What I’m Reading Today: Matthew 18
Each of us has learned ways of coping with difficult people given the limitations of our personality. Some folks, for instance, deal with difficult people by completely avoiding them. Others deal with them by trying to beat them to the punch and become more agressive/abrasive than they are as a means of intimidating the difficult person or keeping him/her in check.
At different stages of my life, I have employed at least two different strategies – neither of which is all that healthy. And wouldn’t you know it, both of my coping strategies were taken on in today’s passage from Matthew.
The first strategy I have used is to talk with others about the nature of the conflict. I told myself that by doing so I would get fresh perspectives on (and perhaps even new ideas for solving!) the conflict and have the added benefit of getting support and encouragement from others. Such an approach made sense to me at the time. The only problem was that such an approach never encouraged me to do the most important part: sit down with the difficult person and actually work things through.
Along comes today’s passage that encourages me to set my passive-aggressive tendencies aside once and for all. “If a fellow believer hurts you,” Jesus said, “work it out between the two of you.” Jesus goes on from there to draw out a backup plan in case the one-on-one conversation doesn’t work. Each step of his plan, however, is predicated on the thing I spent years avoiding: open and honest communication.
And if losing my preferred way for dealing with difficult people wasn’t bad enough, Jesus went on to discredit my second favorite method. My partner Mike says I’m a master at playing the “If the shoe fits, wear it!” game. What he means by that is that when I’m in the presence of someone who has wronged me I prefer to speak in generalities about the offending behavior without specifically mentioning names. This feeds my passive-aggressive tendencies and still allows me to feel as if I’ve address the problem.
Let me give you an example of what I mean. If someone borrowed money from me, promised to repay it at a certain time, and broken that promise; I’ve been known to say (either to an individual or a group in which the individual is in), “Don’t you think it’s important that people a person honors his/her word by following through with his/her commitment.”
There are lots of problems with such a passive aggressive approach. In addition to the fact that the whole approach is predicated on avoiding the issue at hand, such an approach is often tremendously ineffective because some of the people who engage in inappropriate behaviors are the ones least able to see that behavior in themself. They will complain loudly if someone else does something to them. If they do the same thing to another, however, they will be completely oblivious to consequences of their own behavior.
That’s exactly what happened in today’s story about forgiveness. A king forgave the huge debt of one of his servants who couldn’t afford to repay the debt. And how did the servant respond to that act of grace? He immediately went out and attacked an underling of his who owed him a much smaller debt. The servant was completely oblivious to the hypocrisy of his actions! Eventually the king had to step in and directly expose the servant’s hypocrisy. The servant probably would have never made the connection on his own.
Once again, the lesson in dealing with our fellow human beings is this: “be direct”.
Chances are that you have at least one difficult person in your life. If you don’t, give me a holler and I might be able to help you find one – but I digress. One you’ve found that difficult person, look for opportunities to practice the sort of approach that Jesus encouraged. Be direct and name your concerns in a spirit of love and grace. Your new approach just might chance the whole dynamic of the relationship.
Til next time …
Help support the vision of Woodland Hills Community Church!
For those of you who would like to support the vision & ministry of Woodland Hills Community Church (the faith community I serve that continues to encourage me to minister outside the box), please click on the link just above.
Monday, August 9, 2010
What I’m Reading Today: Matthew 16-17
One of the things I love about the sacred writings of our tradition is their amazing complexity. That complexity is evident in so many places – one of which is how we go about thinking of who Jesus is/was.
In the 16th chapter of Matthew, for instance, we are told the story of Jesus’ question to the disciples: “Who do you say I am?” Peter’s eventual answer – “You’re the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of the living God” – uses language that suggests Jesus is special, or unique.
Just one chapter later, however, we hear a story in which a man requests healing for his son that is battling what we today might describe as epilepsy. As he made his request, the man noted he tried getting help from Jesus’ disciples but they couldn’t help him out. After Jesus healed the man’s son, the disciples asked Jesus why they couldn’t do what he did. Jesus replied: “Because you’re not yet taking God seriously.” His answer suggests that Jesus didn’t think of himself as being all that special/different than the disciples. Jesus felt others should be able to do what he did.
So which way is it? Is Jesus special/different than us, or not?
That is a question that theologians have been wrestling with for centuries. The complexities is why we have a range of answers to that question ranging from “Jesus is totally special and unlike any of us” (what some call “high Christology”) to “Jesus is no different than you or I” (what some call “low Christology”). Of course, there are answers to the question that lie between these two extremes.
The challenge for people of faith who identify as Christian – then – is two-fold. First, what answer do I come to regarding that question; and second, in what ways do I hold on to my answer.
