A mirror blog . . . kind of.

I probably should leave well enough alone . . . but I'm not gonna.

I'm starting a new blog at http://gettingfree.wordpress.com/. Whether it becomes my new permanent blogging-almost-once-a-month home remains to be seen. But I will be posting there a bit for a spell.

It's got more columns. Which is what I really need in my life. More columns.

AA, the Church, and the Mission of God (pt. 3 - AA & the Gospel)

I think being raised Southern Baptist has helped give me a lifelong curiousity in 'the gospel' and I hope to always keep it. As I implied in the last post, I have come to see Jesus' gospel of the kingdom--the news that the government of God has come near by virtue of Jesus showing up to assume his rightful role as the 'Christ'-ened Lord of heaven and earth)--as the central message, with Jesus' own story (a.k.a., the gospels) as the specific reports of how he, among other things, took that rightful place without immediately judging all of humanity for their ages-long resistance to his rule of love and selflessness. Thank God, Jesus comes announcing how we can be transformed into his cooperative friends, restoring the whole creation with and through him, rather than continue to be part of its destruction in large or small ways.

Now, you may notice that a fair summary of the gospel I've described in this post and before has the feel of a story of a very gracious king coming to his people who had been in various stages of rebellion against him. Instead of giving them the penalty for their treason and their other crimes against him and others, he took the consequences of their rebellion upon himself in the hopes that his people would cease their destructive rebellion and finally join with him in caring for each other and the whole creation as he envisions. Or, to put his hope another way, that they would 'repent and trust him' as his apprentices and constructive co-workers, that they would 'enter' and 'receive' his government as grateful and willing participants, joining his family business of making all things new though his love and power.

What you may notice is lacking from this description is any central concern about where one might be headed after death. My summaries of the gospel are focused on bringing humans back into participative, and increasingly constructive cooperation with God's chosen king--right now in this life for the good of all we effect. Now, the implications for the after-life are clear enough. As Todd Hunter has said, if there are two options for the after life, where do you think God takes his friends? With him, of course, to finish what they have worked toward together--the new heavens and new earth. And the negative implications are also clear: what of the person who has remained hostile to Christ and to his rule of love and self-sacrifice? Out, tragically, with the rest of the trash that is committed to death. But--and this is the salient point--the focus of the gospel of the reign of God is how one wants to go forward in this life. Specifically, the issue is whether we want to 'receive' the new management. Do we want to actually ask God to let his name be honored above all (including ours), his government to come (not ours), his will (think, great commandments) be done in our particular corners of the earth--at least through us, or do we want to pray for and continue to seek our name, our reign, our will be done. It is a directional choice. It is a 'how we want to live and for what?' choice. It's a day-by-day choice. It's the choice God has laid before us when he sent his son proclaiming that 'The time has come. The reign of God has come near. Repent and trust this good news' as he healed and took apprentices, teaching them his Way.

Now, as that gospel started to get hold of me, I started looking at the 12 steps and thinking, "Is there a better way to respond, or rather, follow through in response, to that gospel, then this?" I encourage anyone to think about this gospel and what God is seeking to do in the world--really search the whole NT on that question-- and ask the same question. I will go into some of the specific strengths of the steps as a kingdom-gospel response in later posts, but for now I will simply say that the steps are, in a nutshell, about turning the practical reigns of our lives over to God, especially as they inevitably involve our dealings with others. What's more, the path of the steps aren't taken alone, but in truly helpful relationships with others who are on the same path. The steps are about learning to actually live the way Jesus lived and taught, not just hear about it. They are a communal path to entering the reign of God, one day at a time, ceasing to be an instrument of other, darker powers such as our own selfishness and the idols we've counted on and followed for so long.

AA, the Church, and the Mission of God (pt. 2 - the Gospel)

About 9 years ago, my wife and I were preparing to leave Gainesville, Florida, and the Vineyard church we had come to deeply love was preparing to host a regional pastor's conference. I was finishing a long academic career with a take-home final exam the very same week of the conference. Needless to say I couldn't attend the meetings, so I got the tapes of each session. Four of these tapes focused on the kingdom of God, but in markedly different ways. Two of them were from Don Williams in which Don combined (i) N.T. Wright's scholarship, particularly regarding God's work in the Exodus as a prototype of God's kingdom with (ii) his personal and pastoral experience with the idols of our day, which are often better understood and dealt with as addictions. The other two sessions dealing with the kingdom were from Todd Hunter, who had been serving as the head of Vineyard USA, and in fact was just announcing his resignation from that post. Eugene Peterson and Dallas Willard had been influencing him strongly, and he gave a session on the Pastor's inner life, calling pastors to learn how to draw their energy from Christ and his kingdom (and warning of the addictions and infidelities that inevitably come if we don't), and another to the youth—the PKs—challenging them to ponder whether they really had ever heard or positively responded to the gospel that Jesus announced—that of entering the Kingdom—or if they had instead been trying to receive 'eternal life' without any intention of letting Jesus actually reign over them in this life. Now, although I had been part of a Vineyard for years, even leading small groups and eventually the college ministry, those tapes, which I nearly wore out, made me realize that, despite being in churches and/or Christian schools my whole life, the topic of the kingdom of God was a giant, giant hole in my understanding of Christianity generally and Jesus in particular. It knawed at me. So, as I began my career in the practice of law and felt the pain of separation from the church that had become my home, I read. I read Dallas Willard's Divine Conspiracy (and later, Renovation of the Heart & Hearing God), I read Missional Church by Guder & friends, I read N.T. Wright's Challenge of Jesus. I read Eugene Peterson's pastoral books and much of his Message. I read Andrew Murray's Humility. I read Don Williams' Jesus and Addiction. Some friends and I visited the Servant Leadership School a la Church of the Saviour in D.C., so we listened and read some from them, too. I'm pretty sure there are others that I'm forgetting. But what all these folks said in common, and often emphasized, was that

the kingdom of God is not a place but a dynamic.

