Living in Two Worlds: Hope and Despair

Written for the Presbyterian Outlook blog ...

-------------

I find myself in two worlds: hope and despair.

I think the two are related, in a symbiotic way.

I get the uneasy feeling that hope needs despair in order to be hope, in any authentic way. Hope is a part of the faith I have in Christ, a faith that confronts the "realities" of the day, without flinching, yet rises above them to claim the providence of God, God-at-work, in all things. Without despair in things as they are, hope for things as they will be seems shallow and self-serving.

Which then makes despair an integral part of my spiritual layout. Not that I'm happy about that, but I'm in good company.

I think the Prophets are people of despair and hope, and sometimes the oscillation is severe (read Isaiah). Jesus speaks of his "troubled" heart (John 12:27), as well, and then speaks of "my joy" (John 15:11). I can't have one without the other, if I understand anything about the ways of God in my life.

Paul says that hope has a lot "invisibility" to it - things unseen (Romans 8:25), and then reminds us that it's the Holy Spirit that prays within us, for us and with us, when we can't see, with "sighs too deep for words."

I live in both worlds, and maybe you do, too.

I think Matthew lives in both as he pens the opening chapters of his gospel. He begins with an affirmation of faith in God's ordering of history (Chapter 1), then moves the reader into some of the dark materials of our world (Chapter 2) and then blends it all together in Chapters 3 and 4.

The Gospels help me with despair - not to move me out of it, but to bear it, as a cross, in the name of Jesus, and bear it with hope in the providence of God.

If despair takes hold, and I live only in Chapter 2, what with the conniving of Herod and his bloodlust for anyone who threatens his throne, my spirit grows heavy.

Yet, if I try to live only in hope, with sweet nostrums piled high all about me, my spirit objects, for what right do I have to escape from sorrow and sadness when millions of human beings are condemned to mean and miserable lives, for want of justice and peace?

To follow Christ is to spend time in both realms - in the darkness of Herod's world and in the brightness of a Magi's star.

To live with Jesus shedding tears on the brow of the hill overlooking Jerusalem and with his incredible forgiveness and reinstatement of Peter after the resurrection.

I live in both worlds - maybe you do, too.

Tom Eggebeen, Interim Pastor
Covenant Presbyterian Church
Los Angeles, CA

Following the Script

The more conservative the congregation to which someone belongs, the more likely I hear in their conversation "the script."

This is rarely the case for Presbyterians, whatever their persuasion, though I find this happening with a bit more frequency as fundagelicalism takes root in our congregations - what with easy praise music and the four-point therapy message, with appropriate screen images, and the need to always be "victorious."

As if, before anything else can transpire in the conversation, sort of like clearing the throat, a certain number of "god-honoring," or "Christ-witnessing" statements must be said, and said in such a way as to impress upon the hearer the "victory" of the gospel.

We all use our scripts, I suppose, in order to establish, both in the mind of the speaker and the listener, the lay of the land. I suspect folks are really trying to convince themselves, more than anything else, because life is scary and life is hard and life is confusing - realities to which various forms of fundagelicalism cannot and will not admit.

I don't like scripted language, because it's not real, even when the person is speaking of "their personal relationship with Jesus" or whatever else they may be trying to impress upon me.

Perhaps, since I'm a pastor, there's some urgency in the speaker's mind to be sure that I know they're saved and bound for glory.

Or, because I'm a Presbyterian pastor, some urgency to witness to the unsaved, which seems to be the status to which I'm assigned in conservative or fundamentalist circles.

In some respects, I think, the issue of "scripted christian-speak" falls under the category addressed by James when he writes, "Above all, do not swear - by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your "yes" be yes, and your "no" be no, or you will be condemned."

Christians who try too hard are not likely to succeed in their witness, though God is merciful, and can use most anything to further the cause of the gospel.

But James, I think, hits the nail on the head with scripted language - don't use it. When we talk, let's talk authentically.

If we're afraid, then we're afraid ... if we're confused or uncertain, then so be it ... if we don't know how to say something, then be quiet. None of this is an affront to the Father who loves us and to the Christ in whom we have life, nor to the Holy Spirit who gives us words, and sometimes gives us silence, as well.

More than anything, I try to help such folks get beyond the script so they actually say what's on their mind and heart.

In the course of the conversation, I usually find them relaxing and being more at ease, because that's what honesty is all about ... when our "yes" is a yes and our "no" is a no.

To God be the glory.

Tom Eggebeen, Interim Pastor, Covenant Presbyterian Church, Los Angeles. 

Max De Pree Center for Leadership at Fuller Theological Seminary

Written in response to: http://documents.fuller.edu/news/pubs/tnn/2010_Fall/9z_news_and_notes.asp

Dear Friends,

Just finished reading the latest "Fuller: Theology, News and Notes" and was taken aback by a brief excerpt from Michael Novak's lecture (p.35).

