writing and saying in reaction to the "emerging church" conversation are not consistent with the character and wisdom that they are known for, at least by me and a few other amateur church leaders and thinkers.
One Christian leader in particular who has seemingly softened his tone and been very helpful in his responses to the emerging church is Michael Horton, who contributed to the book Church in Emerging Culture: 5 Perspectives. He had a very gracious discussion online with Andrew Jones last spring that was somewhat softer than his contribution to the book. If you surf around enough on Andrew's blog, you'll also discover something of his interaction with D.A. Carson, author of Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church. Recently, I also came across this interaction on John O'Keefe's blog with yet another criticism.
In response to the flurry of reactions, opinions, criticisms, and responses to the emerging church dialogue, a few prominent members of this club got together and wrote what I would consider a very gracious, gentle response (and even "subversive rebuke?") to these reactions.
I'm sure there are more recent online conversations between established evangelical leaders and those in the emerging church conversation. (Too bad that there is this "us and them" dichotomy that is developing over the issues, but I guess it's consistent with both the history of protestantism, not to mention the very name "PROTESTant.")
The reason I'm pointing these things out is because I have a lot of friends, family and supporters who are following my life and ministry in Europe. An increasingly big part of that ministry is connected to this movement called the "emerging church." (I myself am not particularly excited about labels, but I realize they can be helpful.) As I think through and blog about some of these issues that are being thrown around by the EC, I realize that there are plenty of people out there who listen to/read respected evangelical leaders who are issuing blanket condemnatory remarks about the EC (eg., Chuck Swindoll, Michael Horton, D.A. Carson, etc.) And without doing the research and thinking through things for themselves, they are buying in to the views of these men about the EC dialogue.
Within historical Evangelical Christianity, there seems to be a tendency to dismiss someone completely whom you might have a disagreement with in one area of theology/doctrine/philosophy. This may be a result of an evangelical presupposition that bad or innacurate theology has the power to corrupt one's mind and even usurp the sovereignty of God. Therefore, in this view, we should put up our defenses and protect ourselves. It is because of this mentality that I have heard people say things like, "Ooo, stay away from those people or from that website because they promote this or that heresy." (In other words, "Don't think for yourself, let my version of 'sound theology' indoctrinate you and do the thinking for you.")
Rubbish. This protectionist, defensive posture is nowhere found in scripture. In fact, if we are to obey Jesus' command to love God with all of our minds, we should be willing to dialogue with people of all sorts of viewpoints and perspectives with humility, realizing that no human being has the monopoly on truth, even in spite of the fact that God has "clearly" revealed Himself to us in Scripture. If this means having an intelligent, respectful conversation with someone outside the narrowly defined boundaries of evangelicalsim, then so be it - especially if it sharpens us and causes us to think more deeply about the issues at hand.
Having said that, I understand scripture's warnings about false teaching and the like. The problem is that it is much too easy to misuse those passages to put controls on our own doctrinal opinions, thus granting ourselves immunity from whatever false teaching is out there threatening our controls.
My apologies if this informative-essay-turned-rant has developed an antagonistic tone (with a British flare - "rubbish"? where'd that come from?). That is not my intention. Evidently, there are some tensions and frustrations that have been bubbling under the surface of my own heart that decided to come out during this increasingly lengthy blog session.
Much more to be said about these things, but I think it's time I cut myself off and turned my attention back to the wedding planning. =)
One Christian leader in particular who has seemingly softened his tone and been very helpful in his responses to the emerging church is Michael Horton, who contributed to the book Church in Emerging Culture: 5 Perspectives. He had a very gracious discussion online with Andrew Jones last spring that was somewhat softer than his contribution to the book. If you surf around enough on Andrew's blog, you'll also discover something of his interaction with D.A. Carson, author of Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church. Recently, I also came across this interaction on John O'Keefe's blog with yet another criticism.
In response to the flurry of reactions, opinions, criticisms, and responses to the emerging church dialogue, a few prominent members of this club got together and wrote what I would consider a very gracious, gentle response (and even "subversive rebuke?") to these reactions.
I'm sure there are more recent online conversations between established evangelical leaders and those in the emerging church conversation. (Too bad that there is this "us and them" dichotomy that is developing over the issues, but I guess it's consistent with both the history of protestantism, not to mention the very name "PROTESTant.")
The reason I'm pointing these things out is because I have a lot of friends, family and supporters who are following my life and ministry in Europe. An increasingly big part of that ministry is connected to this movement called the "emerging church." (I myself am not particularly excited about labels, but I realize they can be helpful.) As I think through and blog about some of these issues that are being thrown around by the EC, I realize that there are plenty of people out there who listen to/read respected evangelical leaders who are issuing blanket condemnatory remarks about the EC (eg., Chuck Swindoll, Michael Horton, D.A. Carson, etc.) And without doing the research and thinking through things for themselves, they are buying in to the views of these men about the EC dialogue.