Specifically, it was an intimate and productive dynamic with the Father and his people in which God got to actually lead and provide for humanity in the way he intended. Looking at the verbs of the NT, it was a dynamic with God and others, which we entered, or failed to enter, received or failed to receive. It was a dynamic that Jesus perfectly modeled for us and invited us into as his apprentices. The government of God had come and was looking for a people to govern and provide for.

This was amazing to me. I'm still dealing with the implications. But my first question was where does the cross fit in? As I read, I became aware of a long-running debate of which I had been totally ignorant—was it Jesus' gospel (the kingdom) or Paul's gospel (forgiveness via death and resurrection) that was the gospel? How exactly does "The kingdom of God has come near" fit together with "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures?" Where does forgiveness of sins fit in with the kingdom of God, or vice versa? One of the benefits, though, of coming late to a debate is that you get to hear, immediately, some of the better ideas that often only come after others have done much work. Another common theme that kept popping up in my reading was the narrative flow of Scripture. God doesn't do everything all at once. There is a story at work here, with characters, large and small, along with plots, subplots and more than one twist and turn before the end. As this big picture started to sink in, I began to see Jesus, his kingdom, his cross and his resurrection within this Story, and everything started to make sense. First the central character and the basic context of the NT: one cannot talk about the Jewish "Messiah" or "Christ" without simultaneously talking about "the kingdom of God" he is "Christ-ened" to lead. The Christ is a king, the King, who was to come, "restoring the kingdom." Jesus tended to talk about the kingdom (implying he was the Christ), while Paul focused on the main character—Jesus is the Christ!—assuming that everyone knows that the "Christ" leads a kingdom, the kingdom, God's kingdom. I started to understand that the historic connection between Paul's "Christ" and Jesus' "kingdom" is strong enough to bring substantial congruity all on its own. Second, though, the (messianic) plot: this king will, among other things, rescue God's people from their enemies, rebuild God's temple, bring God's justice to bear on the whole world . . . but how? The way I have come to see it, the early church saw the cross and the resurrection as the guts of the "how." It's how God's choice of king saved humanity from the dominance and fate of evil. It's how he rebuilt the temple of God. It's how he fulfilled the calling of the Jewish nation in general and the vocation of the Messiah in particular. It's also "how" a holy God can invite ordinary, messed up humans into an intimate collaboration. It's how Jesus brought the government of God near to humans in the form of an invitation instead of a death sentence. The cross and resurrection is the big climax, the ultimate surprise plot twist, of how the kingdom of God came to earth with peace and goodwill instead of a sword, even while the enemies of God and humans were completely dismantled! It's also the heart of how people will follow this king and become his people in this world, living examples and agents of his ongoing (and growing) rule. It is also the sign to the whole world, just as the Exodus was through superpower Egypt, that Yahweh is more powerful than the ultimate weapon of the most powerful human government on earth. God turned the symbol of Roman power into the ultimate ad campaign, into another stepping stool: Jesus is Lord with a capital "L.", everyone else should govern themselves accordingly. Jesus and Paul were indeed telling the same story of God's kingdom coming to earth, telling the same "good news" but Jesus was himself the main character--the king--living through the unexpected and intense climactic battle, and Paul was telling his story--which he understood as the story of the kingdom of God coming to earth, rescuing peoplefrom the kingdom of darkness.

And what was "the gospel" of the Old Testament? "How blessed are the feet of those who bring good news, who say to Zion, your God reigns." There are many gods and powers in the world, neutral at best and hostile at worst. The people of God in the OT and NT come to Yahweh and his Christ, enter and receive his reign over and for us, in substantial part, if at all because they believed he alone can treat the great powers of the world as podiums to stand upon or whatever else. He is the ultimate and highest Power in the world. He reigns, not least of which over the things which are the most menacing to people. And we rejoice, and jump at the chance to enter his government, his society, his never-ending administration on the earth. Eventually, it will be the only administration/society at work on the earth. Next will be how AA relates to this "gospel."

AA, the Church, and the Mission of God (pt. 1 -Introduction)

Convergence. In a word, that's what I've been experiencing—and been amazed by—over the last couple of years. The Christian faith contains many mysteries, some of which are intended by God himself, while others are just unfortunate failures to understand, hear or communicate what God intends to be obvious. I feel as though most of my questions of the last decade or so fall into the latter category, but have been substantially addressed by a variety of people whose insights and experiences have converged to help me see—and enter—the whole Christian faith in a different and much more cohesive and compelling way. The 'gospel' of the Old Testament, the gospel of the kingdom of God, the gospel of Paul, the invitation to discipleship, the Great Commission, the greatest commandments, the cross and resurrection, the larger mission of God led by Jesus, the new (and old) monasticism, holiness, worship, service, idolatry, addiction, righteousness (or justice), the practices of the Church, and even the work and methods of Alcoholics Anonymous—to name a few—all of these have a much deeper, complementary, and more mutually refining relationship than I ever would have imagined when I first encountered them individually. In fact, some of these things were totally mysterious to me when I first heard and thought about them, whether separately or as part of a larger whole, and it has been wonderfully satisfying, not to mention extremely helpful to see each of them fit together, overlap and even explain each other in often surprisingly simple and inviting ways, ways that shed substantial light on the heart of God's own intentions as well as the most typical of human problems and obstacles.

For those in the Church, especially those who have not personally been part of a 12-step recovery group, AA's inclusion in the above list of topics is likely surprising, and maybe even suspicious. As one who grew up chiefly in the Southern Baptist camp of Christianity, I think I understand at least some of that surprise and suspicion. Perhaps mentioning 'the gospels' (plural), of the Old Testament, of the kingdom of God, and of Paul only adds to the suspicion! If so, my point (which I'll eventually post about) is that each of these, while seemingly very different in their bare verbal content, contain much, much more of the same substance than most Christians realize. Indeed, the various ways 'gospel' is used in the scriptures have no conflict at all, but come from different angles and from different points in the story of God's good actions, often with more details of God's work available at the later points of the story. And it's when that shared substance of "the good news" of what God is doing is understood that one can better appreciate why AA's program has worked and continues to work so well for so many people around the world, and why AA can repay a very old favor and help the Church, particularly in the West, with her current task. In essence, each post in this series will discuss a different way in which one or more of the above highlighted topics converge or fit together, often in a way that ends up making AA's program, with surprisingly few adaptations, look more and more attractive as a way to respond to God, faithfully, appropriately and with the kinds of results God is seeking.

