The American Dream?

American Dream What has America come to that we are dreaming about counter tops?

If we had an epidemic of defective counter tops, I might understand this phenomenon. Say, for example, that faulty or sub-standard counter tops were causing 3.4 deaths per week, or messing up 17.6 meals per day: then I, too, might dream about new counter tops.

Or, suppose that counter tops did more than, well, top a counter. If we had amazing counter tops that increased our knowledge and skills, or contributed to the spiritual or moral well-being of the population, then I could understand.

But why on earth would I dream about a counter top of any kind? Are we that wealthy that a new counter top is what we dream about now? Are we that small?

I don’t get it.

Posted in Culture, Economics, Spirituality | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What’s the Price?

Theologian Roger Olson turns to a non-theological subject, the way prices are computed in contemporary markets. He observes,

For example, many city newspapers are basing subscription rates on: length of time a subscription has been steady, zip code and income statistics, even home values. One subscriber might pay (for example) $25 for a month’s home delivery while another subscriber, a mile away (but possibly even next door), pays $35 for a month’s home delivery of the exact same newspaper. The difference is based on computer models that take into account the factors mentioned above and more.

Prices for medical services have long been mysterious. If you can find a published price, that price usually isn’t “real,” i.e., a price anyone actually pays. The actually-paid price varies depending on what kind of insurance you have (or don’t have). With so many health plans now offering rising deductibles, we all know we’ll be paying more, but with no clear information about the price of anything, we lack the information to make wise decisions or comparisons. Of course, if we can only afford cheaper offerings (“afford” is a euphemism for “the government has declared that we MUST buy insurance, and what they offer is, by their fiat, affordable“) we must operate in narrower networks where comparison is irrelevant because our choices are mostly already made for us.

This is also a reason I hate buying cars. There may be good reason to buy a new car before your old one gives up the ghost, but what’s the price? Some places praise themselves for delivering us from haggling by offering us a standard price. But is that a good price? We have to take their word for it. Others offer us such a mix of prices and features for the same thing, that befuddlement is the norm (at least for me; you’re likely smarter than I am). There’s the price of the car, the price of the various financing options, the price they say they’ll pay on the trade in, etc. They refer to Blue books (not Wittgenstein’s, I assume) and Black books, but what they offer with one hand, they take away with the other.

Or, let’s try higher education. Colleges have long had a published price. But is that the real price? As in car-buying, education buying offers so many options that many don’t pay the published price. What will we pay? Who knows?

Now, as Olson notes, prices are determined individually in terms of “perceived ability to pay.” Corporate computers have collected all our data. They’ve tracked our buying habits for years, and putting the Big Data together, decide on a price, personalized according to our “willingness” to pay – and their willingness to sell.

Markets exist not merely for the trading or acquisition of goods; that’s what happens on the surface. Markets function as epistemic devices for the social identification of value. Traditionally, an invisible hand did most of the work. Buyers and sellers each had some information, but commonly not all. With the corporate computer replacing this invisible hand, information is even more asymmetric than before. The corporations will do our knowing for us; all we need do is decide.

As more of the consumer economy goes this direction, maybe corporate pricing magic will lead to more and happier consumers. I don’t think it will lead to wiser consumers, however. Except, maybe, that insofar as consumers desire wisdom, they will simply decide to remove themselves from the process as much as possible and simply buy less.

Posted in Consumerism, Economics | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Bringing People to Jesus, but Unintentionally

John 8 has a story about the teachers of the law and Pharisees bringing to Jesus a woman “caught in the very act of adultery.” According to John (or, considering that this story was likely not part of John’s original text, another early disciple who passed on the tradition), these guys weren’t out either to help the woman or to punish the woman for her adultery. Their motivation, according to the text, was to “trap Jesus.”

Bringing the woman to Jesus, they said, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. Moses says we should stone people who do this. What do you say?” Their thought was probably something like, “We are putting Jesus in a no-win situation here. He has two options. He can say, ‘Do what Moses said and stone her.’ In that case, the crowd will no longer take him for the compassionate teacher they think he is. They’ll know he’s no different from us. Or, sappy fellow that he is, he could say, ‘Moses was pretty hard-hearted. God is loving and kind. Let’s forgive her and let her go. After all, we’re not supposed to judge.”

