Spiritual Formation and the Arts

The heart, the inner spirit and will of a person, is the most inaccessible part of a person to try and form. The mind can be spoken to directly, the body can be dealt with tangibly . . . but the heart seems the hardest to reach.

Since the heart is connected in one person to the mind and body, there is an indirect route through those parts. Discourse that immediately engages the thinking of a person may have a deeper resonance into the heart. The actions of the body which can be disciplined may have repercussions to the spirit. But the hardest part to reach, is the most important to be shaped.

We know that out of the heart a person speaks, meaning that both the thoughts of the mind and actions of the body are directed by a person's spirit. Emotions too are reflections of one's heart. The essence of spiritual formation is focused on the transformation of the human spirit by God's Spirit -with consequences for every other part of a human being.

I wonder if the arts are a way of speaking more directly to the heart. Moving music, an engaging story, a well-directed film, evocative paintings, poetry, and many other 'arts' seem in my experience to get into a person's heart, or spirit . . . pushing beyond the mind's thoughts and body's actions.

Not every use of the arts speaks to every person's spirit, but I wonder if there is something of importance here of spiritual formation. The love for what is true, what is beautiful, what is merciful and just, what is good and hopeful - and for the practice of love itself - must be a matter of the reformation of the spirit.

The Problem with Metaphors

I am quoting someone (but forgot long ago who said it) when I say "all analogies limp." It's true. Analogies are illustrations to help us understand something, but all are imperfect and if pushed too far or taken in the wrong way they can really cause problems.

Over the last couple of years I have heard the question asked "are our churches are more like cruise ships or battleships?" In other words, are Christians looking for fun, relaxation, and pleasure while the church staff labors to keep them happy, or are we all serving selflessly a greater good? Do we whine if something isn't to our liking, or are we prepared to endure hardship because my personal comfort-level isn't what is paramount.

You get the picture . . . and in some ways this image isn't too bad. But there is a part of me of cringes anytime Christians start using militaristic analogies. I know there is biblical precedent, but my point is that there is a great danger of being misunderstood - by either those who are believers or those who aren't.

To someone leery of Christianity "battleship-talk" and the language of "spiritual warfare" fits all too easily their perceptions that Christians long to rule over the world and subdue by force nonbelievers. Of course, that's what Muslims want to do, right? Not us! How could anyone think that about Christians? Well, just listen to us sometimes . . .

Perhaps a way to modify the analogy is to ask whether being a church together with others is like "being on a cruise ship or on a hospital ship?" We keep the contrast of "here to be served and made happy" versus "here to serve unselfishly" without appearing like crusaders.

Ash Wednesday

Today is the beginning of Lent. For me this means no morning coffee.

I didn't choose to give up coffee because it will be some great sacrifice, but because it is part of my routine. Last year I chose to give up something I like, but not something I do regularly - which was missing the point. I wasn't connecting Lent with prayer, but seeing it more as some sort of duty.

I believe there is a profound difference between obedience and discipline, though both are important. Obedience does what is right, and discipline does what leads to spiritual formation. Last year I think my observance of Lent was more an obedience than a discipline.

By giving up coffee I am carving out a regular time that I will fill with prayer. The beverage is irrelevant, the discipline is the focus. That time each morning will be devoted to prayer and repentance.

Scripture as a Relational Moment

Before the invention of the printing press the reading of scripture was a relational event, something heard aloud in the company of others rather than an individual activity one experienced within oneself. We could even back up further to the oral tradition that preceded much of scripture - even more relational.

Today we carry scripture around in books, on PDA's, access it on our computers, and have the opportunity to bring ourselves to scripture constantly. Of tremendous importance is the mindset I bring to that encounter with holy writing.

I've heard many metaphors which compare the Bible to some other type of printed material: it is a blueprint, the constitution of the church, an owner's manual for human beings, the book containing all the answers (like a dictionary or encyclopedia), a road map, or something else. All of these suggest a mentality one should bring to an encounter with scripture. Come looking for a pattern or bylaws to govern things, bring your questions about life, ask your questions about anything, find out how to get where you are going, etc.