In the fashion of classic Christian witnessing (and AA tradition), this series will not be the explanations of an expert in any of the areas mentioned. I'm sure I've misunderstood some things and not yet even seen other important pieces. But these posts will be the reports of my own experiences, my own testimony of what I, a person in the process of following Jesus, think I have seen and heard, offered in the hope that they may be helpful to others and even generate conversations that will help me make progress in the Way.

The next post will look at the way the Old Testament and the New Testament talk about 'the good news' or 'the gospel', some of how they fit together, and what that might mean.

Dallas Willard on the Steps

For some time I've thought of putting together some quotes from Dallas Willard relating to using the steps and workout groups in the way we are (as a communal path toward Christlikeness), and then Jim put me over the edge with his comment to the previous post. Because of his depth of work in the areas of (trans)formation, spiritual disciplines, what being a disciple of Jesus means and requires, the gospel of God's government, and how all these interrelate (not to mention his experience in living these things out), few people have been as influential on me through their writings as Dallas Willard. So, here are just a few excerpts from Dallas' works (there are many, many more), which I think help explain how the steps can help people with receiving and entering the Government of God; the strength of the first quote--especially given Dallas' depth with the disciplines--really surprised me the first time I read it, and has stuck with me ever since:

"Any successful plan for spiritual formation, whether for the individual or group, will in fact be significantly similar to the Alcoholics Anonymous program." Page 85, Renovation of the Heart [hereinafter, Renovation].

The following adaptation of the 12 steps is found in the Renovation of the Heart Leaders' Guide, page 5A:

1. I admit that I am powerless over sin and that my life has become unmanageable.
2. I believe that God—through His action and those of His Son Jesus and the Holy Spirit—can restore me to sanity.
3. I will turn my will and my entire life over to the care of God.
4. I will make a searching and fearless inventory of my life to discover all the ways I have engaged in self-worship (by being in control instead of living surrendered to the will of God).
5. I admit to God, to myself, and to another human being the exact nature of my
   wrongs.
6. I am entirely ready to have God remove all the defects in my character and replace them—through His presence—with the thoughts, emotions, will, behavior and relationship patterns of Christ.
7. I humbly ask God to help me become willing to deny myself—and the desire to live life on my terms—and to remove my shortcomings.
8. I will make a list of all the people I have harmed and become willing to make amends.
9. I will make direct amends to all I have injured.
10. I will continue to take personal inventory, and when I wrong someone, I will promptly admit it.
11. I will, through prayer, meditation, and the practice of other Christian disciplines, attempt to improve my conscious contact with God.
12. Having experienced some measure of authentic transformation as a result of surrendering all aspects of myself to the power and presence of Christ, I will carry this message to others and continue to practice these principles in all my affairs.

"The familiar means of the traditional AA program—the famous "twelve steps" and
the personal and social arrangements in which they are concretely embodied, including a conscious involvement of God in the individual's life—are highly effective in bringing about personal transformation." From Living A Transformed Life Adequate To Our Calling, http://www.dwillard.org/.

"So the problem of spiritual transformation (the normal lack thereof) among those who identify themselves as Christians today is not that it is impossible or that effectual means to it are not available. The problem is that it is not intended. People do not see it and its value and decide to carry through with it." Renovation, p. 91

"Now I must say something you can be mad at me about. A fundamental mistake of the conservative side of the American church today, and much of the Western church, is that it takes as its basic goal to get as many people as possible ready to die and go to heaven. It aims to get people into heaven rather than to get heaven into people. This of course requires that these people, who are going to be "in," must be right on what is basic. You can't really quarrel with that. But it turns out that to be right on "what is basic" is to be right in terms of the particular church vessel or tradition in question, not in terms of Christlikeness . . . . As a result they actually fall far short of getting as many people as possible ready to die, because the lives of the "converted" testify against the reality of [Christ's power and character]. The way to get as many people into heaven as you can is to get heaven into as many people as you can - that is, to follow the path of genuine spiritual transformation or full-throttle discipleship to Jesus Christ. When we are counting up results we also need to keep in mind the multitudes of people (surrounded by churches) who will not be in heaven because they have never, to their knowledge, seen the reality of Christ in a living human being." Renovation, p. 239, 239

Reconciliation to a God on the move

"Be reconciled to God!" Paul urges, and the Church has long echoed him. Many have said that the key here is to accept or appropriate Christ's sacrifice through a prayer to God. Essentially, "the gift" of God is forgiveness (which can be important coming from the God who made and fills heaven and hell), and our job is to simply receive this gift. That's it. That's the "good news." And if God wasn't an object in motion, and we humans weren't objects in motion, I'd pretty much leave it at that myself. But we are all on the move; and not just random movements, either. Does "reconciliation to God" have anything to do with the nature and direction of my movements in life compared with his?

Years ago my wife and I had a long, good talk about intimacy. Specifically we talked about whether our intimacy level as husband and wife was limited by the extent that our direction or goals in life differed. Essentially, we agreed that it was. I keep thinking about this regarding God. If God had no particular goals for the world or for me; no real agenda for what I became, what I love, what I trust, what I hate, what I do from day to day--absent, say, really harming someone--then getting a blanket of forgiveness for any particular offenses in the past or future would pretty much complete, our 'reconciliation'. I'm okay, he's okay, we're okay--reconciliation done.

But God does have a very definite goal for me--and not just me. He has a dream for the whole world and heaven as well, and he is passionate about it, willing to go through the crucifiction for it. He has a clear direction and he is very, very active--every moment, around the world--in bringing his dream to pass, training and working with those who become his children and co-workers in his great dream.