Jesus, however, didn’t follow their script. After taking a bit of time (which annoyed them), he said, “Let the one of you who was without sin cast the first stone.”

“But Jesus! That wasn’t one of the options we gave you! Grrrr.” I doubt they heard Jesus willingly, but they knew he’d beaten them. The text says they started to go away, from the oldest to the youngest, until no one was left standing before Jesus other than the woman. Jesus then asked her, “Woman, does no one condemn you?” “No one, Lord.” “Neither do I condemn you. Go and leave your life of sin.”

We know nothing more about this woman. We don’t know her name or where she was from. We don’t know what her life was like before or after this event. If we can take her accusers at their word, all we know was that she committed adultery, though how she could be caught “in the very act” with no man to also be stoned has mystified many. Chances are, though, that she had no intention of coming to Jesus. Whether content with her life or not – and, with the adultery, probably not – she likely would never have come to him, certainly never had a word of forgiveness given to her personally, if these guys had not caught her in her sin, and, intending to destroy her, brought her the best gift, a date with Jesus.

Sometimes we bring people to Jesus without intending to do so. Hopefully our intentions are not merely to use people, like these guys. Well, maybe we intend to use them, but we don’t wish them dead by our hands. Just used; only slightly taken advantage of. But, through no intent of our own, we bring them to Jesus where they can receive good news.

Perhaps these men with twisted hearts, who sought to use a woman to destroy Jesus, could also hear the good news from Jesus. Jesus’ words to them turned them from their evil plans and saved them from having the woman’s blood on their hands. We always remember that Jesus had mercy on her; Jesus also had mercy on he would-be executioners.

Posted in Bible, Jesus | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What Kind of Preaching Do We Need?

I’ve read/heard many admonitions over the years to keep sermons practical. People are having trouble in their marriages, in raising their kids, in dealing with work: they need wisdom. Now this is doubtless true. In a relativistic age ruled by “everyone has their own opinion” and “I know what I want” wisdom has gone out of style. Even out of style, however, at least some feel the need of it, even if they no longer use the word. In such an environment, we need to preach wisdom. We need to teach the basic biblical principles of life – how to do marriage and family, how to handle the stresses of work, how to handle money, and how to have a good life. Our preaching needs to be centered on these things if we want to attract the people from our communities.

But is wisdom enough? Surely the Bible gives wisdom, having several books in the genre called “wisdom literature.” Some have even framed Jesus as a wisdom teacher (I think here of Ben Witherington’s Jesus the Sage, though given the great diversity of Witherington’s output on Jesus, his is far from a reductionist “Jesus is only a wisdom teacher” approach).

In a blog post this week Derwin Gray claims that if we want to produce fully Christian adults in our ministry with youth we need to move our teaching from “Jesus as life coach” to “Jesus as God and King.” Does my life need a “coach?” Do I need someone who will impart wisdom to me? Sure I do – so will many others out there. But I’ll take Gray’s claim a step farther. It’s not just our ministry with youth that needs more than a “Jesus as life coach” approach. We need it in our ministry with all ages; we need it in our preaching.

As long as our basic ministry approach is attractional, some variant of “if you build it, they will come,” then we’ll have to build our preaching and ministry around the felt needs of our target audience. If we want them to come, we have to figure out what they want (wisdom; life coaching) and give it to them. But what if the attractional model isn’t the only option? What if we, like Jesus, like the apostles, had going as our primary model? What if we went where people were and allowed God to treat us as levers in their lives, as billboards of grace and mercy, as living and walking invitations to join the story of Jesus? Then, after already having “messed” with their lives, we bring them “to church,” they will be looking, perhaps, not merely for wisdom (we still need that), but for clarity on what God is up to in their lives and in the world.