There are other metaphors that I've not personally heard people use, but they use the Bible in other ways. One is as a business model. A really bad one is that Bible is a treasure map with clues to wealth and success.

I will concede that none of these metaphors is totally without some truthful aspect, but some only have a sliver of redeeming application and in general are quite misleading. Each metaphor suggests the intention of scripture, and therefore the mindset I should bring to reading scripture.

One deficiency I see with all these comparisons is that they emphasize that the Bible is a resource of information. Our interaction with scripture is therefore primarily intellectual.

Since scripture is written, it would be easy to think like this. But if we take seriously the Hebrew writer's statement that the Word of God is living and active (4:12), and believe that scripture is the Word of God, then in a mysterious way the person of God is encountered through scripture. And so I believe that some relational metaphors, instead of informational ones, might be better to set my mind in the proper frame.

As far as the people whose stories are found in the Bible I think about the possibility of approaching them as I would a family reunion. If your family is like mine, not everyone you see at the reunion is who you'd choose if it was a 'friends' reunion. Some might seem downright strange, to my way of looking at things. Reunions are where the family history is revisited in many ways, often the good and the bad. There is information, but only in the context of relational interaction - people with people. That is different than a person with a document: a person and a blueprint.

Undoubtedly wisdom, family history, and a perspective of one's own narrative would be informational benefits of the experience. Though the metaphor is hardly sufficient, I think there may be some benefit in orienting myself in this way rather than as if I am about to read a roadmap or constitution. I am about to enter a living conversation.

When it comes to encountering God, I think the relational becomes even more pronounced. For me scripture then becomes a 'place' where I interact with God. Rather than being God's instructional manual for me (almost suggesting God has left that in place of His personal presence), scripture is more like a coffee shop - a venue for dialogue. Though the words within the books of holy scripture don't change, they are the place where God speaks and so become a meeting place of creature and Creator where new things happen (certainly not the only meeting place, by any means).

Is there something helpful about opening your Bible with the expectation of entering an ongoing conversation rather than intending to search for and extract information? What happens when we change the expectations we bring to reading our Bibles?

Room for the Right Brain

I grew up in a Christian tradition that was very left-brained and so was all about thinking. Out of a desire to avoid being ostentatious, everything about our meeting places was minimalist and plain. Any sort of art was purely functional - like the flannel graph figures or pictures used to teach children Bible stories.

There is certainly an academic part of me that can be rational - but there has always been a creative part of me as well. In other words, I had a 'right-brain' side too. In fact, for a while I dreamed of becoming a commercial artist/illustrator - but that was discouraged by more practically-minded people (well-intentioned, I'm sure).

Now I am sharing in a community of believers that has room for the right brain - which is rediscovering art, beauty, creativity, and poetry . . . for at least me and I think for others as well. I am reading Brian McLaren's Generous Orthodoxy and one point he makes is that poetry is more capable than prose when it comes to talking about God.

Now I don't want to set up a fictitious conflict between the two sides of our brains, but rather to point out that prose has its place while I agree that it is incapable alone to express faith. I am finding that I am more of a mystic than a systematic theologian - though systematic theologians have blessed me in many ways throughout my journey.

Within our community of faith we have made a place for artistic expression - without labelling such work 'graven images' . . . because the point was not in the making of things but in the worshiping the works of our hands. That is a whole other subject - and we have worshiped our work plenty, though its not been the artistic work of our hands.

In finding a new place for my creative side I have created a couple of icons of Peter and Paul which are reminiscent of Eastern Orthodox icons.

I contribute these to our community not as decorative art, but symbolic art. In the style we affirm a connection with ancient Christianity, and in the depiction of Peter and Paul we are reminded of the spiritual unity of Jewish and Gentile Christians of the first century despite all their differences. May we be inspired to a similar unity.

