Real Act

I just read an article citing statistical characteristics of kids who grow up in church and don't leave it when they get older.  This is a huge phenomenon, if you don't know.  Kids grow up going to church, doing good things, then leave either quietly or not so much, or fall into problems that most Christians think they should have been insulated against such as drugs, pregnancy, atheism, etc.

This article cited three main characteristics of those that stay. 1. they have had a conversion experience. Makes sense because those who simply grow up there can talk it and walk it, but it isn't necessarily a real thing for them.  So can they truly be called Christians in the first place?  As the Supertones said, "if you say you used to be a Christian, then you never were."

2. they are equipped to deal with life and not just entertained.  Again makes sense because most contemporary protestant churches and probably many of the nonprotestant bent focus so much on drawing them in that they lose all but the merest shred of content and become nothing more than "clean" social clubs. Which apparently aren't that clean either given the ways in which so many I've known have fallen out.  There's an infamous case (which could be rumor, though I don't doubt it could well be true) where a girl got pregnant in the church I grew up in while playing a youth group game...it resulted in a ban on any games that left us out of sight for more than like 5 minutes...which interestingly enough didn't stop any of those who fell out in my day from doing so...hmmm.

3. they are taught at home.  Again makes sense.  If a family is leaving their children's spiritual education up to professionals and volunteers who see them maybe 3 hours a week...c'mon.  But even still this is not fool-proof and I know several very stable families who did everything right to no avail.

This struck me.  I don't disagree with the article.  Makes sense, right?  But still doesn't seem to hit the nail on the head.  So how many will read that article and try to engineer these traits?  The thing is, I can point to many of my own friends who have had a so-called conversion experience who now reject the faith utterly, even those who came and left it far after their teens.  I know people with advanced religious education who have done the same.  These ought to be "equipped", yeah?  And as I pointed out, even the best families can't control everything.  I've seen the controlling ones who drive kids away and the more moderate who lose them still.

I don't know the answers here.  But I do know I am one of those kids who didn't leave, and I know why.  I did hit a wall in my faith as a teen.  I shouldn't say wall...it was more like a desert.  I had the so-called conversion.  I had the equipping and the family training in the form of hours of formal discipleship and biblical training as well as the fortunate gift of logical training and reason.  But it still all just seemed pointless.  As my questions deepened and broadened, the answers I was getting were mostly insufficient because people who were teaching me didn't understand or couldn't articulate themselves.  I naturally began to explore other things after my own peculiar flavor of poison.  But in my case, God pursued me.  He broke through my reality in seen and unseen ways.  He brought notable people who would speak powerful lasers of truth into me...sometimes just one statement at a critical time.  He sent me dreams...vivid visions.  And he allowed me to break myself so that I would be receptive when he stepped in for a greater revelation.

That was when real conversion happened.  Oh yes, it happened.  But it isn't something that can be engineered in a building with lights and music and retreats.  It is a deeply personal, tragic, painful sort of conversion in which I had nothing left and was given a new hope...a new life.  This is why I say like CS Lewis, I was drug in kicking and screaming.  In reality, I was more carried in after I had passed out and given up, but I was kicking and screaming up to that point in that I would accept nothing less than reality, Truth.

A few years after this, a mentor of mine posed this question that reveals for me how I felt prior and after.  He said, "If you came to a fork in the road and Truth went one way and Jesus went the other, which way would you go?"  My answer was a resounding "Truth".  But here's the trick of the question:  I've found that every time I perceive this dichotomy, it's because I have a false conception of...Jesus.  (I bet you thought I was going to say Truth.  If so, you need to stop drinking your evangelical koolaid.)  You see, every time I went toward what I saw as Truth and left Jesus behind, I'd find a clearer, brighter, realer Jesus standing right around the bend.  I couldn't get away from the guy!  And Thank God!  Because when I was utterly undone, he brought me back.

