Faith's Edge

You know, before I came to SFTS, I didn't know people who were fans of teams other than the Steelers, Pirates, and Penguins (and Panthers in NCAA stuff). Pittsburgh doesn't have an NBA team (which is a travesty!) so folks are all over the place in terms of basketball. It is good to know fans of other teams. It keeps me humble. I have also been incredibly spoiled by the Steelers since I got out here. My first year of seminary they were 15-1. Last year, well, you know. The whole Super Bowl thing. It is taking some time to getting reaccustomed to watching the black and gold lose. That being said, I still have every confidence that the Steelers will turn this season around. Why? Here's why: 1) their passing game. The Steelers have discovered over the past two weeks that they can throw the ball. Hines Ward (pictured left) had an amazing game on Sunday! They have probably the best receiver core that I can remember the team having (although Ward, Randle El, Burress was pretty good). If they can start using the pass to set up the run instead of the other way around, they have we an offensive juggernaut on our hands. The last two games Ben has thrown for 5 td's and no interceptions. Batch added two at the end of Sunday's game (more on the qb situation later). 2) the tough schedule. Now you may be thinking, isn't the tough schedule a bad thing? Well, kinda. Here's the thing, in my opinion the two toughest divisions have to play each other this year, those being the NFC South(CAR, ATL, NO, TB) and the AFC North (PIT, CIN, CLE, BAL). The toughness of schedule for the rest of our division is going to allow smoe good teams to cancel each other out. 10-6 or even 9-7 might win our division this year. That might seem optimistic, and this week with CIN beating CAR that didn't shake out as I had hoped, but I think towards the end of the season we're going to see some leveling off and the Steelers are money in November and December. Just you wait.

Two things are killing the Steelers right now: turnovers and the QB situation. At the beginning of the season, the problem was Ben throwing interceptions. He seems to have fixed that. But we've now fumbled two punts this season. That is unacceptable. We've had a couple of monster fumbles. Fumbles suck. Even the word makes you feel like an idiot if it is attached to your name. The Steelers surprisingly are tied for first place in interceptions. If they can keep creating turnovers without turning the ball over they will be fine.

Okay, now onto the QB thing. I'm worried about Ben. I hate to say this, but I hope someone is talking to him about retiring as an option. I don't want that, but it has to be a serious consideration with two concussions in a short span of time. Football is a game. Granted it is his job, but no job is worth scrambling your brain for the remainder of your life. I just think it should be on the table. For now, no matter how Ben is, Charlie Batch should probably start Sunday. It is a very winnable game against the Raiders (anyone got tickets?) and Batch can handle it while Ben gets ready for Denver, which will be tough the way their D is playing. (Tenacious D, some might call it).

I could just blog about football for the rest of the morning, but maybe I should talk about real life too. Right now, I am getting sick. I've been fighting it for a couple of weeks, but as soon as I get a chance to stop, the sickness catches up with me. That is what is happening now. Which sucks because it means being sick during my break. Right now it isn't too bad. My head is kind of fuzzy (on the inside) and I'm really drained. Other than that...ah, I'll stop my whining and suck it up.

God is good! I've been thinking about that alot lately. It is impossible to rationalize feelings of peace when life is turbulent. I am in a reflective mode alot these days and as I look back I really see that God has been doing some work on me here at good ol' SFT to the S. (sorry!). I don't get God. I thought seminary would help me 'get' God. It hasn't. God has become bigger and more mysterious. God is unpredictable, but faithful. A weird combination indeed. Anyway, I won't gush, but I am very aware of the fact that God has carried Marnie and I through alot in these past couple years and I am grateful. I am particularly grateful that Marnie is a two and focuses alot of her twoness in my direction! (enneagrams are fun!)

Speaking of my lovely life partner, she gets to have lunch with Barack Obama tomorrow. Okay, not exactly, she's going to hear him at a luncheon tomorrow, but she'll be at a close table. She will also get an autographed copy of his book which is awesomely title The Audacity of Hope. Needless to say, I am extremely jealous, but I think Marnie and the students she is taking to hear the senator from Illinios will have an amazing time.

If you watched the news at all on Sunday, it was hard to avoid Mr. Obama. He made an "announcement" on Meet the Press with Tim Russert that he was considering running for president in '08. It was all any news show could talk about Sunday late afternoon and evening. Barack was on Larry King, Oprah, the cover of Sojourners and MTP all in one week. I couldn't turn around without hearing about Barack Obama. Personally, I don't trust the guy. Obama sounds an awful lot like Osama. Coincidence? Yeah, probably.

Seriously, though, I think Barack Obama is exactly what the country needs, but not yet. I think we need a four year lame duck President that will de-polarize the country. Then Barack could run in 2012. Alot of the current thinking around Obama is that he should strike while the iron is hot. I think that might be political suicide right now. He hasn't been in the senate that long and quite frankly, I don't think we know how good of a senator he is.

on the other hand, he seems like a big idea guy. A visionary. Our country needs that. He might be able to depolarize the country himself. My in-laws, who are big Fox News watchers, really like him. It might be time for a popular young president with fresh ideas.

I guess my other worry, as an African American, is the popular conspiracy theory that the first black president will be assassinated in office (or before they get into office). Maybe the world isn't like that anymore, but I suspect it is. I don't want to have to celebrate Barack Obama day until twenty years after the end of his two terms and we are all really grateful for what he's done for our country. I don't want it to be a memorial for a great man who died before his time.

Okay, the Steelers had a wonderfully, wonderful game on Sunday. I take back what I said about benching Ben. Sorry, Ben! Really sorry. I told Marnie during the game against the Chargers that things would turn around once Ben threw his first touchdown. He threw two on Sunday. So far, I'm right. Atlanta this weekend. That will be tough. But we gotta keep the big mo'! (momentum, duh!) They can do it. I believe! BTW, sorry A's fans. However, seeing as how I am a fan of A's fans, I can still keep cheering for you because you're season isn't over yet. Go A's fans!