There are many poets among us whose creative expression of faith will enrich the whole community.

An Unmarketable Message

One of our readings yesterday was 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 where Paul states that the Gospel message is ridiculous (foolishness) to all but those who are being saved. I am afraid that too often well-intentioned Christians have tried to remove the absurdity of the message of the cross in order to better spread the Gospel. In other words, Paul obviously knew nothing about marketing. You can't sell foolishness, for goodness sake! You have to find a way to show how Christ is what they are looking for. I agree . . . we can show that Christ is what they are looking for if they are on the right journey.

Too many people want a god who will satisfy their desires . . . but what we need is for God to accompany us through life. The good news of the Kingdom of God is that such a life is freely available through Christ. This is not about having our desires met, but living in God's Kingdom under his gracious direction. Everything is redefined, even our desires. Our will becomes His Will. Unfortunately, that is not what many are looking for.

Here and now eternal life is enjoyed by anyone who enters the divine life even though we find ourselves still burdened by our earthly existence. We recognize that beyond this life there is a fuller participation where what is promised and experienced in part, will be our all in all.

As we talk about the pitfalls of trying to market Christianity (does God really need a public relations consultant?) the most obvious is the gap between what people want and Who God is. Christian faith cannot be tailored to speak to a target audience - reshaped and packaged to appeal to their desires. Another name for the results of such attempts is 'heresy.'

We all know how some promise blessings in abundance, health and wealth, to all who follow Jesus faithfully. I cannot decry the crass salesmanship of those endeavors and turn around and choose a less blatant form - but one which is essentially based on appealing to human appetites rather than trusting in the Spirit's work. Unless we understand Paul's observation that the message of Christ is foolishness, we will try and make it palatable.

Let's face it . . . someone not oriented by the Spirit's working to seek God will find our message of following a crucified Savior into suffering for the sake of the world is an insane goal. The world will accept a savior who suffered so they don't have to suffer, but the world rejects a call to submission, selflessness, and suffering. No one in the flesh follows Jesus into his love - dying to self for others.

But we do not lose hope, though our message is unappealing and unmarketable. To those being saved such a message is the power of God. That is what Paul believed . . . and what we know by grace.

Why This Grace?
We usually ask 'why this suffering?' - assuming we are entitled to goodness but suffering is somehow a travesty. Even so, sometimes we are distinctly aware of a particular grace in our lives (read grace = any loving act of God, not just those relating to forgiving sin) within the multitude of graces. I find myself then wondering "why this grace?"

Actually the question seems ridiculous since the 'why' of every grace is the love and mercy of God. That is the 'why' from God's perspective . . . if it's not too presumptuous to talk about His view of things.

But for me there can always be a 'why' - which is the 'why' I will create in reaction to that grace. In this way the 'why' of the grace of being made a child of God is gratitude and being holy as He is Holy. It is not that God graces us to get something back, for grace is truly free - predicated on nothing in my past, present, or future . . . . but only on the eternal nature of God.

Nonetheless, as children of grace we ought to reflect on each experience of goodness . . . and put our own 'whys' to them. In this way we respond to the grace of God.

You really ought to read Mark's blog from yesterday if you haven't already done so. Then you will want to read Alan Creech's blog that Mark refers to. I guarantee it.

In the past inviting people 'to church' meant asking them to come to a meeting. We encouraged people to come and sit in on our 'worship service' with the hope that they would join us permanently.

There is nothing particularly bad about offering those invitations. The problem I see is that the invitation is too limited. The Kingdom of God is so much more than church meetings, which is to say nothing bad about church meetings. If I say a car is much more than the motor, I am not being negative about internal combustion engines.

Being the people of God is about much more than Sundays. In saying that I am not trying to put down Sundays and what traditionally we do in meeting together, but to elevate the other days and our other daily activities so that we perceive we are just as much living out faith then as when we gather on Sunday.