You see, it isn't a choice.  It isn't a point of decision...though I guess that exists somewhere or for some people.  It's an acceptance of what is.  A giving up to what I couldn't change.  The point of decision for me, has come multiple times after that as I am forced to decide whether my experiences are real or if I was/am psychotic.  But when I think about it, I can't choose otherwise.  There is nihilism, the nothing of no meaning, no caring, no feeling, emptiness of unrequited existence, or there is God who has revealed himself to me in the man Jesus.  Psychotic or not, I'm not going back in the pit...probably couldn't if I tried.  He'd just pull me back out again.

So, is Calvin right?  Am I just Elect and these kids, men, women are not?  I'm not building theology, here, just asking a legitimate question.  Or are they just not at the point yet?

Really, this question isn't what we should focus on.  Rather, what are we going to do about it.  If Calvinistic, we don't know who is elected and have a duty to relieve the suffering of all anyway.  If Evangelical, they're just not ready and no amount of coercing or engineering will change that.  So I suggest we start with one thing.  Be real.

Shed the pomp and hoohah.  Cut the bright lights and fancy marketing tactics. Get off the rockstar pedestals and deeply search.  Find out what's real.  I'll help you.  Come talk to me one on one, I promise I won't pull any punches.  You'll walk away questioning things you never thought you could.  Then, once we're gates of hell, standing in the burning pyre, flayed alive sure of what we believe, we simply act.  In the moment, in the real, act.  Feed, clothe, pray, comfort, support, help, encourage, love, bleed, cry, die in proportion to the faith we each have.

This is Jesus, by the book, man.

Jesus Prayer

It's been a long time since I've blogged.  This is because I've entered the busiest season for me.  This one was made more busy by a certain conglomeration of circumstances: family, work, illness  Not the least of which was surgery on myself.

But now I am back.  I'm still in the throes of activity, but find a spare moment.  Honestly, there's not much to tell, since I've been preoccupied there hasn't been much time for examination.  Perhaps this is a good thing.

Two things I have noticed.  One, I'm developing a fondness for Canada caused by a long spell of recovery in which I became fascinated with Canadian TV.  While this is silly, it's worth noting since I previously viewed it as pretty much a frozen wilderness with a fringe of basically American culture.  While obviously TV isn't a full or necessarily accurate picture, it is a window, and a careful observer (which I consider myself) can pick out elements that transcend the showbiz of even educational TV.  This is what has led to the fondness.

The second thing of note is the Jesus Prayer.  As usual, I won't quote it, go look it up (can't make it that easy; knowledge without even 30 seconds of effort is devoid of value.)  It's basically one line, packed full of meaning, said repeatedly as a means of focusing our attention.

I've tried various forms of discipline in the past. They work for a bit, and then the newness wears off and they become hollow.  Some people may find them more valuable, but for me they fade in favor of ever more real interaction.  But lately, this prayer has been good.  It has helped me stave off wandering thoughts, and quiet my mind.  This is a big problem for someone like me whose mind wanders leagues afield and at the pace of an overstimulated ferret.

But most notable is that while I was prepping for surgery in which they would essentially hollow out my face from the inside...not a pretty prospect...I kept saying this prayer.  It was easy enough to remember and pick right back up after an interruption.  As I was being put under, it was my last thought...I wonder if it might have even become audible as I was fading.  But then most astonishing to me was that it was my first thought upon regaining the slightest bit of consciousness.  Almost as if it had been rolling through my subconscious mind the entire time. 

Of course I can't say that to be the case as I was totally unaware of it.  But I was happy to find that my thoughts were not of monkeys wildly gesticulating behind the nurses or other such half-dreamed impressions.  Instead it was this one solid line of truth echoing through my reality.  Even when I could least control my mind, this razor sharp prayer cut through and remained strong.

Thank God, and thank all the saints who crowd around me whispering this line from across the centuries.

Speak

Today as I was reading George MacDonald, a scene leapt off the page and pierced me right through.  I could quote it, but it wouldn't possibly have the same effect as when it happened, so I won't bother.

Let me start at the beginning.  I'm reading At the Back of the North Wind.  From the very first, the description of the North Wind was remarkably like a sort of person I envisioned in a story I was writing once before.  It was not so much a story, but a vision that seemed to want telling.  Sort of like CS Lewis' image of Aslan that sparked the Narnia series.  Of course I didn't know about Aslan and Narnia at the time. 