So I should be studying for an exam right now. Instead I'm listening to music and blogging. That, boys and girls, is called procrastination. Can you say procrastination? I know you can. BTW, Mr. Rogers never said that whole "can you say...b.s.". I don't know where that misconception came from.

Well this weekend I preached at a very cool church in New Mexico. It was an awesome experience. I've really been having my gifts affirmed as of late and I'm grateful for that. I was also very impressed by this church. They have members who, in the words of the pastor, range from fundamentalists to bordeline unitarians and yet they get along because they are dedicated to being family to one another. Yes, there are churches like that in the world. Praise God! I preached twice. It went very well. My message was well received. A seventy-five year old man told me that it was the best sermon he had ever heard (he might be one of those chronic exaggerators - I know a few of those) and a homiletics prof. from Cuba gave me an (unofficial) A+. That was cool. Marnie and I also got to experience the Albequerque balloon fiesta (fiesta, not festival). We were impressed, but apparently it is usually much better. The rain interrupted the "mass ascension" on Saturday morning. Still, I thought it was cool.

Oh, I should also mention that we were fed ridiculously well because we were. I had heartburn on the flight back. It was pretty cool. Still, all of this love has a price. I have been exhausted since we returned. My brain is kind of fried and I've just felt drained and like I'm going through the motions this week.

Fortunately, next week is reading week. Ah sweet reading week. Normally what happens for me around reading week is that I make all of these lofty goals to get myself organized and caught up on things and then I just end up playing video games until Marnie comes home. Not this year. This year I will attain my lofty organizational goals. I will get myself more organized for the remainder of the semester. I will get myself more organized for my internship. I will finish my novel and my screenplay. I will finish my mastering my cure for the common cold. I will scale Mt. Everest. All in five days. Actually, my only goal for next week is to drink beer with some friends as many nights of the week as possible.

Any takers?

V. My Call
I feel called to some form of pastoral ministry. I feel called to serve those who are in physical need, those who are ostracized from mainstream society, and those who are without a voice in our society. I also feel that I have a call to be a missionary within a postmodern North American context. Part of my call is to work towards genuine racial reconciliation, not just racial assimilation. I honestly don’t know where these things will take place for me. I have found something of a comfort zone within alternative worship communities. The church I attended in Pittsburgh prior to coming to seminary was an emerging/missional worship community that became a crucible for much of my ecclesiology. I have also enjoyed work in the non-profit arena. I have often wondered whether or not my call is to be a tentmaker. I often feel that so much of the integrity of the church is compromised by having religious professionals. Another place where I have a sense of passion is around the arts. As a film student and amateur musician, I have been greatly impacted through the arts and I have witnessed the arts being used to great effect in the spiritual lives of others.
I believe that ministers should be outspoken in the public arena, particularly in places where we perceive public actions as being unjust. There are times when a minister must act as community organizer. There are times when the minister must act as advocate. There are times when the minister must act as the conscience of the state, to paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr. It is not the minister’s role to publicly criticize someone’s private affairs. It is not the minister’s role to publicly endorse a political candidate, though they should give counsel on issues. I say this because, for better or for worse, many people perceive the minister’s voice as the voice of God. I think it is dangerous for the public to see a candidate as sanctioned by God.
Strengths and Growing Edges
I often feel that one of greatest strengths for doing the kind of ministry I described is that I am passionate. That can both be a strength and a weakness. Passion can be a motivator, but it can also increase the sting of events that might be perceived as failures. One strength that has been acknowledged in me is that I can give challenging messages in loving ways. I feel that this is a huge gift because I believe that people need to be challenged in their faith, but they also need to be affirmed. One area that I always feel challenged in concerning ministry is that I am an introvert. I am not a high introvert by any means and I consider myself to be fairly outgoing, but I often find myself being drained by long periods of social interaction.
I enjoy getting to know people. I love to hear their stories and when I have an opportunity, enjoy sharing mine. One of the things that I really enjoyed this past summer was sharing my faith with my neighbors in Portland. I was very different than the caricature of Christianity that they had in their minds. It actually became a benefit to share with them that though I shared some of their displeasure with the church, I still maintained my faith. Another place where I have discovered some skill is in being able to get new projects started. One of my challenges is that I often need a lot of encouragement to sustain those things that I begin. Discouragement is something that I struggle with, though it usually does not take much to re-encourage me.
I think any ministry that allowed me to get outside of the church and work in the community would be a good fit for my gifts and skills. This is not to say that I don’t have skills that would be conducive to effective parish ministry (because I do!), but I think the better use of my skills is a representative of the body of Christ in the community or public arena. I also think I could thrive doing new church development and/or church revitalization. I have had exposure to both of those kinds of ministry. They seem to take an entrepreneurial spirit and I think I have that.
I know that I will be challenged by doing pastoral care work. I am generally a good listener, but my hope is to develop as a healing presence for people. I have yet to do CPE, but I am fairly certain I will after I finish seminary. My hope is to become an even better listener and to increase my compassion. As I work with people, I continue to struggle with how I handle criticism. I tend to internalize negative criticism far more than I do positive feedback. Though I am generally a relationship-oriented person, another place where I will be challenged is those places where I need to be task-oriented. When I do become task-oriented, I often do so at the expense of those closest to me. I can also become something of a workaholic when I enjoy my work, often losing sight of the emotional and physical drain on myself.
I think that spiritual direction will be a big part of my self care after seminary. Being an introvert, I need time to process things. If I do not have that time, issues get internalized and go unresolved which sometimes leads to bitterness and resentment developing within me. My second year of seminary this happened and I believe it may have even been partly responsible for the long illness I had in the fall of ’05. Shortly after I got better I received pastoral counseling and spiritual direction for several months and it made a world of difference in my ability to process my thoughts and feelings. I think without that, I am liable to burn myself out...