The answer is not to stop inviting others to experience a loving gathering of believers who are engaged in worship to God and who are encouraging and teaching each other. Very good things happen when we gather to do that. We need to still 'invite people to church' - but it is a call to being the called out of God daily. Our invitations are to enter the Kingdom of God and live under his reign.

While being followers of Jesus will never be limited to Sunday meetings, experiencing authentic love and seeing it lived out in those assembled is an important way others start to see the Kingdom of God. Let's keep inviting people to church - knowing they'll not see a show, but experience a love created by the presence of God.

I've never claimed to be politely correct, or politically correct . . . however you want to term it. 'Tolerance of anything but intolerance' is often derided as some liberal, valueless, immoral notion that is corrupting our society and churches. Actually, I'd be happy to be labeled as such. Am I simply being politically correct? I am about to not be!

I am not saying that I have no convictions or fail to understand that there are definitely actions and desires that are sin. I know sin exists. I've done enough of it . . . and know how dark the recesses of our fleshly hearts are that I could never dismiss humanity's evil as just individual preference. Some tolerance today is rooted in moral ambivalence - but don't slap that label on me just because I welcome anyone in the name of Jesus. My acceptance of sinners is not due to moral laxity (seems Jesus was accused of that too).

My tolerance is an unwillingness to judge others' failures as unworthy of patience, while I overlook the severity of my own evil. Compared to a judgmental and self-righteous stance my willingness to be forbearing and caring about anyone with any struggle - and to proclaim full and free forgiveness to the awfulest of sinners - appears to be spineless to some. Take the conservative Christian bogeyman of homosexuality . . . is it sin worse than mine? Is heterosexual lust somehow more acceptable than homosexual lust?

Those hypocritical enough to censure others for sins no worse than their own are the ones who I find most objectionable because they want to force me to choose which brothers and sisters to love. It is a zero-sum game for them. My tolerance is a welcoming hope for anyone to seek Jesus. When we are deeply aware of our sinfulness we cling to grace, and seek the realization of our sanctification without condemning others who are on that same journey.

New Churches . . . REALLY New.
When Christians in the West began hearing about a huge church in Seoul, Korea pastored by Paul Yongi Cho . . . somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 people, the race was on to discover how to be a cell-based church. Not that brother Cho was after the numbers . . . but that is another matter - contrasting faithfulness and fleshly notions of success. You don't believe me? Would anyone have cared if there were 123 people meeting in Seoul? Those impressed by numbers would never have given Jesus a second look.

If Cho was talking about cell-based churches, what were the rest of us? I think the best way to describe most churches is campus based. Cho's shift was rarely ever truly embraced - a small group ministry is not the same as being thoroughly cell-based, which is about a change in the way one views the identity of church life regarding organization and communal interaction. For Cho the primary organizational unit and fundamental source of nurture is not the Sunday gathering of the greatest number of believers but the house-to-house groupings. The so-called cells were actually seen as where the real church life happens.

Okay, that is a great idea. The emphasis on Sunday meetings tends not to enrich us spiritually but impoverish us since being Christian is tied to a single place and time - where we spend a fraction of our week. Moving from super-assemblies to simple-gatherings is essential for spiritual formation to occur. I am assuming that 'Christ formed in us' is why we exist . . .

Let me suggest another, perhaps more radical change: what if we move from a church identity rooted in any meetings to an identity found in ministry? What if being the church is truly exemplified not in gatherings of believers but in living faithfully and graciously in the world? What are the implications? Let's see . . .

Can we have ambition that isn't actually selfish? Others might be confident that we can, but I'm not very optimistic on this one. Who has time for ambitions beyond seeking God, guarding one's own heart in God, and striving to be obedient to His instructions? In these our lives will be consumed, and they are all very much concentrated in the present moment. Who has the spiritual luxury of looking far ahead when the task of faithfulness in my now demands constant attention?