Most cultures around the world and through the ages have had some sort of wisdom tradition. Some have noted the commonalities between the wisdom of ancient Israel and surrounding cultures (with a mix of motives: some to debunk the Old Testament and the faiths flowing from it, others wanting to tie in a “natural law” approach). What makes biblical wisdom unique, whether in the OT or NT, is the narrative/historical context in which it’s found. If we listened only to the “preach wisdom to meet felt needs” crowd we might think the narrative was expendable, that we could simply reason: Is X a wise thing to do? (Or personalized as, Is X a wise thing for me to do?) I’m suggesting a different kind of reasoning, one parasitic on the ongoing story of God: Is X a wise thing in light of who God is and what God has done/is doing? What is the wise thing for me to do in light of who I am in Christ?

If we are looking for this kind of reasoning in our disciples, we will need a ministry – including a preaching ministry – that enables people to learn that there is an ongoing story of God’s engagement with the world and how they fit into that story. We need a ministry that helps people form and center their identity on who they are in Christ. Surely this is hard work. We’re more often shaped to form our identity based on our place of origin, our race/ethnicity, our profession/job, our hobbies, our desires, etc. At least part of what it means to be formed as a disciple of Christ is to have all these other elements of identity relativized and reformed in terms of the Lordship of Christ. If all we offer people is, “Here’s some advice from Jesus and the Bible on how you can better achieve your own life project,” we’re missing the gospel and short-changing people, cheating them of the full salvation Jesus offers (much more than a “get out of hell free” card).

Posted in Culture, Discipleship, Preaching, Wisdom | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Students Are Our Customers!

If you work in higher education, perhaps you’ve heard someone in administration say that: “Students are our customers!” Since I don’t see education as a commodity, I’m disinclined to interpret it through the lens of a business metaphor. I also don’t want to reduce students to customers, consumers of a product we offer.

At the same time, I want students to have a good experience. I am treating them just as badly when I reduce them to funding sources, either from their own wallets, their parents’ wallets, or as attractors of government funds, as when I reduce them to customers.

At its best, the business model that treats students as customers recognizes that they are paying and that they have choices. They could go elsewhere. If I’m their teacher – and I want to keep a job in teaching – it’s to my advantage to keep them at my institution, particularly paying at my institution. But if I think of them primarily as my customers, I might lapse further into another mantra: “The customer is always right.” Since the customer is (indirectly) paying my salary, I want to keep the student happy. What does it take to make a student happy? Easy classes? Not too much homework? Open book tests? Frequently canceled class sessions? At some point, as we follow this way, we can imagine that the happiest student is the one who goes to class the least.

Contrary to the “student as customer” model, students don’t know what they want: certainly not in the way I know what I want when I go into a hamburger restaurant. Part of my job as teacher is to teach discernment, to help students learn what they ought to want if they want to become a participant in my discipline (or, in general education courses, what they ought to want if they want to become an intelligent participant in our culture).

Now it may be that few students come to college these days wanting either to become a participant in a discipline or an intelligent participant in our culture. In the first place, they’ve not been encouraged to think in terms of disciplines. Discipline, as they’ve experienced, it usually a bad experience. It’s something like corporal punishment, suspension, exclusion from fun: who wants more of that. They don’t want to join a discipline, they want a job, something that will insure them an income. Most also don’t think of becoming intelligent participants in our culture. They already know they’re intelligent, having received so much affirmation along the way to this point. And where does intelligence come in to the equation? Culture is merely an assortment of opinions. I have my opinions, you have your opinions – everyone has their own opinions. Participation in culture and evaluation of culture, are matters of opinion, matters of the exercise of will, not matters amenable to exercise of intellect.

So we have much to do. We not only have to educate students, but we have to reform the notion of what an education is for and why anyone would want one. The government isn’t much help here. In their demands for increasing accountability they seem to have reached the popular conclusion that education is all about job and income potential. So as teachers we have to impart the content and skills peculiar to our disciplines, but also an understanding of education itself that cuts against the grain of the broader culture. This also requires that students not only gain understanding, but also new desires. Instead of only satisfying their built-in and culture-approved desires for success and fun, we have to impart a desire for a real education.

In this view of education I am accountable not only to the institution that pays me, and not only to the students who sit in my classes (and give their money to the school). I am also accountable to my discipline, to produce students are knowledgeable, competent, and willing participants in our tradition of inquiry. If my own experience as a student is an indication, my students today might not even perceive that there is such a thing as a tradition of inquiry and a gain a concept that faithfulness to that tradition might be possible until they have already progressed quite a way into it. As it stands, I value my students, my institution, and my discipline enough to keep at it, even when various expressions of these think I’m nuts.