Within historical Evangelical Christianity, there seems to be a tendency to dismiss someone completely whom you might have a disagreement with in one area of theology/doctrine/philosophy. This may be a result of an evangelical presupposition that bad or innacurate theology has the power to corrupt one's mind and even usurp the sovereignty of God. Therefore, in this view, we should put up our defenses and protect ourselves. It is because of this mentality that I have heard people say things like, "Ooo, stay away from those people or from that website because they promote this or that heresy." (In other words, "Don't think for yourself, let my version of 'sound theology' indoctrinate you and do the thinking for you.")
Rubbish. This protectionist, defensive posture is nowhere found in scripture. In fact, if we are to obey Jesus' command to love God with all of our minds, we should be willing to dialogue with people of all sorts of viewpoints and perspectives with humility, realizing that no human being has the monopoly on truth, even in spite of the fact that God has "clearly" revealed Himself to us in Scripture. If this means having an intelligent, respectful conversation with someone outside the narrowly defined boundaries of evangelicalsim, then so be it - especially if it sharpens us and causes us to think more deeply about the issues at hand.
Having said that, I understand scripture's warnings about false teaching and the like. The problem is that it is much too easy to misuse those passages to put controls on our own doctrinal opinions, thus granting ourselves immunity from whatever false teaching is out there threatening our controls.
My apologies if this informative-essay-turned-rant has developed an antagonistic tone (with a British flare - "rubbish"? where'd that come from?). That is not my intention. Evidently, there are some tensions and frustrations that have been bubbling under the surface of my own heart that decided to come out during this increasingly lengthy blog session.
Much more to be said about these things, but I think it's time I cut myself off and turned my attention back to the wedding planning. =)
2.11.05
Good/Bad in the City of Angels
I'm here in LA until Friday representing Greater Europe Mission during a special global vision week emphasis at Azusa Pacific University. Here's a little summary of my time thus far:
Good: Rental car handoff between Rick Roberts, leaving to fly back to Colorado, and me, arriving at Ontario airport.
Bad: It’s a PT Cruiser. (The exclusively preferred car of women over 40.)
Good: Southern California weather.
Bad: Southern California smog.
Good: Hanging out with college students, talking about good music, etc.
Bad: Trying to play salesman to college students (and not doing it very well).
Good: Great coffee shop on campus at Azusa Pacific.
Bad: At least 3 Starbucks sightings around the hotel and college campus.
Good: Dinner at “In ‘n Out”.
Bad: Trying to find “In ‘n Out” (in a PT Cruiser) after being given faulty directions by the guy behind the hotel desk.
Good: Rental car handoff between Rick Roberts, leaving to fly back to Colorado, and me, arriving at Ontario airport.
Bad: It’s a PT Cruiser. (The exclusively preferred car of women over 40.)
Good: Southern California weather.
Bad: Southern California smog.
Good: Hanging out with college students, talking about good music, etc.
Bad: Trying to play salesman to college students (and not doing it very well).
Good: Great coffee shop on campus at Azusa Pacific.
Bad: At least 3 Starbucks sightings around the hotel and college campus.
Good: Dinner at “In ‘n Out”.
Bad: Trying to find “In ‘n Out” (in a PT Cruiser) after being given faulty directions by the guy behind the hotel desk.
A Burden for a Particular Corner of Europe
Okay, so I mentioned that I’d give a little more explanation re: our decision to head for Ireland next summer, and here I am distracting myself with a lengthy post about a Rolling Stone interview with Bono. (OH! By the way, I forgot to mention that, in the interview, Bono mentions the African ubuntu concept that I blogged about a few months back. Okay. I’m done with Bono.)
When Kristy and first agreed to visit Ireland, we were really just going through the motions of responsibly researching our “other option” aside from church planting in Cologne. I really liked what I saw in the Cologne team and thought there was really good chemistry and an impressive mix of gifting and ability. However, while we were there, it just never felt right for various reasons and I sensed that Kristy felt the same way. I’m not one to go solely on feelings, but after a few days in Ireland, I was reminded of the sense of calling that I had during my short-term experiences there and in England years ago. The burden on my heart for the peoples of Ireland and Great Britain went deeper than feeling to the level of passion and conviction. I wanted to be there.
On our rather lengthy list of pros and cons, there were smaller, more peripheral things that added up and pointed to Ireland, but this sense of being at home in Ireland and the UK was the pivotal issue for me. It means closer proximity to friends and colleagues that I’ve gained in England and thus opportunity to build on the ministry foundation I have there in a variety of ways. It also means potential involvement in future GEM church planting initiatives in Great Britain.