Maybe my obvious failures in the present are so numerous because I don't live enough in the present. Perhaps if I bring myself more into my now and seek God fully here, I will find that the Spirit is working today, not in my tomorow or yesterday. Too many thoughts of the future, too much ambition, tragically removes me from the only place I am with God . . . in the present.

After Christmas we took a trip to Texas to visit family. On I-20 between Dallas and Ft. Worth, when you are passing car dealerships, shopping malls, and other evidence of middle and upper class prosperity, I saw a magnificent and obviously new church building. The imposing structure is a sandstone beige color and sits squarely facing the highway. At the edge of the property was a banner which says "Your Tithes at Work".

Somehow, I don't think that would be something I would be proud of. Jesus was born in a stable, laid in a manger, grew up in a back-water province under foreign occupation, was persecuted and maligned during his ministry, and died on a cruel Roman cross so we could assemble in multi-million dollar edifices and call ourselves his followers????

I know . . . I'm too radical.

There is an elusive peace that nurtures contentment with the rhythms of life - even those parts that we would rather not pass through. There is an ebb and flow of health and sickness, of youth and old age, of work and rest, of tears and joy . . . and countless other experiences.

Finding that peace is in abiding with God in the inner soul. Our presence with God is His presence with us, and our rest in the place in which He puts us. We do not find this peace by looking for it, but by constantly seeking God. Looking for peace is searching for something to acquire and possess, and seeking God is discovering how to be acquired and possessed. Every spiritual blessing comes to us as we lose ourselves - will and life - to God.

A kind Christian lady who attended a memorial service we had here last week told me that we would grow. She is a member of a large community church and assured me that we would grow because they had begun in a house. I didn't really reply to that comment . . . just said that we are blessed and enjoying living in God.

She was trying with good intention to encourage me . . . predicting that our small group meeting in a humble rented location would blossom into a congregation of thousands meeting in a multi-million dollar complex. She assumed that I needed such encouragement. Obviously, I must have greater ambitions and aspirations than sharing in fellowship with a small band of believers and meeting in a building we share with others. We all know this couldn't be what we are dreaming of . . . a community of loving people who know and care about each other, who meet in modest circumstances so they might minister more to others, where relationships are emphasized and the institution is minimal.

I didn't bother to explain what she wouldn't understand . . . but no, we are not pursuing becoming a megachurch.

This week I encountered the institutional church garbage that I think makes heaven boil. It certainly makes me boil, and I too think that I have the Spirit of God!

A 16 year-old girl was wanting to plan a memorial service for her deceased mother. She went to the nearby Episcopal Church (this isn't about Episcopal Churches, but any church with this mindset) but was told to have the memorial service meant that it had to be done as an episcopal rite. She couldn't make any changes to have it like she wanted. She was turned away!!!

Woe to you churches, hypocrites! You turn away 16 year-old girls trying to bury their mothers for the sake of preserving your traditions! Your denominational orthodoxy has become a stumbling block to those who are suffering! Your institutions are a wall between God and His children. Suffer the children to come to Him and do not forbid them!!!

Too many who call themselves Christians do not know Christ. They would probably be applauded for upholding the purity of the faith.

For Christians there are no enemies - because an overwhelming love from God and for the sake of God which is directed toward all his creatures means that there are no foes. Unbelievers, those opposing our faith, and even those persecuting followers of Christ are not to be hated. Nothing anyone can do or believe can make him or her my enemy. Only the flesh has enemies; the Spirit knows only love.

Church structures. Committees, leadership, who is in charge of whom. Management styles, leadership systems. Systems analysis. Understanding the nature of human organizations and group dynamics. Models for conflict resolution. All essential stuff for building an efficient and functional church - right?

I realize that having some organizational element is unavoidable, but focusing on this stuff is poison to authentic communities where the bond is love. The mature don't need structures because they will love and serve out of who God has grown them to be, but the immature who view things organizationally instead of relationally often strive after positions of power within the institution because of their fleshly ambitions and conceptions. Their ambitions may be for the "good" of the organization as they understand it . . . but that is precisely the problem. The immature want to sit on the right hand and left hand. When there is a structure, often those who believe that wielding power through position - even out of all sincerity - often end up in those positions while the truly mature simply go about their work of serving and loving.