Posted in Education, Higher Education, Teaching | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Free Community College!

Why is there such a thing as COST? Why isn’t everything just free?

Cost is a way of showing the relative value of things. When we see that one thing costs more than another, we can take it as an indication that the thing that costs more is of more value. Now in every situation we value things in accord with our own situation. Some things have a high price attached to them and yet in our situation, or given our worldview/values/principles, are worthless to us. Or the other way around, it may be that society puts a low value on something we consider a matter of life and death.

What about education? The President has just suggested that community college should be free. In light of cost consideration, a couple of considerations occur to me (I’m not talking about the cost to the federal or state tax payers who will fund this).

First, when we say of a thing, “the cost to you is zero,” what are we saying of the value of that thing? Will students universally esteem a thing for its good qualities even if the cost message is that it is of low value? Some will say, Well, if it’s not going to cost me anything, I better go get some. For some, that will surely be a good thing. For others, it will be a waste of their time (which isn’t free).

Second, and directly related to the first, has making pre-college education free raised it in the esteem of students? Have students universally said to themselves, “Wow! The government is being so generous, offering me this tremendous good at no cost to me, that I will surely avail myself of every opportunity therein available!” I’m not seeing it.

Third, some will hear the message “Free college” and act on the theory that it will cost them nothing. Free means free, after all. But college that is worth something will be difficult. It will push students and expect things of them that are outside their comfort zones. Unlike high school, college will expect them to function as adults, no longer as children. (Well, if current trends continue or are widespread, I’m probably wrong here. Colleges are today expected to coddle students and act in loco parentis for these young people.) The cost in things other than money will be high. Will students accustomed to FREE! be willing to be educated? We’ll see.

Posted in Economics, Higher Education, Politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Covenant Renewal in the Wesleyan Tradition, 3

The next part of the covenant goes like this:

Leader: Be satisfied that Christ shall give you your place and work.
People: Lord, make me what you will. I put myself fully into your hands: Put me to doing, put me to suffering, let me be employed for you, or laid aside for you, let me be full, let me be empty, let me have all things, let me have nothing. I freely and with a willing heart give it all to your pleasure and disposal.

The first thing I see here is that the charge from the leader frames satisfaction as a choice. Satisfaction is not something that comes automatically or without attention or effort on our part. What is satisfaction? At its heart it has to do with out attitude and assessment of something. I am satisfied with my a meal if that meal lives up to my expectations and meets my needs. Can I understand my life in such a way that I understand my expectations and needs primarily in terms of Christ, who he is and what he offers? Or do I begin with a predetermined set of expectations and needs and then go to the divine store to find a god who will satisfy me? In this covenant service the assumption is that Christ sets the standards; Christ adjusts my expectations and my perception of my needs. Satisfaction then comes as a result of my life in Christ after my expectations have been transformed.

If this charge is correct, Christ desires to determine my location and what I do there. My place, my location, can be understood in various ways. It can refer to where I live, where I work, what institutions I take part in, as well as the relationships that define my life. I am not the Lord of my life to determine all these things; Jesus gets that honor. And what am I to do in each context, what is it that will constitute doing my duty? Will it be simply doing “the best I can,” whatever that means? Will it be merely doing what is convenient, or easy, or (currently) socially acceptable? The charge here is to allow that Jesus is the one to define the bounds of my duty.

Our response to the charge includes giving Jesus complete say over our lives. Jesus is the one who gets to decide where I am, what I do, what counts as good for me. Contrary to our current cultural values, this response assumes a degree of passivity on our part. It’s not that we’re out there, hard-charging, working in the world, making something of ourselves. No, we are practically objects in the hand of Jesus. Can we trust Jesus that much? Can we relax and let him decide what is good for us – and act on his determined good?

And all this with a willing heart! We could almost understand if Wesley had said “with a whining heart!” Sure, Lord, I’ll accept what you have for me, but I’ll do so grudgingly and with a continual bit of whining. That’s not the idea here. No, we’re considering ourselves – the whole of our lives – to be put at his pleasure and disposal. That takes deep faith, the kind of faith that only comes from regular attention.