However, it also means a step of faith. With the Germany opportunity, I knew the chemistry and gift mix of the team that had invited us and how Kristy and I would fit in. In Ireland, there isn’t a specific church planting team context immediately apparent for us to join. In fact, there are several teams and initiatives in the Dublin area – none of whom have actually invited us to join them. But that’s okay. It just means having the faith that God will provide guidance, insight and wisdom on how to fit into what He’s doing.
Having said that, I look forward to working with Phil Kingsley, the Ireland field director. Phil has a 25 year history of working with the Irish church and a tremendous amount of respect and credibility with Irish church leaders. He’s also very engaged in the church planting dialogue and networking in the country. There’s also Rod Taylor and the burgeoning GEM Youth Ministries, to whom I will be committing a portion of my time and energy. After a few minor setbacks, the process of developing training curriculum for European youth workers is well under way and I look forward to staying involved in that work. Phil and Rod are the ones who’ve persisted in getting Kristy and I to Ireland.
Please feel free to e-mail me with any questions or with regard to anything in this explanation needing clarification!
When Kristy and first agreed to visit Ireland, we were really just going through the motions of responsibly researching our “other option” aside from church planting in Cologne. I really liked what I saw in the Cologne team and thought there was really good chemistry and an impressive mix of gifting and ability. However, while we were there, it just never felt right for various reasons and I sensed that Kristy felt the same way. I’m not one to go solely on feelings, but after a few days in Ireland, I was reminded of the sense of calling that I had during my short-term experiences there and in England years ago. The burden on my heart for the peoples of Ireland and Great Britain went deeper than feeling to the level of passion and conviction. I wanted to be there.
On our rather lengthy list of pros and cons, there were smaller, more peripheral things that added up and pointed to Ireland, but this sense of being at home in Ireland and the UK was the pivotal issue for me. It means closer proximity to friends and colleagues that I’ve gained in England and thus opportunity to build on the ministry foundation I have there in a variety of ways. It also means potential involvement in future GEM church planting initiatives in Great Britain.
However, it also means a step of faith. With the Germany opportunity, I knew the chemistry and gift mix of the team that had invited us and how Kristy and I would fit in. In Ireland, there isn’t a specific church planting team context immediately apparent for us to join. In fact, there are several teams and initiatives in the Dublin area – none of whom have actually invited us to join them. But that’s okay. It just means having the faith that God will provide guidance, insight and wisdom on how to fit into what He’s doing.
Having said that, I look forward to working with Phil Kingsley, the Ireland field director. Phil has a 25 year history of working with the Irish church and a tremendous amount of respect and credibility with Irish church leaders. He’s also very engaged in the church planting dialogue and networking in the country. There’s also Rod Taylor and the burgeoning GEM Youth Ministries, to whom I will be committing a portion of my time and energy. After a few minor setbacks, the process of developing training curriculum for European youth workers is well under way and I look forward to staying involved in that work. Phil and Rod are the ones who’ve persisted in getting Kristy and I to Ireland.
Please feel free to e-mail me with any questions or with regard to anything in this explanation needing clarification!
1.11.05
RS Interview with Bono
On the flight into LA this morning, I read the cover story/interview of the latest Rolling Stone magazine, featuring U2's frontman. (I think this is Bono's 12th appearance on the RS cover.) RS writers and editors seem to have varying degrees of openness and sensitivity to spiritual matters, but for the most part, they seem pretty hostile to evangelical Christianity (which I can sometimes relate with) and to faith in general. Unfortunately, I don't think their readers share the same general hostility to spiritual things. I personally get the sense that, though many people in American culture have a revulsion to elements of American evangelicalism, they’re not necessarily ready to reject the true God. I think Glen Galaxy (frontman for the band Soul Junk) was wise to tell one concert crowd, “Consider the possibility tonight that what you've rejected is not God, it's man's attempt to play God.”
Anyway, in this RS discussion with Bono, the interviewer asks very direct questions about the Christian faith that he is increasingly open to talking about. Bono seems to respond with some tentativeness when he says this:
“If I could put it simply, I would say that I believe there’s a force of love and logic . . . behind the universe. . . the story of Christ makes sense to me. As an artist, I see the poetry of it. It’s so brilliant. That this scale of creation, and the unfathomable universe, should describe itself in such vulnerability, as a child. That is mind-blowing to me. I guess that would make me a Christian. Although I don’t use the label, because it is so very hard to live up to. I feel like I’m the worst example of it, so I just kinda keep my mouth shut.”
Wow. I wonder if we can use Bono’s example to replace the Evangelical “how-to” evangelism formulas. Set aside your “Four Spiritual Laws.” Set aside your hotel-issued Gideon Bible. Set aside your “seeker-sensitive” church services. And in their place, just share your heart of wonder for the poetry of God’s story. (Please note: I’m NOT saying that those other things are all bad.)