Anyway, I tried to write a story about it, but the story wouldn't carry.  It was really just this impression of a person.  It's uncanny that more than a hundred years before, George MacDonald wrote a story about a character who looks nearly exactly as the one I saw.  But muses and all...

So today I read a scene where North Wind says something that I very nearly said verbatim last year.  Lest you think it's a common phrase that would naturally repeat, I'll tell you more.  In the book, North Wind is leading Diamond (the child) across the high ledges of a cathedral.  He's afraid he'll fall and she chastises him for not trusting her.  He tells her he's not trusting because he may falter.  And she replies that even if he fell and she lost her grip, she'd be after him such that she'd catch him before he hit the ground.  And last year as my Goddaughter was afraid of falling out of a boat, I assured her that if she began to fall out, I'd be in the water before she got wet.

But this is only the precursor.  A sign post that had me taking notice so I wouldn't miss what was coming.  In this same scene, the words then jumped out as Diamond and North Wind talked of previously being higher and unafraid, but now being afraid of falling into the deep empty church.  The lines were as if spoken to me.  I know what they mean and it is beyond the story.  This is exactly my apprehension of late.

But then North Wind leaves Diamond to make his way on his own, saying "Come after me".  He is afraid, but then she blows a gentle puff in his face and he draws strength and moves forward.  The blowing increases always gentle, but fortified with strength, and steadily infuses him as he moves.  Right here is where it pierced like an icicle of light right into my brain.  My eyes welled and overflowed.  God was speaking these familiar words directly to me in that moment.  I know the voice.  I know the reaction.  Call it crazy if you want, but it happened.  It's not the first time.

This can be confirmed because it is timely.  As I face trepidating circumstances, struggles with my place in the Kingdom, concerns over being alone, comes this necessary and direct comfort speaking to all of them perfectly and deeply.  I don't expect you to understand, and I don't seek your approval or acknowledgement.  Call me heretic even.  This was for me.  God speaks.  Not just through some systematized list of methods, not even through one collection of writings.  He speaks whenever and however He chooses, to whomever He chooses.  And His voice is unmistakable. 

I go no further than this.  But no less far.

I don't know where or how, but I am linked to George and Jack and Henry and Theresa and Francesco.  And I hear you God.  I am coming after you across the buttresses and ledges and spires.  I won't fear falling, nor the empty church below.  My place is in your wind, whipping full around me.  Help me never forget.

Tribal Christianity

If you read this blog, you'll know that I often refer to the natural grouping of humanity as the tribe.  This is not my idea.  It's documented.  Birds form flocks, wolves form packs, humans form tribes.

Like anything, tribal tendencies can be perverted and have been blamed for many of the conflicts in Africa.  So much so that many have called for conscious abandonment of tribalism.  As an aside, I think this is a mistake.  We can't deny what we were made to be.  The conflicts come because the tribal balance was artificially disrupted by the European colonization of these places which drew national lines right through ancient tribal holdings irrespective of their boundaries and told all the people to grow up and be Western.  But that's not my point.

My point is that Christianity is a restoration of things.  As such, it is inherently tribal.  The lifestyle of Jesus and the organization of the early church are very much tribal.  People are given an identity, which is permanent and personal.  They aren't members of...they ARE something.  Membership implies that you join and therefore can unjoin.  It's an affiliation that one chooses.  Tribal belonging is who you are.  You ARE this thing.  It is part of you and you are part of it.  It is less what it is without you, and you are not all you are without it.

It has an identity.  The tribe is about something.  People of that tribe look a certain way, live a certain way, and believe certain things about themselves and the world because they are of that tribe.  Yet the tribe is formed because the people share these things.  The identity is the lifestyle, and the reverse.  (Are you catching the organic bidirectional synergy here?)

They both have the same type of government.  Christianity is organized under leaders who both have a divine appointment, and are confirmed by the community.  This may not be your understanding from your version of Christianity, but research the descriptions of the early church in the Bible and you'll see.  "elders" (your translation may say "Bishops", but that term implies a meaning not in the original) are people God has given an ability to lead, usually experienced and older than the headstrong young.  But they aren't self-appointed.  The tribe selects and confirms them through their natural respect of these people.  Those who are elders will be and those who are not will not be.  No one campaigns for it.  See the synergy again?  A council of elders helps guide the group and everyone participates in the government of the group as they have ability.