If we say this – from our heart! – does it mean that we accept the maxim, “Everything happens for a reason,” or, “Whatever happens must be God’s will?” I don’t think so. It might be that some circumstance in which we find ourselves, a circumstance we would never choose for ourselves is God’s will – that Jesus has put us in it for some reason. But then it might not be. It may be that we are in that situation because we live in a broken and sinful world, where others have not obeyed God. we may be suffering the consequences of the unbelief and disobedience of others. So what do we do then? Do we just lay down and say, “Woe is me?” Maybe this is when we do what Jesus said (and did) – we take up our cross. In taking up the cross, Jesus willingly suffered the consequences of the sin of others (including our sin). He didn’t do it with the masochistic attitude, “Hey, yeah! I get to suffer tremendous anguish and pain because this is what God wants!” No, his joy – and Hebrews does speak of his joy in this context – was in the consequences that came from what he did, the ends, not the means.

At root, in this commitment we are allowing God to see to the outcomes of our lives and actions. We live in relationship with Jesus. We obey as far as we know how. We give him honor and glory. And we let him bring the results.

Posted in Discipleship, John Wesley, Spirituality | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Secularism Makes for a Better Islam?

Sometimes when we westerners look at the world, particularly at chaos in and emanating from the so-called Muslim world, we suggest that they need more secularism. Islam, it is assumed, must be the problem. If they can manage to tone down their Islam with a good bit of western secularism (sometimes we call it liberalism), they can be peaceful like us.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a native of Somalia, raised in a Muslim family. She is now a secularist and urges secularism as a strategy to defang militant Islam. Western Christians, who have pursued the secularizing strategy of privatization to moderate their own religion, should ally with secularists against the common Muslim foe.

Well, if being Muslim entails killing people and being hateful, sure, I’d like Islam to be moderated. If Islam is by its very nature murderous, the less Islamic Islam is, the better for all of us, Muslims included (since they kill more of their fellow religionists than outsiders), for them to be less Muslim.

I’m given pause, however, by putting the shoe on the other foot. Under what conditions would I see the Christian faith improved by becoming less Christian? Unless “being Christian” necessarily means acting like Saul of Tarsus before the Road to Damascus, or the Crusaders “liberating” Constantinople or Jerusalem, then I’d say Christians need to be more Christian, not less. In fact, picking on those Crusaders, a question arises: Can we imagine Jesus doing what they did? Jesus did, in fact, enter Jerusalem. He is described as “entering triumphantly.” How many did he and his forces kill when he entered triumphantly? How deep did the blood run? When I read the Gospels the only blood I see mentioned that week is his blood. Jesus’ triumph was precisely in his weakness, a weakness that allowed himself to be murdered on the cross. If Jesus is the center of the definition of what counts as “Christian,” I’d say the more Christian Christians are, the better.

If I say, “I want my tradition to be more itself, and your Muslim tradition to be less itself,” am I falling into hypocrisy? Yes, yes, you Muslims: you need to be secular. We Christians need to be less secular. On the face of it, that sure looks hypocritical.

But maybe Islam is the exception. We look at Jesus entering Jerusalem triumphantly and we see a man – him – on a cross. If we shift to the Islamic tradition how would we imagine Muhammad entering a city triumphantly? Could we imagine him, the prophet of Islam, triumphing like Jesus, suffering on a cross? Well, that would be more challenging. In the first place, many in the Islamic tradition even deny the crucifixion of Jesus. Such a horrible death is too demeaning for a true prophet of God (which they believe, on the authority of the Quran, Jesus to be). Since Jesus is a true prophet, the story of his crucifixion in the Gospels must be a corruption; or, perhaps, they were simply confused. God clouded the minds of observers so that Jesus could escape while another, perhaps Judas, perhaps Simon of Cyrene, was crucified in his place. The authorities thought they were crucifying prophet Jesus, but God tricked them. What the Gospels say happened to Jesus surely could not happen to a true prophet.