IV. Me, God, and Church
So far, I have spoken mostly in terms of generalizations on theological topics. From this point I will move to more specifics about the sense I have of my own ministry. First let me speak to my experience of God in my life’s journey.
As I mentioned earlier, my earliest understanding of God was as a Father. I understood God as the perfect Father, the one who would not abandon me and the one who would not abuse His power over me. I have always felt comfortable speaking out loud to God. When that might not be socially appropriate, I try to direct my thoughts Godward. As I have gotten older, I have begun to experience God more and more through creation, particularly through large bodies of water. I’ve always felt very spiritually connected to lakes and one of the greatest things about moving to the west coast was discovering the Pacific Ocean! While God might have been in Lake Erie and probably was in Lake Michigan, God is definitely in the ocean! I once saw a photograph that I believe was taken near the north pole of an iceberg sitting in the ocean with water vapor rising from the water. The water was existing simultaneously in all three of its forms. I thought that was very Trinitarian of the water. I have always had a fascination with nature, particularly with animals. I think I somehow experience God through them as well. I would say that the way that I most often experience God is through the love of others. It is hard for me to not interpret people’s kind words and affirmations as God caring for me. My relationship to Christ has primarily been that of mentor to student. I see Jesus as an example of how to be human and of how a human being can be in relation to the Creator. I experience the Holy Spirit primarily as guide. I am most aware of the presence of the Spirit in times of decision. I often hear it said that I am to look to see where the Spirit is leading. This is at times a hard process, but I feel it is important to be aware and alert for what might be the movement of God.
I am a firm believer that you cannot give to others what you do not have. In other words, I find it very difficult to do ministry in times of spiritual dryness. I have found that there have been times when I have needed to distance myself from ministry work in order to get my spiritual life back in line. There have been times when this realignment has been much more difficult than others. I don’t journal regularly, but I often find that when I begin to record my thoughts and feelings that it helps me to assess where I am spiritually. I have also found fasting very helpful at various points in my life.
I have found that it is difficult for me to take a passive role in the church. It usually doesn’t take me very long after I have become comfortable in a church to find a place to start doing ministry. I am a doer, for better and for worse. I have often found the church as a place of deep community. I have also experienced the church as a place of deep frustration. A lot of that has to do with pastoral leadership. I have experienced excellent pastoral ministry and pastoral ministry that I dare say was incompetent. I realize that “excellent pastoral ministry” is a subjective assessment, but I feel it is my role in a church to be a compassionate pastoral presence that enables those around me to minister in the ways in which God intended uniquely for them. Even if I am never ordained, I feel that I will always be involved in some leadership capacity in some local congregation. Though I am often frustrated with the machinations of the church, I am very passionate about its mission.
My intercultural experiences have brought me to a place of seeing the church as a place where reconciliation should happen. I have grown greatly by worshipping outside of my cultural norms. I look forward to a time when I will get to do that outside of this country. I find that intercultural experience helps to expand our images of God, our vocabulary for God, and our expressions of worship. It also reveals the faults within our own understandings of both God and humanity. For me it has also expanded those areas of hubris that I have about the ways that things “should” be done.

