Being Larry - thoughts on missionary identity

-->

Being Larry – thoughts on missionary identity

I recently spent time with a missionary in a majority country. Let’s call him Larry. (He was assigned as the ‘go-to’ for myself and a colleague who were teaching an intensive course to local church leaders.)

Larry was just into his second year on the field. It is a challenging context physically and spiritually. He had faced the disappointment of a forced move from his initial assignment and was in a holding role while awaiting a new assignment on the same field.

Larry had an identity issue. Who was he, when there was presently no assigned mission role? Back home Larry was an active member of his own church and involved in its various programs of outreach and discipleship.

Larry was a nurse and, like most nurses, a grounded person who deal with ‘what is’ rather than ‘what could be”. As he talked through the identity issue, he concluded that his calling was to be who he was at home. And so, he was an active member of the church he belonged to on the mission field and involved in its various programs of outreach and discipleship. He was also a nurse, and was about to commence a role in the local nursing service where he could help upskill nationals in nursing skills.

As a missionary Larry was being himself – the same person at home and on the field. It would, of course, look a little different but was essentially the same. Larry was being Larry.

That’s not a bad sense of Christian identity whether on the mission field or anywhere. All of us are called to be followers of Jesus whether at home, work, play or the market place.

That’s’ faithfulness in a life worthy of the Lord.

In your face theology

In your face theology

There are times where vigorous and even heated debate is right. The core truths of the Christian faith are the teaching about the who, the what and the so what of Jesus (Rom 1:1-7; 1 Cor 15:1-6). The denial of these is the “another gospel” that Paul refers to (Gal 1:8-9) and which led Paul to rebuke publicly his “senior”, the Apostle Peter.

However, notice how the rebuke was given. It was face-to-face (Gel 2:11-14). What a moment of high drama and we can imagine the reaction of onlookers. The- face-to-face is important. Paul didn’t leave an anonymous note for Peter to ‘find”. Nor did he leave a message for all to see, but which denied Peter and easy reply. He spoke face-to-face.

All that brings us to the modern phenomena of Christians disagreeing on social media such as Facebook. All too easily we let our fingers do the talking and hurl insults and reflections on character to the world through cyberspace.

In recent times, my Facebook circles have included several rounds of strongly worded debate between Christians on this or that issue. In at least one case, this has been noticed by enemies of the gospel and used to disadvantage the cause of Christ.

Here’s a few reasons to think before we hit “post” and maybe either delete the comment or arrange to make it face to face.

·      We fellow Christians may understand the context and why this issue is important. However, what about non-Christians who overhear the conversation through being friends of a friend. Will they understand the issues and comments or will they think that we are out of our collective minds? 1 Cor 14:29)

·      Does a vigorous Facebook argument about theology help a non-believer trust in Jesus or does it put up a scandal or stumbling block? (1 Cor 8:9)

·      Do the limitations of Facebook posts allow us to discuss theological issues with the care and depth that they deserve, or do the push us to combative salvos of theological soundbites?

·      Is God glorified and his people built up by such exchanges? (1 Cor 10:23, 32)

So maybe it’s time to get off Facebook and get in one another’s faces to have the debates in a setting where we can see body language, have opportunity for questions and talk truth in love without the potential for digital destruction. As John says, there things best left unwritten and left face to face (2 Jn 12; 3 Jn 13-14). This is even more so when the things written are there for the world at large to see.

Everest and Easter

-->

Everest and Easter – a mountain top experience

Last weekend I had a mountain top experience.

But first some context. I was in Kathmandu for two week’s teaching and preaching. Saturday is church day and so I went to church and preached an Easter sermon.

So, my Sunday was different to normal. Instead of being in pew or pulpit, I was on a scenic flight (thank you Buddha Air). Bright and early we soared aloft from Kathmandu airport and headed for Mnt Everest. My host had suggested that I take the trip and I was resolved not to spend the rest of my life with the regret of missing the opportunity.

The Nepalese mountains are stunning and Everest is prince among them. For minute after minute, we passed the grandeur of snow-clad peaks, ridges and valleys around which light and shadow played. All too soon it was down to earth and the city of man.

Stunning though my Easter Everest was, it was not the real mountain top experience this Easter. That experience was on the Saturday. There we were – a group of people who differed in ethnicity, gender, age, education and all the rest. What united us was the risen, reigning and returning Christ. He was present in the praise singing, the preaching of his word, the Lord’s Supper and in the fellowship. As we participated in him by faith we were united to one another in faith, hope and love.

Everest is stunning. Better still is Mount Zion, the mountain of the house of God where God’s people gather week by week in the new temple that is Jesus.

When the Copts cop it – why theology still matters but is not everything

-->

When the Copts cop it – why theology still matters but is not everything

On April 9 2017 the Palm Sunday liturgy at two Egyptian Coptic churches left 45 dead and over 100 people injured (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39555897). It’s not the first attack on Copts in Egypt (Google “attacks on Egyptian Copts” for more details as recently as December 2016) and, sadly, it’s unlikely to be the last. Besides, death and injury, the Copts have suffered other forms of persecution over the years.

As an evangelical Christian I find much to disagree with when it comes to the Copts. If leisure afforded space for a conversation I’d love to open the Bible and talk. I’d like to talk about the way that the Coptic church and its rituals seem to have crowded Jesus out and to stand in his place. I’d like to talk about how their view of the sacraments puts attention on the sacraments to receive grace and not on Jesus in whom the riches of God’s mercy are found. And I’d like space to talk about their synergistic view of salvation. And somewhere in all that I’d like to go back to the Bible and discuss their rejection of the creed of the 451 Council of Chalcedon and their profession of a “one nature” Monophysite view of Jesus. These are big points of disagreement, for they go to the heart of the gospel which is  .. concerning his Son .. (Rom 1:3).