If what happened to Jesus, i.e., his death on the cross, which Christians see as his triumph, could not be conceived of as happening to Jesus, it is much harder for Muslims to imagine it happening to Muhammad. Muhammad not only taught the right way to God, according to Islam, but also did many other things in life. As a leader of the nascent Muslim community he was also a military commander and conqueror. When we speak of Jesus conquering, we slip into metaphor; when Muslims speak of Muhammad as conqueror, they need not rely on metaphor.

So, considering Muhammad, Islam is necessarily violent, right? Well, no. Though they get less press these days, there are many Muslims around the world who consider themselves completely Muslim, without an ounce of liberalism or secularism, who consider peace (and peace that non-Muslims would also call peace) as the appropriate lifestyle for Muslims, and the ultimate teaching of their prophet. So what we have had – and will continue to have – is an argument among Muslims, an argument within Islam, about the nature of Islam, what constitutes peace and how it can be brought about.

As a human who doesn’t want to be shot or blown up, I’m inclined to encourage Muslims to become good secular liberals. As one who seeks to avoid hypocrisy, however, I’m going to encourage them to continue to argue about the nature of Islam. I’ll be cheering for the folks who argue that Islam is all for peace (and all against violence). Even more, I’ll continue to try to demonstrate to the Muslims I’m around, the presence of Jesus and his offer of life to all who believe.

Posted in Christianity, Islam, Peace, Secularization, Violence | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Covenant Renewal in the Wesleyan Tradition, 2

The service begins with an affirmation of God’s temporal ubiquity:

Leader: Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations.
People: From everlasting to everlasting, You are God.

This God who calls us into covenant has already been active in our lives and in our world. This is not some strange god, new on the scene, demanding our attention. This is no god holding the gun of omnipotence to our head, forcing us to make a move. This is the same God who created us and in whom we have lived thus far.

The service continues:

Leader: Commit yourselves to Christ as his servants. Give yourselves to him, that you may belong to him. Christ has many services to be done. Some are more easy and honorable, others are more difficult and disgraceful. Some are suitable to our inclinations and interests, others are contrary to both. In some we may please Christ and please ourselves. But then there are other works where we cannot please Christ except by denying ourselves. It is necessary, therefore, that we consider what it means to be a servant of Christ. Let us therefore, go to Christ, and pray:
People: Let me be your servant, under your command.

This part presupposes that we are, to at least some degree, at our own disposal. We are not mere objects at the mercy of our environment, a powerful society, or our own hormones and desires. Neither are we mere objects, mere pottery, in the hands of God. God invites our commitment; God does not coerce our commitment.

While we are, to at least some degree, at our own disposal, Christ calls us to particular ministries (services) that may or may not be what we would choose for ourselves. This is hard for us in an age where we are taught to please ourselves, to pursue our passions, to be true to ourselves. The charge recognizes that some of the things to which Christ calls us may well fit with our desires and inclinations; others likely will not.

When we teach on spiritual gifts in our churches, one of the tools we frequently use is a spiritual gift inventory. These can be a useful tool to help people identify spiritual gifts. They should not be trusted on their own, however. In the first place, they measure only those things with which we have experience. If God is gifting/calling us in some area we have not yet experienced, chances are that an inventory will miss it. An inventory may also point too much at areas of service we enjoy, areas we would choose for ourselves. As reflected in the biblical tradition as a whole, God habitually calls us to do what we cannot do on our own. Our challenge is obedience before it is pleasure.

On the positive side, one of the elements of discipleship (though often neglected) is transformation not only of habits and practices, but of desires and emotions. Our culture frequently assumes that desires and emotions are simply given. If we want to be realistic – and we all want to be realistic, don’t we? – then we must bring our spiritual life into alignment with our desires and emotions. The Christian tradition, here in this covenant renewal and more broadly, refuses to take emotions and desires as givens. They are affirmed as good, in general, but frequently misdirected and disordered. We need the healing and reordering work of the Holy Spirit in our lives to transform our desires and emotions so they become an aid rather than a hindrance to our life in Christ.

A final move in this segment of the service is to consider what it means to be a servant of Christ. Emotions and desires have an important role to play in Christian spirituality. They are not the whole of it, however. God also calls us to think, to engage our minds in the process. Now, just as our emotions and desires need healing and transformation by the Spirit, so do our intellectual faculties. We need the Spirit’s guidance as we exercise our gifts of perception, our memory, our abilities to analyze, compare, contrast, and create. God wants all of us, including our minds. So we offer the whole of ourselves to him in prayer, as we proceed.