So, I agree, "Be reconciled to God!" But I'm convinced that's going to mean more than just receiving his forgiveness for past and future wrongs. It's going to mean learning to love what he loves, learning to work with him for his dream and making it our own, giving up our alternative plans and dreams that don't fit in. It's going to require following his lead. In a nutshell, it's going to require a process of becoming, or discipleship. Because we all, God willing, are going to continue to live and act in this world, affecting everyone around us in various degrees, towards various ends. So is God. The question is, are we working with him, towards his goals, or not. Jesus put it this way: "If you're not working with me, you're working against me. Either you're helping me gather things together, or you're scattering them further apart." Let's learn to be part of the Solution, and learn to stop being part of the problem. Also, let's know that this is what it means to be reconciled to this God who is in motion--receiving his forgiveness, absolutely, within the context of learning to move and act with him, from his Son who knows all about his Father's intentions and plans and ways of acting.

Prayer & Meditation

Alright. Let me just say that step 11 has been a surprise. I'll be straight up honest. I kind of expected, as a long-time Christian now doing the steps as a tool in my apprenticeship to Jesus, that I had already been working step 11 for years, so I'd just kind of jump right into 12 once I got there. Then I got to step 11 and felt like God just made it an inescapable question: "Don't you need to improve your conscious contact with me? Hasn't your inner life gotten weaker and weaker over the years in many ways?" The Holy Spirit and the habit of greater honesty with God and myself that the previous steps had just instilled has kept me from saying "no" to either question. So I'm now in the middle of seeking to improve my conscious contact with God through prayer and meditation. And I'm very grateful to be doing so.

On that front, some of the online Christian Classics, particularly Jeremy Taylor's Holy Living, has been really helping me, along with listening and reading the Message, as well as a more typical bible.

Willard on using the Bible safely

A blurb of wisdom from Willard's Hearing God on how to approach Scripture usefully and safely (HT: Todd):

We will be spiritually safe in our use of the Bible if we follow a simple rule: Read it with a submissive attitude. Read with a readiness to surrender all you are—all your plans, opinions, possessions, positions. Study as intelligently as possible, with all available means, but never study merely to find the truth and especially not just to prove something wrong. Subordinate your desire to find the truth to your desire to do it, to act it out!

I may spend a long time with that last sentence: "Subordinate your desire to find the truth to your desire to do it, to act it out." This priority (and the plan to implement it) was one of the first and most striking differences between every bible study or small group (or worship service) I've been a part of and working the steps with John. In my previous bible studies or small groups (several of which I was leading) the weakest point was the follow-up and follow through on the 'doing' of what we learned. By definition, perhaps, the focus of a bible study is information intake. Sunday service was often the same in evangelical circles. We were always on to the next topic next week, regardless of how well or how poorly any or all of us had really implemented and made a habit of what we learned last week. The process of follow up or follow through was spotty to non-existent. It was left largely to the individual. 52 isn't that many 'truths' to learn in a year. It seems like an inhuman amount of new habits to form without intelligent and community-supported follow up and follow through.

By contrast, I've thoroughly enjoyed how John and I, though we began working the steps at the same time, are not currently on the same step, because our goal has not been to get through the steps either quickly or in lock step, but to let each step do its work thoroughly and completely in each of us, each of us working individually with support from God and each other to make each step fruitful in our actual lives, which is a similar but unique experience and work for each of us. Also, because of the size of our group (2), we don't have to limit our conversation to a certain topic (e.g., "Tonight we're discussing step 9."). We have the time to be person focused, purpose focused, process focused, rather than topic focused. I've heard for years in Church circles "I'm educated way beyond the level of my obedience." I think Church as we've known it is pretty much designed for that outcome, hence it's prevalence. Should we do anything about that, or just accept it?

Many Christians assume that communal attempts to focus on implementation of truth become inevitably legalistic and judgmental. I wonder. AA seems to let the communication and discovery of truth be subordinate to (be a servant of) the implementation of truth, and they seem to be (in)famous for being full of people more welcoming and full of grace than most churches--and more honest at the same time.

The Steps Toward Humanity Akin to Jesus Christ

This isn't finished. I'm not finished. But after wrestling with Jesus and the steps and Dallas Willard and God knows what all else for years, here are the steps as I've been using them for the last several months, more or less, and plan to continue for some time to come.

As with most things, the precise phrasing isn't as critical as the implementing the spirit behind the words, to the extent it is the spirit of God. Your feedback is welcome.

Teresa of AA-vila

Today, I'm throwing in some help from Teresa of Avila, on the role of self-examination, and of prayer and meditation in the task of becoming akin to and more intimately involved with Christ. As with William Law, I get really jazzed to see this stuff in so old and trusted a source as Teresa of Avila. It amazes and thrills me to see so much of the means and goals of the steps in so many Christian classics.

This passage from her classic work, Interior Castle, underscores the necessity of what AA would much later call steps 4, 10 and 11, and offers some wisdom on their relative importance. Both self examination and more 'vertical' prayers and meditations are necessary in making all the rooms of our "interior castle"—Teresa's image of the multi-tiered and compartmentalized human soul—into a beautiful and functional home for the true King.

Mark well . . . that self-knowledge is indispensable, even for those whom
God takes to dwell in the same mansion with Himself. Nothing else, however
elevated, perfects the soul which must never seek to forget its own nothingness.
Let humility be always at work, like the bee at the honeycomb, or all will be
lost. But, remember, the bee leaves its hive to fly in search of flowers and the
soul should [often] cease thinking of itself to rise in meditation on the
grandeur and majesty of its God. It will learn its own baseness better thus than
by self-contemplation, and will be freer . . . [.] Although it is a great grace
from God to practice self-examination, yet ‘too much is as bad as too little,’
as they say; believe me, by God’s help, we shall advance more by contemplating
the Divinity than by keeping our eyes fixed on ourselves, poor creatures of
earth that we are.

I do not know whether I have put this clearly; self-knowledge is of such
consequence that I would not have you careless of it, [because] though you may
be lifted to heaven in prayer, while on earth nothing is more needful than
humility [emphasis added]. Therefore, I repeat, not only a good way, but the
best of all ways, is to endeavor to enter [the work in the soul through prayer
and meditation] first by the room where humility is practiced [i.e., the room of
self-knowledge], which is far better than at once rushing on to the
others.