But that’s not the point right now, for there is no leisure for such conversation. The Copts are copping a beating and this is a time to identify with brothers and sisters who profess Christ. It’s time to remember those who are persecuted, to pray with them, and to seek to publicise their cause in the hope of some relief. When the Copts suffer, every Christian suffers (1 Cor 12:26). When one is in prison, we are all in prison (Heb 13:5).

And that’s why this evangelical Christian wants to pause the theological conversation, identify with the Copts and say that their suffering is my suffering and their persecutors are my persecutors. I’ll pray for the “kings and governors” of Egypt that my brothers and sisters there may be able to live a peaceful and quiet life and that there is space to tell of God’s salvation on behalf of God who desires that all people should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:1-2).

And if that prayer is answered we can sit down and discuss the big questions about Jesus that Coptic beliefs and practices raise. However, that is not the need of this present hour.

Perhaps the title of this post should be changed: When the Copts cop it – when theology still matters but is not everything.

Slice of life ... the book

The book

There was rain. Lots of it. Enough to breach the levee by the river. Roads were blocked, bridges made impassable, crops ruined, stock drowned and many thousands evacuated.

He was caught. He’d gone to the farm for a day trip but was now flooded in. The farm was on a safe and dry ridge, but the low lying wooden bridge over the creek was flooded well and truly.

And so he stayed. Plans were disrupted and he had nothing much besides a phone with a dwindling battery.

But he had a book. A big, fat and mostly unread copy of The Count of Monte Christo. When asked if he was okay he smiled and waved the book. It made him happy.

I look forward to meeting Jesus

I look forward to meeting Jesus

Many of us would echo Paul’s words that it is better to be with the Lord than to remain in this life (Phil 1:21-23). Do we mean it?

The other night, in a small country town I met a man. Let’s call him Peter.

On arrival at Peter’s home there is a sign to say that someone inside is on chemo. Visitors are only allowed after using an antiseptic spray and not enter if they had a cold or any other infection.

Peter was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer four months ago. It has spread to his liver and he is on palliative chemotherapy. Even with some relief through the chemo, life is measured in months and he is likely not to see the next spring.

Peter is a man of strong faith in Jesus. He speaks of being at peace in his body, his mind and his soul. And he speaks of how the best thing is that he soon gets to meet Jesus.

That’s challenging. 

Peter’s first wife died of cancer and he remarried 16 years ago. He has a nice house in a wonderful town and recently bought a new camper van. Earth offers him many pleasures. But his eyes light up when he speaks of soon meeting Jesus. That is his greatest delight and outweighs his sense of earthly loss.

That’s very challenging.

We say that we too would rather be with the Lord? Do we mean it? Or are we so attached to present pleasures that our prayer is: Lord take me home, but not yet?

Not my President?

Not my President?

The election and inauguration of Donald Trump as US President has been accompanied by a vocal ‘Not my President” movement.

For some this slogan indicates a dislike and disassociation from the man and his policies. For others, it is a denial of his electoral legitimacy. Much the same greeted Barak Obama when he was elected. ‘Not my President” seems to have a bipartisan edge as the fringes from both sides of US politics reject their opponent’s election.

Likewise in Australia. When Julia Gillard was elected as the PM of a minority ALP government she was subjected to crude personal attacks including calls that she be taken out to sea and dumped. Some from the conservative side of politics denied the very legitimacy of her government. This reversed when Tony Abbott was elected as a Liberal Prime Minister - there was a new round of personal attacks and denial of legitimacy. Again, it’s a bipartisan rejection of an elected leader.

Such rejection is not only about the leader. It divides nations. It threatens the delicate fabric of civil behaviour. It turns conversations of robust debate and disagreement into shouting matches where entrenched positions are exchanged from behind walls of hostility.  Nobody wins.

I’ll say right now that Donald Trump is not my President in a personal sense. I dislike the man. Many of his policies dismay me. A misogynist and bully who trades off fear and threat cannot claim my affections. Likewise, neither Julia Gillard nor Tony Abbott were ‘my Prime Minister’ in the sense of a significant personal liking or policy approval.

However, I’ll say that Trump, Obama, Gillard and Abbott are ‘my’ President (or Prime Minister) in Christian perspective.

The Bible speaks of how God moves all things to his purposes in Jesus (Eph 1:11). Within this, h commands respectful submission to the governing authorities because ...there is no authority except from God and those that exist have been instituted by God (Rom 12:1). These last words were said of pagan Roman leaders who persecuted the writer of those words and his co-religionists. One example of this respect for unbelieving leaders came when an idolatrous Persian leader was described as God’s anointed servant or Messiah (Is 45:1-5). See my earlier post Was Lee Kuan Yew the Lord’s anointed? (31^st Mar 2015) for more comment on this. Similar words about respectful submission to (even evil) leaders are urged in 1 Pet 2:13-17 and 1 Tim 2:1-3 gives a positive edge to this in calling for prayers for … all who are in high position. This is not a personal endorsement of individual leaders, nor a denial of the evil that they may do, but rather of recognition of God’s providential rule.

In this sense Donald Trump is my President. He was he elected, confirmed and inaugurated under the constitutional arrangements of the US, just as the above named Australian Prime Ministers were. More importantly, he is President according to God’s providential will.

So, I will serve God and my nation by periodically disliking the persons and disagreeing with the policies of these leaders. I will also honour, respect, submit to and pray for them. In extreme situations I will enter into civil disobedience and seek the removal of a government. However, I will always respect that they are ‘my’ leaders by God’s appointment.