Posted in Discipleship, John Wesley, Spirituality, United Methodism | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Covenant Renewal in the Wesleyan Tradition, 1

Since the days of John Wesley, Methodists have sought to renew their covenant with God at the turn of the new year. Our church followed in this tradition this morning.

I framed the covenant renewal with a message from Joshua 24. The most quoted part of this chapter, “Choose you this do whom you will serve… As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD,” is a climax to Joshua’s recital of God’s mercy and grace shown to the people of Israel, leading them from slavery in Egypt, through the wilderness, and into the promised land. Again and again, the LORD delivered the people. Now at the end of his life, Joshua challenges the people to retain their faith in and obedience to this LORD.

The people sound somewhat offended by his challenge. It’s as if they say, “Joshua! How could you say such a thing? We have only and always been faithful to the LORD. Surely you know we’ll keep doing it!.” But they haven’t. There was a time in their lives when they had made a commitment to follow the LORD, but they had wavered in their commitment. The fact that they had made a covenant with the LORD, or had been members of the covenant community in the past, was not sufficient. They needed to renew their commitment to the covenant.

We need the same kind of renewal today. Some of us have at some point in our lives entered a covenant with Jesus. We may call it, “Giving our life to Christ,” “Making a profession of faith,” “Being confirmed,” “Joining the church,” or something like that. And we sometimes think that having done so, we have, in a sense, graduated.

As a United Methodist pastor I have taught many confirmation classes over the years. We have a great time in the classes. Sometimes, however, those who are being confirmed treat it like a graduation from church. “Yes! I have learned about God and the Bible. I have given my life to Jesus. God has written my name in his little book, so that when I die and show up at the gate of heaven, he will see my name and let me in.”  Having done “all that,” now we can move on to other things. After all, the big thing about coming to faith in Jesus is avoiding hell, right? (That’s the idea we get from some high-pressure “evangelism” techniques at least.)

People tell me exercise is a good idea. If I exercise, I will have a healthy body and a resulting good life. I have exercised. I even worked up a good sweat. So now I’m finished, right? I’ve challenged my muscles, made my cardio-vascular system work, now I’m set, right? You tell me, “That’s not how exercise works. It has to become a lifestyle.”

Or, let’s think about marriage. A couple fall in love and plan to get married. They spend their tens of thousands of dollars on a beautiful ceremony (and heaps of food). They say their “I wills” (the United Methodist liturgy doesn’t have “I do”) and repeat their vows. They exchange rings. The preacher pronounces them husband and wife. Such a beautiful couple. But, now that all that bother is over with, they go their separate ways. You tell me, “That’s not how marriage works. It’s more than just a wedding, it’s a lifestyle.”

Faith in Christ, a life with the LORD, works analogously. By some means/event, we enter a relationship with God. That entry point is only the front door, however. Having a front door is a great starting point. But the point of having a house (shifting to yet another metaphor) is to live in the house.

Sometimes in our life with Christ, we’re like Joshua’s buddies: we wander. We get distracted. Sometimes we find the gods of our age less demanding and more accommodating to our pleasures and lifestyle preferences. The Wesleyan Covenant Renewal service is predicated on the observation that sin and rebellion is all to common, even among those of us who “love the LORD.” We need to confess our unfaithfulness. We need to repent of our sin. We need to renew our commitment. This renewal is a way for us to live into and live out the relationship we claim with Jesus.

The good news for us, as for those who heard Joshua, is that God goes first. God is not standing back, arms crossed, waiting for us to make the first move. The step we take in covenant renewal is in response to God’s continued grace in our lives, and call to return with all our hearts.

In the next several posts I will examine the various parts of the traditional Wesleyan Covenant Renewal, as found in the United Methodist Book of Worship. Follow along with us, not just to satisfy your curiosity (“What odd things are those Methodists doing now?”) but provoke you to discover and take your next step with Christ.

Posted in Jesus, Spirituality | Tagged , , | 2 Comments