If this quote represents the sum and substance of Novak's work, then I must raise a serious question about the purpose of the De Pree Center for Leadership - leadership of what? The people of God, the faithful in Christ, or the capitalist machine that is clearly revealing the fruits of a lot of bad decisions and flawed logic.

The few remarks printed struck me as nothing more than the same old nonsense we've heard from the Wall Street Journal and such, and to suggest that a "moral case" for capitalism can be made is stunning in its hubris - what with 40 million Americans without health insurance and millions more under-insured, and millions out-or-work, victims of the largest transfer of wealth in history - from the pockets of the many to the hands of the few, with millions of good and decent jobs sent overseas so that the giants of capitalism might improve their bottom line and continue in their media effort to manipulate the American people into believing that all is well, because all is well with the top 2 percent of this nation, who continue to whine, by the way, all the more, about the hardships of taxation and wondering how they'll pay for their next Bentley.

Novak is billed as scholar, yet gives no evidence of any scholarly sensibilities about China. I was stunned at the arrogance of his comments, offering a sadly simplistic analysis of China's development and "it's bet" as he puts. Goodness, it seems to me that we've bet the house and grandmother, too, and we're not faring very well at all; we've lost the house, and grandma has no health insurance. Some bet!

Fortunately,this bizarre lecture-description was bracketed by excerpts on "Walk Humbly with Your God" by Clayton J. Schmit and "Life-Giving Spirit" by Luke Timothy Johnson. How ironic that humility and Spirit would bracket such a bunch of big-money humbug.

Anyway, just thought I'd offer my two-cents' worth.

God's Peace.

Tom Eggebeen, Interim Pastor

Covenant Presbyterian Church

Los Angeles, CA

Merciful God, I pray thee to grant me, if it please thee, ardor to desire thee, diligence to seek thee, wisdom to know thee and skill to speak to the glory of thy name. Amen (Thomas Aquinas)

The Mind, the Face, of American Christianity?

She had forgotten to “fall back” with her clock, what with being a visitor and staying with friends just down the street from the church.

As it turns out, upon moving to Colorado Springs 30 years ago with her husband, joined the First Presbyterian Church there, but then affiliated a few years back with Ted Haggard’s New Life Church, “Where,” she said, “we had those shootings” (no mention of Haggard’s troubles).

The conversation began when she asked, “Are there any evangelical churches nearby?”

I replied, “What do you mean by evangelical? We’re evangelical here.”

She said, “Oh, I mean non-denominational.”

To which I responded, “We have only denominational churches in the area. But, then, all churches are sort of denominational, including the independent churches who do a lot of things alike – sing the same music, and worship pretty much the same.”

She said, “Oh sure, but for me, it’s the Bible. I only believe what the Bible says.”

At which point, I changed the subject.

She joined with a few folks in my office for prayer and then stayed for worship. Afterward, she expressed gratitude for the day, though it took her awhile to adjust to a bulletin and a printed liturgy and hymnals.

I couldn’t help but feel sorrow for her, an otherwise bright-spirited person who loves the LORD, but without any personal awareness of the culture in which she has been living and moving for some years now.

When she retreated to “I only believe what the Bible says,” I knew that we had reached her limit.

How sad for her, and millions like her, who are fed spiritual pabulum by silver-tongued preachers in multi-million dollar buildings with the latest in technology, mindless praise songs – you know, the 7-11 kind – seven words repeated eleven times. And they leave these stainless steel sanctuaries convinced that they “believe what the Bible teaches” and that “denominational churches” are suspicious.

No wonder the confusion in American religion, but don’t for a moment think that I believe our mainline gang is in any better shape, conservative or liberal.

American Christianity, by and large, stopped thinking some time after WW2, or so it seems to me, though I think the antecedents in a Billy Sunday and the bully pulpits of the big-city churches during the Roaring Twenties had already started the full retreat from mindfulness.

The influx of post-WW2 millions into the churches, in quest of stability, home, marriage and the suburban life, guaranteed the church’s material success, but at what price for the faith? Then came McCarthyism, Eisenhower and the insertion of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, and our all-out war against god-less Communism. Then Billy Graham, who took Billy Sunday’s world and mainstreamed it, and before you know it, millions were singing “Just as I Am” and signing up for Jesus, while leaving their minds in the parking lot, only to retrieve it later, untouched by the gospel now held so dearly in their hearts.

All of this, allowing American Christians to embrace the central sin of the Book of James, faith without ethics, or faith without works. Or at least the kind of works envisioned by James – to confront and overcome partiality driven by appearances, boasting about tomorrow and a growing love of riches, little of which seems to bother contemporary Christians in America.