III. Christology, Missiology, Ecclesiology
There is a popular saying among those who hold to a missional understanding of the church: Christology informs missiology and missiology informs ecclesiology. In other words, as Christians we get our understanding of what our ministry lives should look like from an understanding of what Christ’s ministry life looked like. That understanding of our ministry lives should then determine the shape that the local expression of the body of Christ (the church) takes. We must then begin with an understanding of the work of Jesus Christ.
For centuries, the church has debated as to how to properly explain the existence of God in the form of Christ. One of the most important affirmations came out of the Council of Chalcedon. In this creed, the church declared that Christ was both “fully human” and “fully divine” simultaneously. Daniel Migliore quotes in Faith Seeking Understanding that “according to Chalcedon, Jesus Christ is ‘fully divine, fully human, two natures in one person, without confusion or change, separation or division” (172). How these seemingly dichotomous natures truly coexisted may always remain a mystery, but we can understand more about humanity and the nature of God by examining the ways in which Christ lived out his dual natures.
Though I want to focus my discussion on the incarnation, it is important to say a few words about the atoning work of Christ that was done on the cross. I reject any understanding of God that would show God as a bloodthirsty dictator who can only be satisfied by human sacrifice. Though this was never said explicitly, I believe this is the view of the atonement that I grew up with. The violence committed against Christ on the cross is the violence of humanity against God. I suppose the best description of my understanding of the atonement is what Daniel Migliore refers to as the moral influence theory. In this model “Christ shows God’s love in such a compelling way that we are constrained to respond in wonder and gratitude” (Migliore, 185). Jesus’ crucifixion simultaneously reveals the full extent of the love of a God that is willing to become vulnerable for God’s creation while also exposing the full extent of the evil of humanity. What has become so compelling to me as my theology has evolved is that God loves creation enough to be fully vulnerable to it, risking not being loved in return. It is in this love that Christ reconciles rebellious humanity with its Creator.
As crucial as the atonement of Christ is, it is in the incarnation of Christ that we discover the mission of Christ and therefore the mission of the church. Through the incarnation, Christ redefines for us what it means to be human, what it means to be God, and what it means for the human and the divine to be in community. He redefines humanity by being radically free to love God and neighbor, and by not using power in abusive ways. He redefines what it means to be God by being vulnerable, but ultimately doing the things that only Yahweh can do. He defines what it means for humans to be in relationship to God by having within himself the perfect union of self-giving love and a faithful response and announcing the in-breaking of the kingdom of God.
The fourth Gospel begins by telling us that the Word of God became flesh and dwelled among us in the form of Jesus. Paul adds to this understanding in Philippians 2:5-8 by saying that this dwelling was a self-limiting of the One who had the divine nature within him. In the incarnation, we are given a particular model of how ministry can be done. Jesus shows us an example of one who condescends to those in need without being condescending. The incarnation also gives us a model of ministry being done in contextual ways. Jesus’ ministry was completely dependent on the time and place in which he ministered. Jesus knew the things that any first century Palestinian Jew would have known. He was a product and student of his culture. He both knew the needs of those around him and the images and stories that would be most effective in his context. The fact that so many of his parables reflect the agrarian nature of his society demonstrates a high level of cultural awareness. Theologians have debated whether or not Jesus entered the world with full intellect, full awareness of His mission, and full spiritual development. This would, of course make sense with the concept of Jesus being fully divine. However, in light of what is seen in Jesus’ ministry, it makes more sense to say that Jesus “was deeply influenced by the cultural and religious heritage of his people” and therefore he “grew and matured physically, intellectually, and spiritually” within the context of his community (Migliore, 174).
I referred earlier to Luke 4:16-18 as Jesus’ mission statement. In it he refers to a ministry that is focused on particular demographics of people, namely those imprisoned, those infirmed, and those oppressed. Jesus’ ministry reflects concern for those groups, particularly in his healing ministry. Furthermore, Jesus’ ministry reflects God’s desire that those who have been rejected from community will once more be restored to it. Often those that Jesus healed were the ones that the Torah law would exclude from being part of the covenant community. Jesus does not express the nationalistic aspirations of his culture’s elite. Nor does he express the xenophobic tendency to close the door on those outside of the community of faith. As Migliore emphasizes, “Jesus cannot be properly understood if he is seen apart from the covenant of God with the people of Israel or if the scope of his saving work is limited to certain individuals or to a select group rather than reaching out to the whole creation” (Migliore, 167). In Christ, all are invited to God’s table. God’s new family being created in the work of Jesus has none of the boundaries that are created by social stratification or as Paul puts it in “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female (poor nor rich could be added to this as well), for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians: 3:28).
It is from this understanding of the work of Christ in his earthly ministry that I adopt my missiology for the church. When I speak of missiology, I am not speaking of the classical understanding of missions that the church has employed. I believe that all Christians are engaged in missions. That has much to do with the postmodern, post-christian context in which the majority of the world finds itself. I see no reason to understand missiology strictly in terms of understanding cross-cultural experience; though I would argue that there is nothing more counter cultural in 21st century America than to truly follow after Christ. My understanding of missiology encompasses the entire “Missio Dei”. It is the church’s mission to continue the community-building work which Christ began. This understanding sees the healing ministry of Christ as a means to an end, the end being the restoration of community.
If missiology is determined by the ministry of Christ then the shape of the church should be determined by our missiology. As Paul says, the church is the body of Christ (I Cor. 12:27) and though it is made up of broken humans, it is Christ’s representatives to the world. Therefore, any understanding of the church must include the idea that the church exists to further the mission of Christ. In my mind, that means that the church’s primary role is a social one. I look at the often quoted Micah 6:8 as a benchmark for understanding what the church should be. Justice, kindness, and humility should be at the heart of what church is about.
I credit a book I have recently been engaged with for some of my newer thoughts on what the church should be. The book entitled The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21st Century Church encourages church leaders in the west to begin thinking with the same minds that missionaries have had for centuries. It encourages an incarnational and contextualized vision of the church and advocates a rethinking of the traditional models of church that spread during the height of Christendom. The authors, Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, describe three overarching features of what they refer to as the missional church. The first feature is that the missional church is “incarnational and not attractional in its ecclesiology” (Frost, 12). Their understanding of an incarnational church is one where sacred space is not required to encounter the Gospel. “Rather, the missional church dissembles itself and seeps into the cracks and crevices of a society in order to be Christ to those who don’t yet know him” (Frost, 12). This stands in opposition to attractional, “if you build it, they will come” models of church which becomes overly focused on buildings, programming, and performance. The second feature is that the missional church is “messianic” not dualistic. This goes hand-in-hand with the incarnational feature in that it sees creation as holistic and integrated instead of divided into profane and sacred. The final feature of the missional church for Frost and Hirsch is a non-hierarchical leadership structure. The missional church “abandons the triangular hierarchies of the traditional church and embraces a biblical, flat leadership community that unleashes the gifts of evangelism, apostleship, and prophecy, as well as the currently popular pastoral and teaching gifts” (Frost, 12). The intent of this is not to jettison organized leadership altogether, but to instead hold all kinds of leadership as equally beneficial to the life of the church. I would also add some thoughts from Gustavo Gutierrez on this subject. In his book Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation, Gutierrez states that the church’s function should be evident in its structure. The church then needs to display in its operation and hierarchy values that are consistent with the in-breaking kingdom of God and not the values of the society. “The break with unjust social order and the search for new ecclesial structures – in which the most dynamic sectors of the Christian community are engaged – have their basis in this ecclesiological perspective” (Gutierrez, 148).
Simply put, while I believe strongly in the mission of the church, I have grown increasingly disenchanted with the shape of the church and the level of apathy that is often associated with addressing the current structure’s shortcomings. I believe that less of the church’s energy and resources should be focused on Sunday morning worship and the ABC’s of church culture (attendance, building, cash). Instead, leaders within the church should be focused on building community, especially among those to whom community is typically denied. This is what Christ did. It should be noticed that Frost and Hirsch wrote their book primarily in response to observations of the large, mainstream, evangelical churches in the West. I do, however, find that their work also speaks to the needs of the mainline denominational churches in this country.
Before moving on, one more important function of the church must be pointed out and that is the proclamation of the Gospel. I believe the quoted passage from II Corinthians is the heart of the Gospel message; in Christ, God reconciles humanity to God’s self. John 3:16-20 also is a fundamental passage (for me and many others) in terms of understanding the Gospel. This passage highlights that God’s motives are motives based in love. I also think it is important that any understanding of the Gospel includes the notion of eternal life with God. This hope for eternal comfort in the bosom of the Creator is especially important to the proclamation of the Gospel to oppressed people groups. Ephesians 2:3-10 also provides a great progression of a life lived in the Gospel. It is a progression from a life in sin to a life lived doing the work that God designed for each of us to do. The Gospel is also an announcement of the imminence and arrival of the reign of God (Mark 1:14-15). It is an announcement that requires response in the form of repentance. This metanoia is not just a one time changing of our minds and direction. It is a daily decision to live a life that is consistent with the values of the kingdom of God. The focal point of the Gospel is of course the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Gospel must contain all of theses components and those of us that proclaim the Gospel must reject unhealthy focusing on one aspect of the Gospel (particularly the death) to the exclusion of the others. As a worker in ministry, I believe that it is incumbent upon me to both proclaim the message of the Gospel and trust in its efficacy. I believe that the Gospel has the power to change hearts and minds and the ability to liberate people from bondage of all forms.
One more function of the church that I will touch on briefly is the administering of the sacraments. At their best, communion and baptism are affirmations of the community we find in Christ. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s directory for worship describes the sacraments as “sealing the promises of faith within the community of faith” (W-3.3601). The sacraments are “palpable enactments of the Gospel by means of which the spirit of God confirms to us the…love of God in Jesus Christ and enlivens us in faith, hope, and love” (Migliore, 280). The sacraments symbolize the grace of God to the community and remind us of our common bonds in Christ. My theology has not always been a heavily sacramental one. What I find appealing about sacramental theology is the idea of using common elements as signs of God’s grace thus continuing to combat the church’s dualism.