Over the last couple of centuries we have paid a whole lot of attention to the first challenge – the part where we formulate an answer to the question of how special Jesus is.
During this same period of time, however, we have paid very little attention to the second challenge – the part that has to do with the ways in which we hold on to our answer to the question. As a result, there is sometimes a HUGE amount of arrogance to the ways in which people hold on to their answer to the question.
Some of those with a high Christology say, “Of course Jesus is completely unique. Anyone weirdo who doesn’t think so is not – I repeat, NOT - a Christian.” Some of those with a low Christology say, “Objective historical/sociological studies tells us that Jesus had to be just like you and I. Anyone who thinks differently is a superstitious moron who probably believes in the Easter Bunny too.” It’s no wonder we struggle to build unity amongst the body of Christ!!
In recognition of the complexity of the questions before us – and in a call to lead a life that truly reflects the values of Jesus – I would encourage you to re-visit the question of who Jesus was today. As you arrive at your answer, immediately ask yourself: “How does the answer I’m resting in affect the way I see others (both other Christians and others in general).”
I believe the answer to THAT question will reveal even more about what each of us truly believes about Jesus.
Til next time …
One of the things I love about the sacred writings of our tradition is their amazing complexity. That complexity is evident in so many places – one of which is how we go about thinking of who Jesus is/was.
In the 16th chapter of Matthew, for instance, we are told the story of Jesus’ question to the disciples: “Who do you say I am?” Peter’s eventual answer – “You’re the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of the living God” – uses language that suggests Jesus is special, or unique.
Just one chapter later, however, we hear a story in which a man requests healing for his son that is battling what we today might describe as epilepsy. As he made his request, the man noted he tried getting help from Jesus’ disciples but they couldn’t help him out. After Jesus healed the man’s son, the disciples asked Jesus why they couldn’t do what he did. Jesus replied: “Because you’re not yet taking God seriously.” His answer suggests that Jesus didn’t think of himself as being all that special/different than the disciples. Jesus felt others should be able to do what he did.
So which way is it? Is Jesus special/different than us, or not?
That is a question that theologians have been wrestling with for centuries. The complexities is why we have a range of answers to that question ranging from “Jesus is totally special and unlike any of us” (what some call “high Christology”) to “Jesus is no different than you or I” (what some call “low Christology”). Of course, there are answers to the question that lie between these two extremes.
The challenge for people of faith who identify as Christian – then – is two-fold. First, what answer do I come to regarding that question; and second, in what ways do I hold on to my answer.
Over the last couple of centuries we have paid a whole lot of attention to the first challenge – the part where we formulate an answer to the question of how special Jesus is.
During this same period of time, however, we have paid very little attention to the second challenge – the part that has to do with the ways in which we hold on to our answer to the question. As a result, there is sometimes a HUGE amount of arrogance to the ways in which people hold on to their answer to the question.
Some of those with a high Christology say, “Of course Jesus is completely unique. Anyone weirdo who doesn’t think so is not – I repeat, NOT - a Christian.” Some of those with a low Christology say, “Objective historical/sociological studies tells us that Jesus had to be just like you and I. Anyone who thinks differently is a superstitious moron who probably believes in the Easter Bunny too.” It’s no wonder we struggle to build unity amongst the body of Christ!!
In recognition of the complexity of the questions before us – and in a call to lead a life that truly reflects the values of Jesus – I would encourage you to re-visit the question of who Jesus was today. As you arrive at your answer, immediately ask yourself: “How does the answer I’m resting in affect the way I see others (both other Christians and others in general).”
I believe the answer to THAT question will reveal even more about what each of us truly believes about Jesus.
Til next time …
Saturday, August 7, 2010
What I’m Reading Today: Matthew 15
There were a lot of things that I learned in seminary that were of tremendous value to me. There was one thing they failed to teach me, however, that would have been particularly helpful as I struggled to come to a better understanding of my call. Let me take a moment and explain that thing they forgot to teach me.
During my seminary years, most folks talked as if there were just two kinds of calls to ministry. One call was to parish ministry (i.e. serving a local church); the other call was to serve outside of a local church (i.e. serving as a chaplain, teacher, non-profit director, etc.). I was clear that I felt called to serve in a parish – so I thought that was it: all calls to serve a local church were the same.
Wrong!!
Over the years I have learned there are lots of different types of call to serve local churches. Some, for instance, feel called to serve local churches as interim ministers. Others feel called to serve local churches and build a particular type of ministry (i.e. a social justice ministry or a ministry of spiritual formation).
I too have a more specific understanding of my call that it has taken me years to figure out. I feel called to serve local churches on the brink and help them find their way back to a position of health and vitality.