In a process of apprenticeship and change, it is necessary to look at and even meditate on (think about) both our own ways as well as those of the Master we are seeking to emulate. The beginning of our transformation will be weighted more to the former, while we will eventually focus more and more on the latter. Eventually I imagine we become so one with Christ that these twin tasks become quite fluid, like the way we subtly and even unthinkingly checking our speed and how much gas is in the tank, and adjust the AC, the steering wheel, the brakes and accelerator, even change gears, all while keeping our eyes down the road where we are headed, even though, when we began driving, we had to pay much more attention to our own actions with the car, than where we were going. Accurately assessing one's own life and Christ's are both wonderful gifts from God, and are both essential to the task at hand, but as Teresa has said, "we shall advance more" in the long run by contemplating Jesus—he is our chief subject—than by assessing ourselves alone. Let us examine ourselves initially and regularly, but all the while learn to fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfector of our trust.

Some resources for working the steps

For those that are interested in using the 12 steps explicitly for pursuing Christian growth, here are some resources I can recommend: First, I've been using One Day at a Time by Trevor Hudson. The book is short, to the point, and has had several helpful tips for working each step, which has been particularly helpful with certain steps. I've been working the steps with my friend, John, and he's using Keith Miller's Hunger for Healing Workbook, so each of us are getting exposure to both authors' tips, which have really helped flesh out how to go about each step. Keith Miller appears to be the godfather of using the steps explicitly for Christian growth; I plan on getting his book Hunger for Healing after seeing John's workbook for it. 12step.org is a free online resource that is absolutely fantastic. They give summaries and excerpts from the Big Book of AA, from AA's 12 and 12 and from other recovery groups for each step, scriptural passages for each step, worksheets, etc.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I suggest doing the steps with another person, preferably someone who has done them with good results. Since neither John nor I have worked the steps before, I frequently talk to other friends of mine who have worked the steps through AA or Al-Anon, to get their input. Remember, the steps aren't a race. I'll be posting the version of the steps I've ended up with in my head, having adjusted them slightly for the goal of growth in Christ, soon.

What's this Christianity thing about, anyway?

One can sometimes get the wrong impression from how Christianity is often practiced as to what God's priorities are for his people. On that note, a word from our enviably named brother, William Law, from A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life (does this guy know how to name a book or what?):

[T]hat religion or devotion which is to govern the ordinary actions of our life is to be found in almost every verse of Scripture. Our blessed Saviour and His Apostles are wholly taken up in doctrines that relate to common life. They call us to renounce the world, and differ in every temper and way of life, from the spirit and the way of the world: to renounce all its goods, to fear none of its evils, to reject its joys, and have no value for its happiness: to be as new-born babes, that are born into a new state of things: to live as pilgrims in spiritual watching, in holy fear, and heavenly aspiring after another life: to take up our daily cross, to deny ourselves, to profess the blessedness of mourning, to seek the blessedness of poverty of spirit: to forsake the pride and vanity of riches, to take no thought for the morrow, to live in the profoundest state of humility, to rejoice in worldly sufferings: to reject the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life: to bear injuries, to forgive and bless our enemies, and to love mankind as God loveth them: to give up our whole hearts and affections to God, and strive to enter through the strait gate into a life of eternal glory.

This is the common devotion which our blessed Saviour taught, in order to make it the common life of all Christians. Is it not therefore exceeding strange that people should place so much piety in the attendance upon public worship, concerning which there is not one precept of our Lord's to be found, and yet neglect these common duties of our ordinary life, which are commanded in every page of the Gospel?

Sound daunting? It is!! (even if our brother Law slightly overstated the call) In fact, without the help of God, the Way of Christ is impossible. But Christianity is about coming to do our actual life with and through Christ and his power, in the way he knows it should be done for the good of all. It's about learning how to let God, through his annointed leader, actually run things. The time has come. The government of God (through it's King) is near. Change your plans, your direction, and trust this good news. Receive the governing of God through Christ. Enter it. Follow Christ. Learn to live in this Way. These are the invitations of the New Testament. If you want to say "Yes" to this, and you want a prayer to pray, pray the Lord's prayer, then follow it through with something like the steps: Learn to stop letting sin reign in your body; instead, learn to let Christ heal and reign through every part of you. How can we do this without honestly taking an inventory of ourselves and our patterns of action, and then seeking the help of God and other followers? I love the steps because they are about actually identifying where sin has reigned in us and seeking God's help for that to stop (and they've helped me see that come to pass in my life).

Lord, let your government come; let your will be done on earth, just like it is in heaven.

Habit Forming

I'm on vacation with Kim, Ruby & Brooke, and I'm happy to say I've not been on the internet much at all!

But the steps are still helping me . . . and I figured I'd post an observation or two while they're fresh. I've noticed that the steps are really habits, specifically, they're habits that facilitate progressive humility, trust in God, and general improvement of character. Just look through the steps, and it's not hard to realize that these are not things that someone just does, never to repeat, normal ebbs and flows notwithstanding. If you do them even once sincerely, they give you benefits that are hard to walk away from. That seems only fair play for AA's to fight fire with fire. The Big Book says something to the effect of alcohol abuse being only the symptom: it is merely the vehicle that alcoholics use to run away from the pressures of life. The steps are the solution because they teach a person how to successfully deal with life: by humbly taking our place with God, taking advantage of his many benefits. "Taste and see that the Lord is good." Similar to alcohol, one experience of God can lead to another.

It's hard for me to say enough how much God is ready and willing to recreate a willing human being (even one that is extremely screwed up) into someone akin to Jesus. The issue isn't God's power or willingness on this point, it's ours, which the original AA's were desperate and fortunate enough to discover.

As for my current step 'location', I have made some of my amends of step 9, and still have work to do. In fact, I've got my biggest 'amends' yet to schedule once vacation is over. I pray it goes well. And I find myself doing steps 10, 11 and 12 as well already, though without any prompting.