II. Basic Theological Understandings
With the Scriptural foundation established, I can now begin making some assertions about what I believe to be the basics of Christian theology. At the heart of theology is our understanding of who God is. For reasons that I hope are obvious from my spiritual journey paper, my understanding of God as Father has been central to my spiritual development. To this day, with an absentee father and an abusive stepfather, the idea of God as the ideal father is rather compelling. Over the course of my theological education, however, I have adopted many additional metaphors for God the Creator (after all, the best we can do is speak of God in terms of metaphors and analogies). In addition to Father and Creator, I have become comfortable thinking of God as Mother, Artist, Rock, and Source. I believe that God is infinite, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient. As the author of I John proclaims, I believe that God is love. God is love that is freely given and unconditional. God acts in complete freedom, yet is also at times intentionally self-limiting and vulnerable. This aspect is best represented in the person of Jesus Christ. I believe that the best way to know what God is like is to look at the incarnation of God revealed in Christ.
I hold to an understanding of creation that states that God created all things ex nihilo. I find no reason for this view to conflict with what modern science tells us about the planet’s origin. With no actual witnesses present, the creation stories presented in Genesis have to be considered mythologies that help to form worldviews and develop priestly theology. I will say, however, that I also hold to the belief that God would be capable of creating the world in six days. I believe that creation was originally as God intended it to be and that humanity was originally created in the image of God. The fall of humanity has had far reaching effects on God’s good creation.
I believe that humanity is alienated from God by sin. Sin is not just a set of immoral actions that we commit. Sin is a state of being where creation is not as the Creator intended and the image of God has become distorted. At its heart, I believe that sin is when we turn from the Creator and begin to overvalue the creation. In his writing “Body, Soul, Will and the Image of God”, Augustine describes the state of sin as one abandoning “the goodness of the Creator in pursuit of some created good” (Hodgson, 150). Sin can also occur when another created thing is not given the value it deserves as part of God’s creation. Both of these modes of sin can occur on both individual and corporate/institutional levels. To better explain this I turn to process theologian Marjorie Suchocki’s chapter “Sin in a Relational World” from God-Christ-Church: A Practical Guide to Process Theology:
Frequently Christians have personalized [the demonic] and projected them away from ourselves Process theology suggests as a nonhuman being, a devil, whose temptation of humanity in its very beginnings resulted in transgression and original sin. Process theology suggests a more tragic view, naming the cumulative acts of human beings in society as the source of the demonic. We are ourselves corporately responsible for the societies we create and the ill effects they engender. The demonic element is that we are each individually born into a society we did not create; insofar as it contains powers of destruction, these originate prior to our being. These powers can and do overwhelm us, involving us in the condition of alienation that is manifested in personal sin. In the grip of these powers, we continue to perpetuate them (15)