Since no one talked to me about different kinds of calls to parish ministry, early on I thought that my call was to interim ministry. Now, I’ve figured out ways in which these calls are different.
In each of the situations I’ve worked, I’ve discovered there is one message that a struggling local church MUST come to understand if they have any hopes of making it. They must understand that at any given moment in their ministry, they have all the resources they need in order to become a healthy and vital community.
This is a difficult message for people in struggling communities to hear (much less believe). They have gotten so use to thinking, “If only we had more members, then we’d have enough volunteers to create wonderful programs.” Or, “If only we had more money in the bank, then we could do some exciting things.”
Those sorts of messages are exactly the kind of things that threaten the future of a local church. It’s only when the individuals in a local church learn to celebrate and use what they already have – and not focus on what they think they lack - that they can truly begin to turn things around.
I was reminded of that principle as I read today’s passage from Matthew. In that passage we heard the story of Jesus’ feeding of the 4,000+. Early in the story, we hear that Jesus – moved by his sense of compassion – told the disciples to feed the people.
And how did the disciples respond?
They said what folks in struggling churches say all the time. “Gee, we’d love to do it but we don’t have enough resources to be able to do that.”
Jesus had the world’s best comeback ever! Instead of buying in to their scarcity-based thinking, Jesus simply asked a question: “How much bread do you have?”
In other words, he shifted their focus away from what they lacked and moved it toward what they had. And wouldn’t you know it: God was able to use what they had to accomplish things they previously would have thought impossible!
Of course the principle I’m talking about doesn’t just apply to local churches. It applies to the lives of individuals as well. The more we focus on what we lack, the more we lose sight of what God is able to accomplish through what we DO have.
If you find yourself in a place of habitual scarcity-based thinking, today I challenge you to leave that thinking behind. Spend time in prayer/meditation today giving thanks for all that you do have, and trust that God can find ways to work in and through you to multiply those resources exponentially.
Til next time …
There were a lot of things that I learned in seminary that were of tremendous value to me. There was one thing they failed to teach me, however, that would have been particularly helpful as I struggled to come to a better understanding of my call. Let me take a moment and explain that thing they forgot to teach me.
During my seminary years, most folks talked as if there were just two kinds of calls to ministry. One call was to parish ministry (i.e. serving a local church); the other call was to serve outside of a local church (i.e. serving as a chaplain, teacher, non-profit director, etc.). I was clear that I felt called to serve in a parish – so I thought that was it: all calls to serve a local church were the same.
Wrong!!
Over the years I have learned there are lots of different types of call to serve local churches. Some, for instance, feel called to serve local churches as interim ministers. Others feel called to serve local churches and build a particular type of ministry (i.e. a social justice ministry or a ministry of spiritual formation).
I too have a more specific understanding of my call that it has taken me years to figure out. I feel called to serve local churches on the brink and help them find their way back to a position of health and vitality.
Since no one talked to me about different kinds of calls to parish ministry, early on I thought that my call was to interim ministry. Now, I’ve figured out ways in which these calls are different.
In each of the situations I’ve worked, I’ve discovered there is one message that a struggling local church MUST come to understand if they have any hopes of making it. They must understand that at any given moment in their ministry, they have all the resources they need in order to become a healthy and vital community.
This is a difficult message for people in struggling communities to hear (much less believe). They have gotten so use to thinking, “If only we had more members, then we’d have enough volunteers to create wonderful programs.” Or, “If only we had more money in the bank, then we could do some exciting things.”
Those sorts of messages are exactly the kind of things that threaten the future of a local church. It’s only when the individuals in a local church learn to celebrate and use what they already have – and not focus on what they think they lack - that they can truly begin to turn things around.
I was reminded of that principle as I read today’s passage from Matthew. In that passage we heard the story of Jesus’ feeding of the 4,000+. Early in the story, we hear that Jesus – moved by his sense of compassion – told the disciples to feed the people.
And how did the disciples respond?
They said what folks in struggling churches say all the time. “Gee, we’d love to do it but we don’t have enough resources to be able to do that.”
Jesus had the world’s best comeback ever! Instead of buying in to their scarcity-based thinking, Jesus simply asked a question: “How much bread do you have?”
In other words, he shifted their focus away from what they lacked and moved it toward what they had. And wouldn’t you know it: God was able to use what they had to accomplish things they previously would have thought impossible!
Of course the principle I’m talking about doesn’t just apply to local churches. It applies to the lives of individuals as well. The more we focus on what we lack, the more we lose sight of what God is able to accomplish through what we DO have.