Meanwhile, our seminaries have suffered deeply under the pressure to turn out “leaders” who can compete in the religious marketplace with all the tools and styles inherent in the American entrepreneurial spirit.

All of this, abetted by the rise of the megachurch (safe and comfortable) led by charismatic pastors generally skilled in teaching and preaching but shy on theological discernment – relying a great deal on slogans, mission statements, splendid graphics, inspiring praise music, gripping dramatic presentations and “I believe what the Bible teaches.” Thus able to convince and energize their audiences, but not likely to move them along spiritually,

Mainliners themselves have little to crow about. Conservatives have hunkered down, taking refuge in their various confessions and theological traditions while liberals have jumped onto a variety political bandwagons. Neither group seems particularly interested in what the Bible truly offers in its multifaceted witness to God and what it means to be God’s people, often responding with, “But the confessions say …” or “the latest socio-psychological studies suggest….”

If the visitor from Colorado Springs is, in anyway, the face, or the mind, of American Christianity, we’re in trouble.

Though God will see us through, as God always does, in one way or the other.

But in the meantime, I hope and pray that the voices of reason and compassion, those who love Scripture and tradition, for liberals and conservatives alike, and all those who are willing to work hard at the faith, so that the faith can work hard in our souls, will not surrender the pulpit to mediocrity in the name of success, nor abandon people to the mindless slogans of religious marketeering.

Crystal Cathedral - Some Reflections

Churches come and go - they always have, they always will.The "latest," sooner or later, becomes old hat.

The American church is particularly susceptible to hitching its wagon to the newest star. Yeah, I've done it, too. But the latest word is never the last word - that, and that alone, belongs to something much better, or shall I say, to someone much better - God!

American Christianity prides itself on inventiveness, as if faith were a consumer product to be "improved" by the latest and biggest and glitteryest developer, and to that developer, everyone flocks. But the sun always sets, and there's always someone who turns out the lights for the last time.

Maybe one of these years, American Christianity will grow up, and quit chasing after the pot o' gold at the end of some imaginary rainbow, using nickels and noses as "proof" of some inside information that not even Moses could wiggle out of God (Exodus 33) - in fact, there is no inside information. But we keep believing there is, and we chase after it like mice in some kind of mad experiment, running until we drop. But fear not, we'll soon catch our breath, and someone or something else will come along to revive our spirits with new promises, new techniques, seminars, webinars and DVDs. Though, I wonder - the world turns, and maybe, just maybe, American Christianity is growing up a little bit - less infatuated with proving itself against itself, and all the one-upsmanship of too many pulpits. Maybe so ...

Help My Peace Corps Son Fly to His Sister's Wedding

Electronic Giving to Your Church???

From a good friend and fine writer, The Rev. Bob Orr (ret.) ... on "electronic giving."

Why I won't ever do electronic payments to First Pres for my pledge

Yesterday in the 9:30 am worship there was an effective stewardship minute  delivered by a father who pays his pledge electronically.  While I see the convenience of this for him and for the church, I cannot go down this path. 


Now before you judge me antiquated, let me tell you that I'm a member of a credit union where I pay my bills automatically with monthly deductions from my checking account.  In addition I order things occasionally  on line and pay with my Visa card.  


So why don't I just take the easy step and contribute to the church electrically?   


Here's why - in the order of worship each Sunday there's an offering of tithes and gifts, an offertory, a doxology and a  prayer of dedication.  All of these elements of worship focus on the monetary offering whether it be in cash, coin or check placed in the offering plate as it's passed around the pews, up into the balcony and then carried by the ushers back down the center aisle and placed on the communion table.  For me this is a significant moment of worship.  


When I pledge in the fall I'm given the option of requesting envelopes and can choose the  weekly or monthly option.  It's a conscious choice for me to make my offering every week so that I have a physical act to do at this moment in worship.  It's a  gesture of returning to God that just wouldn't be the same with the press of a computer button.  


Sure paper could be saved and  trees left standing.  Sure the church would get my gift quickly and efficiently.   I could think of my church pledge as a "bill" and pay it along with my gas and electric bill, my car insurance, my groceries but I don't want to think of my pledge that way.  It's not a bill,  It's a gesture I want to make each week, writing that check on Friday or Saturday,  getting it in my shirt pocket each Sunday before heading out to the car and reaching for it at the appropriate time in worship.  


The man giving the stewardship message commented that his young daughter looked at him when the offering plate went by and said "shouldn't we put something in?" which prompted him to tell her that he gave electronically.  I want to put something in the offering each Sunday, not so someone will see me do so, but because I want to see me return some of my means of living to my Lord, to his church and to his people for local and international mission.   Somehow it's more real if I do it this way,  week in and week out.  It's part of my worship.  That's why I won't be giving electronically.