Notice his reticence to call himself a “Christian,” not necessarily out of shame, but because of a humble recognition of what it means. Bono has seemingly counted the cost of what it means to call himself a Christ-follower. But here’s a man who has gotten the attention of world leaders and the wealthiest of businessmen to act on behalf of the most marginalized, victimized people in the world – echoing the example of Jesus. And he calls himself the worst example of a Christian.
Later, Bono says this: “I also have enormous respect or my friends who are atheists, most of whom are, and the courage it takes not to believe.” If you’re a Christ-follower, just think to yourself for a moment. Are your brothers and sisters in Christ generally known in society for the respect that they have for atheists (or agnostics or the everyday, run-of-the-mill non-Evangelical Christian, for that matter?)
There are plenty more jewels in the interview, but I’ll just end with a couple more quotes.
Speaking of his relationship with the other band members:
“They make me a better singer [and writer]. The idea of being in a room surrounded by people who agree with you is terrifying, ‘cause I’m not sure I’m consistent enough in my own judgment.” (Oh, man. Could this be an example of an appropriate attitude for Christians in the context of biblical community? What about theologians who see their own doctrinal opinions as black and white truth?)
Speaking of the evangelical movement in the U.S.:
“I’m wary of faith outside of actions. I’m wary of religiosity that ignores the wider world. In 2001, only seven percent of evangelicals polled felt it incumbent upon themselves to respond to the AIDS emergency. This appalled me . . . Amazingly, they did respond. I’ve started to see this community as a real resource in America.”
I haven’t actually picked it up myself, but there’s a book that came out last spring that’s essentially one big interview with Bono. I’m sure it contains some more insightful nuggets about the enigmatic rock icon.
Anyway, in this RS discussion with Bono, the interviewer asks very direct questions about the Christian faith that he is increasingly open to talking about. Bono seems to respond with some tentativeness when he says this:
“If I could put it simply, I would say that I believe there’s a force of love and logic . . . behind the universe. . . the story of Christ makes sense to me. As an artist, I see the poetry of it. It’s so brilliant. That this scale of creation, and the unfathomable universe, should describe itself in such vulnerability, as a child. That is mind-blowing to me. I guess that would make me a Christian. Although I don’t use the label, because it is so very hard to live up to. I feel like I’m the worst example of it, so I just kinda keep my mouth shut.”
Wow. I wonder if we can use Bono’s example to replace the Evangelical “how-to” evangelism formulas. Set aside your “Four Spiritual Laws.” Set aside your hotel-issued Gideon Bible. Set aside your “seeker-sensitive” church services. And in their place, just share your heart of wonder for the poetry of God’s story. (Please note: I’m NOT saying that those other things are all bad.)
Notice his reticence to call himself a “Christian,” not necessarily out of shame, but because of a humble recognition of what it means. Bono has seemingly counted the cost of what it means to call himself a Christ-follower. But here’s a man who has gotten the attention of world leaders and the wealthiest of businessmen to act on behalf of the most marginalized, victimized people in the world – echoing the example of Jesus. And he calls himself the worst example of a Christian.
Later, Bono says this: “I also have enormous respect or my friends who are atheists, most of whom are, and the courage it takes not to believe.” If you’re a Christ-follower, just think to yourself for a moment. Are your brothers and sisters in Christ generally known in society for the respect that they have for atheists (or agnostics or the everyday, run-of-the-mill non-Evangelical Christian, for that matter?)
There are plenty more jewels in the interview, but I’ll just end with a couple more quotes.
Speaking of his relationship with the other band members:
“They make me a better singer [and writer]. The idea of being in a room surrounded by people who agree with you is terrifying, ‘cause I’m not sure I’m consistent enough in my own judgment.” (Oh, man. Could this be an example of an appropriate attitude for Christians in the context of biblical community? What about theologians who see their own doctrinal opinions as black and white truth?)
Speaking of the evangelical movement in the U.S.:
“I’m wary of faith outside of actions. I’m wary of religiosity that ignores the wider world. In 2001, only seven percent of evangelicals polled felt it incumbent upon themselves to respond to the AIDS emergency. This appalled me . . . Amazingly, they did respond. I’ve started to see this community as a real resource in America.”
I haven’t actually picked it up myself, but there’s a book that came out last spring that’s essentially one big interview with Bono. I’m sure it contains some more insightful nuggets about the enigmatic rock icon.
1-4-1 PDX
Just received an e-mail from an old friend who has a burden for the homeless, particularly in Portland, OR. I love what Crystal is doing because it puts very practical handles on ways that everyday people with a few bucks in their pocket can help. Check out the the website that's up and running (but still a work in progress) to get the big idea behind the vision. (LINK) There are already great organizations and ministries throughout the U.S. that seek to meet the needs of the homeless, but I think Crystal's fresh and innovative vision is something extra special.