If you find yourself in a place of habitual scarcity-based thinking, today I challenge you to leave that thinking behind. Spend time in prayer/meditation today giving thanks for all that you do have, and trust that God can find ways to work in and through you to multiply those resources exponentially.
Til next time …
Friday, August 6, 2010
What I’m Reading Today: Matthew 14
I often chuckle inside when I hear someone characterize the Bible as a collection of ancient documents that is completely irrelevant for today. I chuckle because the issues the Scriptures speak to are so similar to the issues we face today. Let’s take the story about what happened to John the Baptist that is contained in today’s passage.
The story of John the Baptist’s demise turned on one critical moment. Herod was having a party and – in the midst of the revelry – made a promise to give Herodias’ daughter anything she wanted in return for her lively performance. She asked for the head of John the Baptist.
Now if Herod was thinking clearly (i.e. not drunk), he would have felt comfortable saying something along the lines of “Actually, I meant ‘anything you want – within reason.’ Your request went beyond the bounds of what is reasonable so just ask for something else.”
Herod didn’t do that, however. He gave the young woman her request.
And why did he do that?
The passage explains his motivation by saying, “Unwilling to lose face with his guests, he did it – ordered John’s head cut off and presented to the girl on a platter [emphasis added].” In other words, Herod went along with the request because he wanted to fit in and give the majority of the people what they wanted.
That same storyline was played out just a couple of days ago here in California when Federal Judge Vaughn Walker was in a position much like Herod’s. He had presided over a trial exploring the constitutionality of Proposition 8. It would have been extremely easy for Judy Walker to listen to lots of voices clamoring around him – reminding him that the majority of voters had passed the proposition so therefore he should simply go along and give the majority of those who voted on November 3, 2008 what they wanted. Lots of other judges might have done that: they might have been unwilling to lose face and gone along with popular opinion to simply get along.
Thankfully, Judge Walker veered away from Herod’s example and had the wisdom to do what he felt was right instead of what was popular.
Few of us may find ourselves in the position of being either a regional ruler or a federal judge. While we may lack those impressive titles, each of us still has the ability to profoundly affect the lives of others through our own day-to-day actions.
In the midst of our daily interactions with others, we too face moments when we have to decide the sort of thing Herod and Judge Walker decided: will I do what’s popular, or will I do what’s right? That’s a choice each of us must decide for ourselves in that moment. My prayer for today is that each of us draw upon the strength of the Spirit so that we are willing to lose face and do what’s right rather than what’s popular.
Til next time …
I often chuckle inside when I hear someone characterize the Bible as a collection of ancient documents that is completely irrelevant for today. I chuckle because the issues the Scriptures speak to are so similar to the issues we face today. Let’s take the story about what happened to John the Baptist that is contained in today’s passage.
The story of John the Baptist’s demise turned on one critical moment. Herod was having a party and – in the midst of the revelry – made a promise to give Herodias’ daughter anything she wanted in return for her lively performance. She asked for the head of John the Baptist.
Now if Herod was thinking clearly (i.e. not drunk), he would have felt comfortable saying something along the lines of “Actually, I meant ‘anything you want – within reason.’ Your request went beyond the bounds of what is reasonable so just ask for something else.”
Herod didn’t do that, however. He gave the young woman her request.
And why did he do that?
The passage explains his motivation by saying, “Unwilling to lose face with his guests, he did it – ordered John’s head cut off and presented to the girl on a platter [emphasis added].” In other words, Herod went along with the request because he wanted to fit in and give the majority of the people what they wanted.
That same storyline was played out just a couple of days ago here in California when Federal Judge Vaughn Walker was in a position much like Herod’s. He had presided over a trial exploring the constitutionality of Proposition 8. It would have been extremely easy for Judy Walker to listen to lots of voices clamoring around him – reminding him that the majority of voters had passed the proposition so therefore he should simply go along and give the majority of those who voted on November 3, 2008 what they wanted. Lots of other judges might have done that: they might have been unwilling to lose face and gone along with popular opinion to simply get along.
Thankfully, Judge Walker veered away from Herod’s example and had the wisdom to do what he felt was right instead of what was popular.
Few of us may find ourselves in the position of being either a regional ruler or a federal judge. While we may lack those impressive titles, each of us still has the ability to profoundly affect the lives of others through our own day-to-day actions.
In the midst of our daily interactions with others, we too face moments when we have to decide the sort of thing Herod and Judge Walker decided: will I do what’s popular, or will I do what’s right? That’s a choice each of us must decide for ourselves in that moment. My prayer for today is that each of us draw upon the strength of the Spirit so that we are willing to lose face and do what’s right rather than what’s popular.
Til next time …
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)