The atoning work of Christ occurs in his life, death, and resurrection. It is atonement for the individual as well as for society. It is atonement that is initiated by God and seeking human response. It is also atonement with an endpoint in mind. I hesitate to make any definite eschatological statements. I do, however, find one particularly appealing vision of the coming reign of Christ in the writings of Miroslav Volf. Volf’s article “Love Your Heavenly Enemy” speaks to the necessity of reconciliation among individuals and people groups (races, ethnicities, classes, etc…) in order to realize our eschatological hopes for the Kingdom of God. Volf argues that for Heaven to truly be Heaven personal enmities need to be resolved to the point that “not-loved ones will have to be transformed into the loved ones and those who do not love will have to begin to do so” (94). Volf goes on to say that in order for those who have found each other as undesirables in this world to love each other in the next, they would in essence have to extend grace to each other and “justify” one another. The “last judgment”, in order to be completed, also needs to have the element of “Final Reconciliation”. “If the world to come is to be a world of love, then the transition from the present world to that world, which God will accomplish, must have an inter-human side” (Volf, 96)
Several elements have to exist in order for humans to repair their social relationships. According to Volf, the first is the giving and receiving of forgiveness. Though God can surely forgive our sins, it is essential that we receive the forgiveness of those we have wronged (and extend forgiveness to those who have wronged us) in order to live in a future world of peace. “…divine forgiveness cannot substitute for a victim’s giving and a perpetrator’s receiving of forgiveness” (Volf, 96). This, of course, echoes the emphasis placed on forgiveness throughout the gospels. The parable of the unmerciful servant in Matthew 18:21-35, for example, emphasizes that God’s forgiveness of sin is to some extent conditional on our extending of grace to others in light of the grace we have received. The Lord’s Prayer, as presented in Matthew 6, draws a direct correlation between the degree that we forgive and the extent to which we will be forgiven. Luke echoes this sentiment with the phrase “Forgive and you will be forgiven” (Luke 6:37). Volf crystallizes the idea, saying “Reconciliation with one’s estranged neighbors is part and parcel of reconciliation with God” (96).
To move into a future world of love, not only must the sins of the present be forgiven, but also the misdeeds of the past. As Volf explains, the future kingdom of God has to be more than just a “fresh start”, but it must also be “redemption of yesterday, today, and tomorrow… Heaven is having had your messy pages made clean and right again” (96-97). This goes beyond a reconciliation of the lives of those who are currently living and active in the world. It requires that old social ills be made right and that the sins of the past be forgiven and resolved. This involves more than the healing of past interpersonal sins, but also of past corporate sins as well. “Hence the final reconciliation of those who died unreconciled must be part of the transition from the present world to the world to come” (Volf, 97).
The final piece of Volf’s argument may be the most difficult. It is a move from continual attempts at self-justification to full acknowledgement of sin. In the final judgment, all will have to give up their right to be right and admit that they have fallen short. Volf’s final argument on this is most compelling:
The divine judgment will reach its goal when, by the power of the spirit, each person eschews attempts at self-justification, acknowledges personal sin in its full magnitude, experiences liberation from guilt and the power of sin, and recognizes that all others have done precisely that - given up on self justification, acknowledged their sin, and experienced liberation. Having recognized that others have changed… one will no longer condemn others but offer them the grace of forgiveness (97)

The call of the gospel to deny oneself includes giving up on being right in one’s own eyes in order to be reunited with others in love. Volf adds that this extension of grace is only fully consummated in the embrace of former enemies. “Reconciliation will take place only when former enemies have moved toward each other and embraced each other as belonging to the same communion of love” (Volf, 97) It is this final communion of love, communion among humans and between humanity and the triune God, that is the hope of Christians which moves us to seek reconciliation with our neighbors in the here and now. The point of Volf’s article is not to say that we should wait until we reach the fulfilled Kingdom of God to begin the work of restoring relationships. On the contrary, our offering and receiving forgiveness is a glimpse of the Kingdom in the present day. In fact, I think it would be fair to say that Volf is arguing that we cannot be ushered into the future world of love without extending grace and mercy to our contemporaries. This brings us into a discussion on the nature and purpose of Christian Life.

By request, I am putting my theology of ministry paper on my blog. I have to say that writing this was such a profound experience for me. I didn't expect that. For the first time, I think, I was truly, truly grateful for where God had brought me from and for where God is taking me. All that from a paper! I'm going to break this up into sections, so if you feel like reading it, you can read one section at a time. I'd love feedback on this as, even though it was approved by my classmates, I feel like this paper will never really be done for me. Enjoy!

I. Scriptural Basis for My Theology of Ministry

As in any Christian theology, scripture plays a foundational role for my understanding of ministry. Several passages in particular are central to my conception of how the church is to act in the world. First among them is II Corinthians 5:17-19:
So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us.

I understand this passage in several different senses. First, it is a statement about the atonement of humanity through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Second, it is a missiological statement about the nature of the work to which the church is called; the work of proclaiming the reconciliation that is found in Christ as well as the work of reconciling ourselves to one another. Finally, this is an eschatological statement. To be in Christ is to participate in a new creation in which reconciliation, not enmity, is the norm. This new thing that is being created in Christ does away with the old moral order and Paul’s acknowledgement that he has been entrusted with a ministry of reconciliation illustrates that God has a participatory role set aside for those who follow Christ.
The next foundational passages are found in the Gospels. First is Luke 4:16-18:
When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.’
In this quotation of the prophet Isaiah, Jesus is giving what amounts to a mission statement. Jesus’ understanding of himself as the fulfillment of this prophesy has missiological, Christological and ecclesiological ramifications which we will discuss later.
Along these same lines I see Matthew 25: 31-46 as making important missiological claims for the church:

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, “Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.” Then the righteous will answer him, “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?” And the king will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.” Then he will say to those at his left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.” Then they also will answer, “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.” And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.’

Though the author of the Gospel of Matthew must have certainly intended these words to have an eschatological tone to them, I imagine that the evangelist also intended these words to shape the understanding of the Christian mission. To finish off this section, allow me to use two more passages of Scripture that will be the springboard for the following theological discourse. First is simply John 1:14:
And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.

The second is Philippians 2:5-8:
Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death— even death on a cross.

Both of these passages speak to the incarnational nature of Jesus’ ministry and provide a model for the church to follow.

Just a quick endorsement for a wonderful film I saw last night called 'Catch a Fire'. It is based on a true story and set in apatheid South Africa. It is a film about the power of forgiveness, not just between people groups, but also between individuals. It stars Derek Luke from 'Antwone Fisher' and Tim "Shawshank Redemption" Robbins. What was incredibly great about the screening I went to last night was that it was part of the Mill Valley Film Festival and so the director, the writers, several of the actors, including Robbins and Luke, and the man the film's story was about were all in attendance and stayed for a Q &A after the film. Amazing experience!