Two birds, one post

The below is a comment I left on Scot McKnight's blog, on the first post of what should be an excellent study on the word/concept of "gospel" in the bible. His post today focused on the Old Testament 'gospel', I think it's also strongly related to my experience with Step 2 of the 12: "We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity":

Alright! The mother of all series! Very much looking forward to this one, Scot. Just to be explicit about something that is implied in all of your points: God’s great power or abilities (which he uses for good), especially relative to others. Especially the Isaiah passage (who says to Zion, “Your God reigns”, emphasis mine) says to me that the chief power in the world is their God. I realize this is implied, but given people’s general tendency to trust other power sources (money, governments, persuasive people, etc.), I think it’s worth being explicit: No one, no thing has more power on the earth than God (specifically Jesus). The fact that saying it might be controversial even among Christians proves the point. It also happens that in many, many circumstances, one’s conclusions about who the most powerful person in the room is will dominate one’s course of action. If the earth is a ‘room’ where God has little power, our ethics will show it.

Even the Exodus speaks loudly about this ‘power’ issue to the whole world, to the extent pharoah and Egypt were perceived as the world’s greatest power. Foundational to trusting God instead of other things is believing he is able to help, more able than other things we could trust. (BTW, I’m looking forward to the book Salvation Belongs to Our God, for this reason)

My point being that God's power, and specifically Jesus' power, to help people on the earth is part of the gospel itself, and a critical part at that. If he did not have power to help, we would not bother coming to him; we'd go to someone or something else. We just don't--and shouldn't--trust things or people that can't deliver. Even people we hate, if we think they have power to do something, we are inclined to listen to what they say, perhaps do their will. Trusting God's gospel about Jesus is, in substantial part, coming to believe that he has the ability to come through in the ways we need. We need to know he has power on the earth to help.

For me, knowing Jesus has power, saying to myself "Jesus is Lord" puts my soul at ease. So many "what ifs" become quieted within me. More on that to come.

Observation 1: If your goal is transformation . . .

As I've been working the steps (slightly modified), and talking to various friends and church folks about them, I've noticed a common reaction, typically non-verbal, which I guess can best be summarized as 'perplexed'. After I confirm I don't even like alcohol and don't have any 'bad' addictions, the question on their faces seems to be: "Why would a Christian without an overt addiction problem do the steps?"
Obviously, some of these questions stem from an ignorance about the steps and what they're really designed to do--but that's for another post. Another reason for the perplexity is a general idea of what we think God is hoping to accomplish in the world through Jesus, and we don't see how the steps figure into that. In a nutshell, if Christianity is--at its core--about 'getting saved (from hell)', why go through the steps absent a typical-kind of addiction problem? And from that standpoint, I'd have to agree; the steps would be tangential at best to Christianity, though extremely practical for living well.

But what if God's goal and hope in sending Jesus is not just to save us from the ultimate consequences of our sin, but from "our sin" itself? What if his goal is to get his way on earth more like he does in heaven; to make human rebels into happily cooperative family; to overthrow the functional leadership of self, money and all that causes evil? What if re-creating people into the character of Jesus is the goal, and honest, maybe even desperate, communities of people are the best raw materials? What if a gospel 'response' is about saying 'yes' to God's leadership through Christ, then learning how to actually live that 'yes' out with God and other folks on the same Path?

I want to throw out the thought that to the extent that one becomes gripped by a gospel of the latter kind, by the thought that how we learn to live is the only kind of worship that matters, the AA program in general will start looking like one of the most logical ways an individual and group could respond to what God has in mind and what he offers. (For me, becoming really centered on the latter instead of the former was a process that took several years.) Ironically, in this effort of transformation, one becomes especially thankful for God's amazing forgiveness for falling short, because that forgiveness is put into a dynamic context and pursuit of a very high goal, issuing from the very heart of God: re-creation in the likeness of his Son, letting God reign on earth, through Jesus, just like he does in heaven.

More on why the steps are so appropriate and functional as a response to the gospel, and on my own experience with them, later.

(Another) Long Time, No post

Well, for anyone that still visits here on occasion, I am alive. And silence has not meant inactivity.

To continue where I left off, I started working the 12 steps with my friend John as a 'workout' towards transformation, towards Christlikeness, towards functionally entering God's reign through Jesus. (A hint re: future posts: the steps aren't really about drinking.) I'm not done with them yet (or, better, they're not done with me); and I don't know if that will ever happen, though I'm excited to go through the 12th step soon, which I'll talk about more later. As many who have worked the steps know, they're not a checklist to be 'completed' and left for the next thing; they become a way of living with different goals, different motivations and different means of handling each day.

I really can't adequately say how grateful I am to God and his people for this little program of transformation and healing, though I hope my life will show it for years to come. The next several posts will be attempts to share some of my own experience with the steps, and also some larger reasons why the wider Church might want to listen to these humble "suggestions" offered and practiced by broken people around the world who wanted real change for themselves, and often found that and so much more. For those interested in the so-called 'new monasticism' dawning in the evangelical church, don't forget to listen to the wisdom of the enormous fellowship of 'drunk' monks, quietly and anonymously working around the world, among and as some of our society's most broken people.

Making Disciples of Jesus

After some delay, below is the plan that we're currently using as we re-launch Bow Down, a community in the inner-city of West Palm Beach, looking to become and make disciples of Jesus. Each item is in order of priority, more on that, and on each element, later:

1. Workout Plan with Workout Partners. Our first and foremost shared activity will be some sort of spiritual "workout" plan with two or three other people. A workout can be virtually any plan--a set of spiritual and not-so-spiritual disciplines--chosen by the workout group. It's not rocket science, but neither is it too common, for a group of professing Christians to look honestly at Jesus and ponder, "What practices would lead me toward becoming like him?" A group of 2-4 folks just have to prayerfully ask that question and see what seems good to the Holy Spirit and to them, and then do it. A few points on this practice: ~ There is no official workout of the church; there are virtually an unlimited number of good options (some are already using a modified version of the 12 steps, or the Daily Office, for example). ~ Each group can determine the appropriate length of the workout plan ("until we've all finished the 12th step", or "for six months", etc.). ~ As each group comes to a close, we encourage each person to begin again the process of finding workout partners and a workout. ~ We recommend that each workout group plan on meeting or talking together at least once a week to give each person a couple of partners in their process of being Jesus' disciple. ~ Everyone should take time, before beginning a workout with a group, to think and pray about whether they are really ready to give the time required for a workout and to be in relationship with the partners, and what, in a broader sense, they think being Christ's disciple will require; ~ Finally, we encourage that every other weekly meeting of the workout partners be at one of the small groups:
2. Small Groups. A few venues, meeting every other week, will be created where a few workout groups can all get together for a more typical small group meeting, where everyone can eat together with communion, sing together, pray for each other, and talk about what's going on. In this way, people can get exposure to some of the workouts that others are doing and get some meaningful connection with people within and outside of their workout group. One of the elders will facilitate each small group.
3. Worship service. Our final shared practice is our worship service. This will be a service not significantly different from many evangelical/charismatic congregations, though we may be more urban in our music, give more time for testimonials, talk more about the process of discipleship, and be more plural in our teachers. On the teaching front, it is the express goal of those currently involved in teaching to bring others into the work as gifting and character allow.

As I mentioned, we're going to attempt to make the above practices a priority in the order listed. The main reason being that we think our chief job is make mature disciples of Jesus (and become such ourselves). We need more Christ-like people and families downtown. We have had many converts, but see few "little Christs." Like many of the monastic orders or even like many educational theorists, we don't think that a typical worship service, as the express or implied chief communal practice, is going to result in significant progress toward this end, though it can be helpful toward that end as a lower-tier activity. Each person must respond to the call of discipleship and take intentional, if not aggressive steps if they intend to actually be a disciple of Jesus who makes progress in the effort. At the weekly service and elsewhere, we will routinely announce Christ's invitation to be his apprentice and how we at Bow Down are structuring our response with workouts in micro-communities with the Holy Spirit. Responsibility must be taken by each disciple for what they are becoming, and the process must be undertaken together and with God's direct help.

In a nutshell, after asking what practices would lead us toward "Christ fully formed within", we have come up with the above plan of action. Your comments and feedback (even the "You're crazy and a heretic!" variety) are welcome.

Blame Kyle

Below is a response I was going to leave in the comments to the last post, BUT, after thinking about it, I wanted to (i) highlight Kyle's comment (because it's highly informed and thoughtful, and he has his own significant learning and teaching experience which is different from mine), which you can read in the comments of the previous post, and (ii) give my thoughts on it separately here:

Yo! Kyle,

You can opine here anytime! I'll take your comment above all as a double compliment: 1) that my post was interesting enough to read through and comment thoroughly upon, and 2) you must believe my attention span to be above average. :)

Really, thanks for interacting with some really good stuff (how's that for an educated vocabulary?). This was my favorite quote: "The pedagogy of the early third century Eastern theologian, Gregory Nazianzen, was, 'let us teach dogmatically today and discuss tomorrow.' I'm with you on not dismissing lecture altogether (which you'll see in the next post). I just lectured a little last night, as a matter of fact. (Though, I wonder if Gregory would substitute a reading assignment for a dogmatic lecture if his entire church had access to what we have access to . . . just a thought.) For me, the issue of teaching is at least significantly one of emphasis within all our formational practices, and what we're hoping to accomplish when we teach. That will affect how we teach and many other things. I think teaching is important. That said, the sermon/lecture has become the evangelical sacrament in many, many circles (faith comes by hearing, and that of the word of God), sometimes an end in itself, rather than one of many tools to assist in the making of mature disciples.

Relatedly, having a "head pastor" has become the chief necessary ingredient in Evangelical ecclesiology. To quote or at least paraphrase John Wimber, "The modern era has been a blessing in many, many ways, but it hasn't done much for our pneumatology." Similarly, it's also created distinct and easily recognizable problems in our ecclesiology and our soteriology especially. These all affect what churches pursue in the world and in their own people, and how. For example, I don't think that you should be saddled with the burden of a 'holier-than-other-Christians' title in order to be given space in your community to use your gifts and training with passion and as often God inspires within broad communal boundaries. Why can't there be multiple people whom the community has recognized as having a particular gift to teach? These folks can work together and sharpen each other and the community. Can't they, in turn, train and involve others in their discipline and work, all within one community? Certainly. And when it comes to decision making in the body, the Quakers, some monastic orders, and even AA have, in my view, embodied a more biblically sound practice and government, namely, a "pneumocratic" body of brothers in which the members discuss and discern together, looking for consensus, not mere 'majority vote' on what God is doing in a particular situation. Of course, some voices will carry more weight than others, which is appropriate, but the Spirit can also speak through the most unexpected sources, and many will recognize his voice when they hear it, no matter the messenger. There is more here, but you get the idea.

Though, clearly, modernism has not and does not stop God from accomplishing wonderful things in the most modern (and lecture oriented!) churches, many times over. To not see this is a mistake.

But the splinters remain for me, both from experience and from what I see God doing (and how) in the scriptures. BTW, my favorite take on a functional approach to church decision making is stated nicely in a brief study by the Center for Parish Development, called "Gathered Together to Seek and to Do God's Will."

Hope you all are doing well. I'll roll out the next post soon.

A little background . . .