Many tribes are run the same way.  Often even calling them elders!  You may have romanticized ideas of tribal kings and chiefs and such, but this is far less the fact than the council of guiders.  Plus in root tribal society, there are usually no laws as we know them.  People are guided by what is "right" and "wrongness" is rejected.  They don't need laws because they all know naturally.  In cases of dispute there are procedures to resolve it, or a split may occur.  Which leads to the next way Christianity is tribal.

Tribes are not always homogeneous.  Within tribes there are bands, within bands, families.  Tribes themselves may sit within nations of related or federated tribes.  Examples include the Iroquois, the Five Civilized Tribes, and the Sioux Nation...to name a few from the US (which I'm most familiar with).  Incidentally, the US governmental system of states and congress was largely patterned after the Iroquois who consulted at the Continental Congress, albeit Westernized with Greek and Roman ideas which the Iroquois were against.  Really...look it up.

So it is no surprise that there might be 41,000 versions of Christianity across the world.  One nation/faith with many tribes/denominations which are full of bands/local churches.  Each may vary in their customs, style, and coping strategies, but they are part of the one nation of God.

I could go on and on about how there is allowance in tribes for geographic and environmental adaptation just as Christianity has diverged and adapted to various cultures and situations, how typical roles in the tribe equate to spiritual gifts described in the Bible, how even the conflicts among Christian groups and other faiths mirror tribal conflicts.  But this is enough to chew on for now.

I encourage you to look it up.  Research the organization of ancient Israel, American tribes, and other tribal societies.  Also check the organization of the early church.  Read the Biblical sources, check the Greek, look at extra-Biblical writings from the same period as the Bible, compare anthropological evidence. Use credible sources and get a diversity of opinions.  I bet you'll come to the same conclusion.

And that makes perfect sense if Christianity is a restoration of the way things were intended to be.  The closer people live to how things were originally intended, the more they should look similar, right?

The next question is of course, what should this understanding mean to us?  But I'll save that for later.

41,000

There are an estimated 41,000 Christian denominations.  This varies depending on how you count, but lower numbers are around 33,000.  Wow.  That's a lot.  And I'm sure this doesn't pick up many 'flavors'  and styles within denominations.

The fact that there are so many doesn't really concern me.  Humans are a persnickity people who love to lump and split and join and faction.  Especially with things so dear to our hearts, like sports teams, and colleges, and fashion styles, landscaping, music, and religion.  I believe this to be a natural, though often perverted and at times over active tendency based in our genetic tribalism.  I've said it before; wolves have packs, birds have flocks, humans have tribes.  Best to simply accept it and move on.

But anyway, the thing that concerns me is what happens amongst Christians...they tend to assume people are on their side.  I can't tell you how many times I've talked to someone who finds out I'm a Christian who then assumes I believe so many things that they associate with it.  When statistically, I'm far less likely to believe what they do.  Of course it would be more prudent to discover a little more about my beliefs before getting into controversial topics, or simply avoid them altogether, but prudence is not a popular quality, nor is logic taught widely enough to achieve the same effect simply from efficiency.

So why do so many people automatically assume I am of their particular bent in what is truthfully quite a diverse pool?  Some of it is probably that people don't really encounter that many of the denominations in their lives.  Many are very small and regionalized, so it's a much smaller set of groups people encounter.  But even if there were only five major groups (I believe most people encounter far more than that) the beliefs could be different enough to teach us we may not be talking to someone who believes like we do.

So then there's training.  Most people really only know one or two in any depth.  Even if they've encountered others.  And if we know more, we're usually taught they are wrong.  This isn't usually the actual teaching, nor the reason the denominations split.  As CS Lewis said, those at the center of the wheel are much closer together than those at the end of the spokes.  If you research it, you'll find it is usually a very minor point of order or belief that caused the split.  Then culture and human nature did the rest.