Though some basic level of organization is necessary, I think we do better to avoid having positions of power for the immature to quarrel over. It is almost humorous to watch those who conceive of things in a "top-down" way searching for the places of authority in a relational community quite devoid of those positions. I watched it happen in Africa where those ambitious for power could not find a place to grab hold of it, and now with the believers with whom I am priviledged to walk. I've also seen other situations where immature people desired and took hold of positions from which they planned to rule - with all good intention, but nonetheless from fleshly ideas of authority rather than self-sacrificing service. Of course, they would disagree with me and protest that what they do is self-sacrificing service . . . and in their immaturity they truly believe it. They also would resist correction and often take offense at it.

The mystery of communities of disciples of Jesus is that they operate relationally in a way that cannot be analyzed and diagrammed. Try as one might, it is hard to come up with any clear organizational chart for Jesus and his disciples, or the apostolic church. Such systems can be imposed on the textual evidence, but cannot be derived from it.

There is a major cultural shift happening in the West. Actually, the West is going back to join the rest of the world. The experiment in modernity reached its zenith but is now fading. While the West may be entering "postmodernity" . . . the rest of the world never adopted the philosohpy of modernity, though they have used some of the technological fruits of it.

There is some good news about this shift. Modernity, with its humanistic mania, is inherently rejects submission to God. The rest of the world, however, has remained much more open to faith. I observed that it was much easier to talk to pagan, idol-worshipping Africans about Jesus and see vibrant faith spring up in their hearts by the Holy Spirit than to talk to modern Americans, many of whom are Sunday-attending confessors of a civil Christianity. Those non-modern Africans are much closer to accepting the Kingdom of God in their animal-sacrificing paganism than many nominally Christian Americans basically because their worldview already tells them that they are nothing in the world and that they are at the mercy of much stronger spiritual powers. That is so different from a modern worldview that proclaims human ingenuity and strength is the penultimate power.

In the modern West, this mindset subverts Christianity. Often while fundamentalists denounce what they call "secular humanism", their theology shows that a modern humanistic view is the bedrock of their perception of faith.

The hope for the shift now occurring is that claims of human potential and sufficiency are now highly suspect. However, as the history of paganism proves, even when man views himself as being at the mercy of great spiritual powers his response can be manipulation rather than dependence. But it is much easier talk to someone about Jesus who knows he is scum as he offers animal sacrifices to appease the gods, rather than trying to convince someone who is confident that he has struck an accord with Jesus, trading his obedience and religiouslity for a seat at the heavenly table, that he is a pauper and must reach out to God in faith and humility. The gospel is an offense to the pride of this latter individual. Those who know they are refuse receive it gladly.

Self-Sacrifice
With the beginning of Advent we are concentrating again on the coming of Jesus - which raises a host of meaty theological subjects. One is the unmistakable self-sacrifice in the kenosis (emptying - Phil. 2:7) of the incarnation, which leads to the cross.

Christians have been self-sacrificing, but for the wrong thing. I believe that in recent decades believers have been called to give themselves sacrificially to the church - when they should have been been giving themselves sacrificially to the world. This has led to an institutionally-oriented and self-serving church without a meaningful redemptive witness in the world. The ministry of reconciliation occurs when the self-sacrifice is made for the world, and not for the collective identity of the Christian organization. Preachers are to blame for calling believers to support the church and for seeking to build enterprises - which has a self-serving link to their own "careers".

While I won't lay all the blame on professional ministers, a good portion belongs there. A desire for success, a tepid modern theology which is dependent on human efforts, and a institutional mindset derived from corporate models have all contributed to a Christian community that practices self-sacrifice for itself instead of the world to which and for which Christ came. Maybe this season of Advent will call us back to the incarnation as a vision for being a missionary movement for the sake of others.