Hopefully, this post and the next will help to make more sense of some of the last few posts. First, a few bits that shape my perspective, in no particular order, so you know some of where I'm coming from when it comes to the subject of teaching and learning:

• I've grown up in the evangelical church and never left. My mother took us to Southern Baptist churches growing up, I went to a Lutheran grade-school, a non-denom evangelical middle school & highschool (bible class every day, chapel once a week), attended and led small groups & then college ministry at a Vineyard in college & law school. Since then I've been a part of two evangelical church plants. (My point: I've heard a moderately high amount of teaching in the evangelical format, and even given my share of it.)
• As far as non-religious schooling goes, I've had about as much as I can get without changing fields of study. I have a B.S. in Business, a law degree and a master's in tax law. I've also been working as an adjunct professor at a local Christian university for two years. My classes, two per semester, have approximately 30 students each. (So I've also heard a relatively high amount of teaching in the academic format, and even given my share of it.)
• FWIW, in the academic setting I generally got great marks as a student and as a teacher (at least in the academic setting, you get formally evaluated on these things). Whether as a small group leader, college minister, professor, etc., I really have cared about what people who were part of these groups were taking away from them. Though questions about teaching have been in my mind for decades, doing the teaching/leading work myself kicked them into high gear as I attempted to help people learn and see something, and even be shaped differently.
• The current church plant that I'm a part of is coming out of a parachurch ministry in downtown West Palm Beach--Urban Youth Impact ("UYI"). It's largest program is an after-school tutoring program, but it also does a variety of evangelical outreaches, bible studies and community service projects on a regular basis, and has been in the community for over a decade. Like most strongly evangelical organizations, UYI's outreaches were typically designed to get conversions--getting kids to say a prayer so that they can go to heaven instead of hell whenever death inevitably comes. UYI has gotten several thousands of these conversions over the years, which they sought to "follow up" with bible studies and the like. But here is the fact: UYI can only point to a handful of people who show substantial change toward Christlikeness out of the thousands who have "converted."

So what? Well, obviously I've not studied learning theory (yet), and have no formal education training. My experience is only as a congregant, a disciple of Jesus, a 'secular' student, and as a church leader and professor. But each of these undertakings have been wonderfully helpful and also left some splinters in my mind about the learning process, specifically as it applies to our apprenticeship to Jesus. Here are some splinters, again, in no particular order, that I haven't yet fully dug out (the next post will be the tangible structures that the current church plant is adopting that these splinters helped shape):

• In all the above experiences (and as a parent), I've seen lots of ways one can teach, and lots of ways one can learn. Some ways of teaching are less effective (i.e., less likely to change the hearers intellectually or more thoroughly) than others. The evangelical church tends to emphasize, even revere, the least effective form of teaching of which I'm aware--uninterrupted lecture by the same person.
• Jesus, speaking to the apostles, whose 'teaching' responsibilities were only going to increase, told them not to let anyone call them "Teacher" or "Father", and gave essentially two reasons: There was only One worthy of such titles, and they, the apostles, were all equals with anyone they'd be 'teaching'. I have no doubts that changing the title to "pastor" or some other term designed to honor and distinguish a servant from the other brothers somehow remedies what Jesus was trying to prevent here.
• Relatedly, being given the task and gift of teaching by God is different from letting people put a title on you. Gifts give energy and life to the giver and the recipient. But few things in life are heavier than a religious title, whether for the individual or the individual's family. Do your leaders a favor: call them by their first names, and think of them that way.
• The longer one stays in academia, listening to experts give lectures, the less one feels qualified to do anything. One has to actually do something themselves and see it work to build confidence with the subject matter.
• Parents whose goal is maturity don't primarily teach by lecture; talking is just step one.
• I don't think we're making as many disciples of Jesus as we think we are.
• While I realize that "not many" should aspire to biblical teaching (for the harsher judgment and the general challenges of the tongue), didn't the early churches enjoy a plethora of teachers (how could Corinth play favorites if they'd only ever heard one guy; how could Timothy know if a potential elder is "able to teach" if the candidate has never done it; if the Jerusalem church "devoted themselves to the apostleS' teaching, that church had at least a dozen teachers, not even counting James, Jesus' brother, and some other folks who likely also taught; if "two or at the most three" prophets would speak per gathering in Corinth, do we really think it was the same two or three every gathering, etc., etc.)
• Guest speakers in my class have a big advantage in being effective just by having a different voice and face and personality than my own.
• Prioritizing "new births" over "Christ fully formed within" will play itself out in actual living results.
• Students tend to retain a lot more if WE discuss, than if I lecture.
• I learn a lot by prepping to teach. I learn even more if I ask the students good questions and listen to their answers and questions.
• No amount of lecture (or even discussion) can make up for a student who doesn't really want to learn what I'm teaching.
• Creating learners is more helpful than teaching, and there is a difference between the two.
• A truth discovered sticks and shapes several times better than a truth heard.
• Seeing and doing something in action (apprenticeship) is so much better than classroom "learning", it's hard to even compare them, but apprenticeship is much slower and requires a lot more "teachers", and a lot more work by the student.
• Would the apostles be horrified by our near permanent "delegation" of the teaching to one person per church, with lecture being the typical method?
• As Dallas Willard has suggested, are we getting the results we now have not despite our efforts but at least partially because of them?

As I said, next post will be the structures our new church plant is adopting, which have been shaped in part by these splinters.

Maturity and "teaching"

Here's a comment I made on one of Brant's posts. His issue was more general, about babies and bathwater in the church and which is which. My comment was specific to the relationship between teaching (as we typically practice and prioritize it) and maturity:

[I]t's fairly defensible that the "end" God has in mind is fully formed, fully functional Christ-likeness, writ-large. If that's where we're headed (or where God would like to lead us), what shared, corporate practices are likely to lead us there? I know you're a fan of [spiritual disciplines], so there's much positive to be said here. On the negative (bath water) side, though, I think that delegating the vast bulk of the teaching to one "expert" person on a near permanent basis, and, secondly, having our teaching be almost exclusively without dialog are likely to help the very young in the faith for a while, but will actually hinder the maturing process after the infancy/child stages. Why aren't pastors typically multiplying themselves out of a job asap? Don't our biblical examples tend toward that kind of multiplication? Our "ecclesiology" is currently best designed to produce babies (converts) and minister to those babies in the faith. It is difficult to argue from typical church practice (centered on lectures, usually by one "expert") that we are geared toward maturity. Our priorities of practice, our ways of doing teaching, etc.--bathwater. Not necessarily bad, but definitely best used for babies.

I hope I'm being clear that I'm not opposed to teaching. I do, though, from a biblical and practical perspective, question how we do it, how we (generally fail to) train others to do it, and how both of the above tends to produce spectators of the faith rather than ambassadors of it. So, are there any biblically faithful alternatives to our typical "plan"? What and how so? Is an alternative approach really necessary at all? I'll be posting on an alternative we're working on at UYI very soon.