Daily Show 10/05/2006

This is one of the funnier Daily Show sketches in my opinion! Enjoy!

Ok, let's just rip off the band-aid...

The Steelers are 1-3. This is not good. Maybe they play better when they're backed into a corner. Maybe they enjoy being underdogs. I don't care. I don't enjoy it! I feel that the Steelers should be liable for heart problems I have later in life. If the Steelers don't bench Big Ben (at least for a game) they are playing for next year. I guess that's not fair to say. The whole team hasn't played a complete game yet. They can certainly rebound, but it isn't going to be easy.

If I wasn't a Steelers fan, a world I can't fathom, I would be cheering on da' Bears. Wow, they look amazing right now! Good for them! They've had some awful years recently and right now they are dominating. I also have to say that it is great to see some African American head coaches thriving. Of the three remaining undefeateds, two are coached by black head coaches. And Marvin Lewis is doing a great job in Cincinnati (though I wish he would stop!).

Though I am really only a football fan, I enjoy seeing the joy in the faces of my friends who root for the A's. I honestly haven't been into baseball since my grandfather died (I used to watch baseball with him when I was a kid). Still, there is palpable excitement around certain folks and that is fun for me. Go A's! (from the fan of A's fans)

Shift...

A friend of mine recently came out of the closet to his folks. His dad is a pretty conservative Presbyterian pastor. After a couple of days, his reaction to his son's news was one of the worst things I have ever heard. He told him that this was incredibly hard on him and that he would rather relive his parents' deaths. Let that sink in for a second...I know my friend's dad. He is a good guy. He will regret those words one day. Though I can't say for certain, I'd imagine that a lot of his frustration is that he has been pretty outspoken within the PC(USA) against homosexuality. I have to guess that a great deal of his frustration is church-related.

I went to a meeting a month agao with some folks who are interested in working on the issue of HIV/AIDS. One of the folks there, a gay man with a Catholic background, told the Christians in the room "As a movement, you have shitty PR". He broke into tears explaining the hurt he had experienced in the name of religion.

I have an archenemy. (this is related) His name is Fred Phelps. If Fred was here right now I would quote to him the lyrics of a song by the Plain White T's: Hate is a strong word, but I really, really, really don't like you. (it's a cool song!) Fred Phelps and his people live in a compound somewhere in middle America. They show up at funerals and protest, telling people that God hates them and their actions. They protested outside of Fred Rogers' funeral saying he was going to hell because Mr. Rogers said that we should love gay people. What kind of sick fuck do you have to be to protest outside of Mr. Rogers funeral?! They protest outside of funerals of soldiers coming back from Iraq. They recently were trying to protest outside of the funerals of kids who were killed in Amish country last week. They didn't show up. Why? Well, a syndicated radio show host offered them money not to show up at the funeral. They turned the offer down. Then he offered them air time on his nationally syndicated show. They took that. Grrrr...

Aside: "Sexyback" by Justin Timberlake is not a good song. It is also illogical. When did "sexy" go away? Unfortunately, bad songs are often catchy.

okay, back to the matter at hand. I had a bad weekend in terms of thinking about the damage religion can do. After talking to my friend and then hearing the news about Fred Phelps (the Dr. Octopus to my Spiderman, the Megatron to my Optimus Prime, the Phil Angelides to my Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc...) Marnie and I watch a dateline special about a priest who had fathered two children with an emotionally unstable woman. The church shuffled him all over the place to cover the issue up. He then stood by as the woman overdosed on pills and died. The woman's now adult children confronted him and got him to take paternity test to confirm that he was their biological father. These folks suffered significantly because of the church and a man not living up to his vows of celibacy.

I wouldn't be at seminary if I didn't believe that the church was capable of an equal or greater proportion of good as it is evil. But somedays, I wonder...

Hey all,


I had to write a five page version of my spiritual journey for my senior seminar. I thought I would share it. Of course there is alot I left out. There is actually very little of my seminary experience included so I gave my classmates a chance to ask me questions about it. I also didn't say much about churches I attended in college, including the Open Door. There is also much more i could say about the Pittsburgh Project. Anyway, this is my story in a nutshell. On Monday I will be presenting my theology of ministry paper to my class and if I don't have to rewrite anything, I will put that up here to. Enjoy!


I feel it is necessary to begin my story before I was born. When my mother was seventeen she had an abortion. I was conceived, out of wedlock, in between her first and second marriage, her second marriage being to my stepfather. Many people, some that I dearly love, attempted to persuade my mother to abort me. She said that she believed God was giving her a second chance to not compound a mistake. She has told me that she believed God had a plan for me and she also believed that God gave her my name. Needless to say, I was born.
The first thing I ever wanted to be was a pastor. That desire was spurred on by a pastor at the Assemblies of God church that we attended when I was young. He seemed cool and he gave me candy. I also like the idea of getting up in front of people and being both smart and funny, which I thought he was. Over time the desire to be a pastor faded. For some reason, it began to seem impractical.
The first time I got involved in a ministry, I was in third grade. I worked with a group called Victorious Faith Evangelistic Outreach as a puppeteer. We went into inner city areas of Pittsburgh proclaiming the Gospel through the arts, mostly puppetry and music. I remember that the night before one of our shows there had been a gang shooting not far from where we were going to perform. Amazingly, what we did that day was bring much needed levity to a very tense area. I later started a puppet ministry at my church that basically involved our whole youth group (by this time I was attending a UMC congregation in the suburb where my family had moved to when I was nine. I was no longer attending church with my family. They went to a Pentecostal “prosperity gospel” church that even in middle school rang hollow). I did puppet ministry and was involved at the UMC congregation all the way through high school.
Towards the end of high school and the beginning of college I started to move away from my faith. I no longer could believe what was being taught in my parents’ church, namely a performance-based gospel where God would “bless” me if I did the right things, and I was experiencing a lot of what I considered to be failures in the ministry I was doing at the church I was attending. When I started college I began to think of myself as an atheist. I wasn’t very good at it. I still prayed all the time.
After my second year of college, my brother and sister-in-law invited me to come and work at the Pittsburgh Project for a summer. The Pittsburgh Project is an urban community-based ministry that runs a summer home repair ministry that serves low-income homeowners and does outreach activities for urban youth. It is also where my brother and sister-in-law met. I was looking for a summer job because my internship opportunities in my chosen field (film studies) were falling through. I went to the Project expecting just a summer job. I soon discovered it would be much more than that. After only a few days of being there and meeting the folks who had come to serve in the city, I became very aware of the fact that something significant was happening. Within the first week of being there I was sitting alone on the back steps of the Project building and asking God to give my life direction. That was a stupid prayer. God was more than happy to oblige.
It would almost be impossible for me to overstate the significance of The Pittsburgh Project to my life. Early in my time there I had shared my story with some folks. I focused a lot on the hatred I felt towards my biological father…
Flashback: I didn’t meet my biological father until I was fourteen. Before then, he had called me a couple of times, always promising that we would get together and that I would get to meet the other side of my family. He never followed through. I met him quite by accident. On Easter of 1994 he was at my parents’ church. My mom asked me if I wanted to meet him and, of course, I said yes. Basically all he said to me that day was “nice to meet you”. I pretty much from that point decided that I hated him.
… six years later I am sharing this with folks at the Project. While they understood my anger, they also challenged me to let go of the anger, saying that it might end up being a barrier that keeps me from loving others as Christ wanted me to love them. They were right. I decided that the root of my anger was in the fact that my father didn’t know me, so I wrote him a letter telling him everything I could think of to tell him about myself. I told him about my anger towards him, but I also told him that I forgave him. I held on to that letter until I knew that I could send it and not be hurt by a lack of response. So I wrote it in June and mailed it in October. I haven’t heard back from him. I know where he is. He serves a church in Pittsburgh. I make a conscious effort to forgive him on a regular basis. I honestly believe that the ability to forgive my father has allowed me both to love and to be loved, so it might also be of note that I, like my brother, met my wife at the Project.
The Pittsburgh Project is also where I first heard grace explained. Though it is a word we use a lot in church circles, I somehow went through most of life feeling like God’s love was something that I had to earn. It was at the Project where I heard that there was nothing I could do to make God love me more (or less). My ideas of ministry changed from being performance-based to being gratitude-based.
Racial reconciliation was a frequent topic of conversation at the Project. We read a great deal on the topic. Race issues have always been an important issue for me because I have lived most of my life in majority white situations. Questions of racial identity are a constant struggle for me. Racial reconciliation remains a passionate issue for me.
As I said earlier, there is much I could say in regards to the Pittsburgh Project, but I will add one more thing; it is the place where I began to feel a strong sense of call. Late in my first summer I was leading a small group of students. During one of the evenings I had shared my story about my father. In my group was a cute, small twelve year old girl, a very “perfect” looking child, seemingly happy-go-lucky. During the course of our week she told us all a story that, though we weren’t competing, put mine to shame. She had experienced various levels of abuse, neglect, and instability through her young life due to situations with her parents. Her story broke my heart to the point that I went alone into the Project’s club room and wept. It was in the midst of this that I heard/felt the voice of God say to me that the brokenness and healing I was experiencing that summer was something I could use to help God’s other heartbroken children. Within a year of that God asked me a very simple question: what was the first thing you ever wanted to do? (refer back to page 1, paragraph 2!) That was when I began to seriously consider coming to seminary. In the interest of full disclosure, I probably need to say one more important, Pittsburgh Project related thing: The executive director of the Project was mentored by Phil Butin. For better and worse, that relationship has had great significance for my ending up at SFTS and has also greatly affected my experience here.
I have had some pretty significant ups and downs at seminary. I’ve felt that much of what I knew with certainty before I began my M. Div studies has been challenged. Those challenges have been a growing edge for me. It has made me reevaluate those things that I truly hold to be true. I have struggled greatly with the idea of ordination since I have been here. Recent communication issues with my presbytery have exacerbated that particular struggle. I have questioned whether or not I should be ordained in a denomination that I have only loose connections with and is at times very uncomfortable for me. I have questioned whether or not my place is in a church at all and have considered devoting myself more to an academic sphere.
This summer I had an experience that made me decide to put further academic aspirations on the shelf. I served in an internship in Portland with a consortium of churches known as the Presbyterian Urban Network (PUN). I was working with seven small, urban, congregations that are struggling with aging populations in a city that is getting younger. The churches are dying while the city is thriving. During the internship I got to experience myself in the role of pastor and it felt really good! I got excited about ideas of helping to revitalize a congregation and connecting the church to the larger community. I was also greatly encouraged by opportunities I had to share my faith and build friendships with self-proclaimed atheists, several of whom eventually came to hear me preach. I discovered an identity as an evangelist. Because of my interest in and exposure to the “emerging church” movement, I also was encouraged that I was able to get pastors to think about ways that church can be done differently and be more relevant to the surrounding community.
I have no clever metaphor for my spiritual journey. All I can say is that I am a work in progress. My hope is that I am always a work in progress. I don’t know where I’m heading. My interests are varied. The Gospel of Jesus Christ has made a huge impact on my life, which is why I do not give up on the church, even though I often hate it. Whether or not I am ordained in the PC (USA) or not, I believe that God has a place for me in ministry. I believe that God wants me to continue sharing my story which ultimately will give me opportunity to share God’s story.