But to return to the point, people may assume I believe like them, because I wouldn't be where they are, and friendly, if I didn't.  Or else, I've just confessed I do (in their mind) by the use of the term Christian, which they take to mean their version of it (which could be the only version they know).

Then some of it may be due to the fact that we don't talk about it in America.  I truthfully talked more publicly about my faith, and to a much more receptive audience, I might add, in Japan.  Coming from a pluralistic background, and in the safety of their decidedly non-Christian culture, my beliefs were no threat to them.  I was in no danger of wrecking their country with my weird ways.  So they could be genuinely curious and respectful.  I don't know about other countries, but I imagine other cultures range up and down the spectrum of tolerance from my two experiences.

Anyway, we don't talk about religion much in America, so it's almost a cagey thing to even bring up...even in a church.  We aren't used to explaining our beliefs or talking openly about them.  So when someone finds a 'clue' that I might share their beliefs, they drop guard and assume without thinking about the reality.

To branch out a bit, I'm convinced that many people abandon the term Christian altogether for more or less the same reasons.  Some don't want to be associated with the notion they have in their head of one denomination or experience when really their beliefs are very close to many other types of Christianity.  Some don't want others to think they're "one of those people" because of the negative connotation they bring to it.

So doesn't one of these denominations have to be right? How can I be so loose about it?  Well, sure, Truth, by definition can't be pluralistic.  But we're talking about human systems here.  At the root of Christianity there are some basic tenets that most groups will align on.  For one, they all center on the man Jesus.  They may differ on exactly who he was or what he did, but those distinctions are for the individual to root out.  We also all pretty much follow the same moral code...which incidentally we share with every other major world religion because (here's a secret), it wasn't created by Jesus.  It's innate to all humans.  The Bible even talks about this.  The rest is mostly just style, culture, and opinion.

Of course, ruling out all the distinctions for a watery ecumenical faith is not good either.  I'm simply suggesting we, first of all, know what we believe and recognize it as part of a wondrous diversity.  The God who could generate such a world of lifeforms could certainly reflect some diversity in music style and opinion.  Secondly, don't be afraid to explain your beliefs...which is tied to my third point: don't assume others believe the same way.  Go ahead and investigate and decide what's right for yourself.  Then stick to it.  But just because I go to certain place or say a certain thing, doesn't mean I'm also number 31,234...I could just as well be 31,235, or even 14,657!  And my version may just have an answer for the burning problem you want to talk about.

Heat

I have a passion, a fire.  My temperament is this way.  I control it well and don't lose my temper often, but I am excitable and quickly heat up about things, good and bad.  I have a hard time letting an injustice go unaddressed.

I have in the past been quite angry...not in the uncontrolled anger management sense, but in the seething beneath the surface, fiery oratory sort of sense.  I have been called a match: quick to fire up at the least abrasion, but short lived and relatively harmless.  I would quickly pop off on people.  Tell them what I thought.  Call them out.  Politely, but directly.  In nicer times, I could frame it as a joke and lay some low with pointed humor that accomplished the same thing as the angry version, but with less direct confrontation.  It has served me well and I took it as a gift.

Of course any gift can be perverted, and so I took my tendency to pop off or become quickly agitated.  I even thought this heat inside was to be used to call crusade for good.  To call out injustice and wrongness.  I wouldn't stand for it and everyone needed to know that they couldn't get away with that junk around me because I'd call it right out in front of everyone.

But lately, I've begun to wonder if this is not such a gift.  I'm not sure.  Really.  I have just begun to see that maybe there is virtue in quietly handling the wrongs, perhaps even letting people go their own way.  Perhaps not always...there may well be a time to stand up and call it out.  But maybe there is a time for noticing without mentioning.

Previously I viewed this as tolerating what shouldn't be tolerated.  As a disservice to the one I refrained from speaking to.  After all, Truth must shine forth, and we have a duty and calling to hack away at the darkness.

Don't get me wrong, I've never attacked people like many legalists do.  My crusades are about grace and forgiveness.  But fuelled with a blazing angry passion.

The thing is, it's really hard to win.  I took this as confirmation that the world was corrupt.  As in the Mission, I was DeNiro's reformed conquistador, ready to shed blood, even my own in defense of what was right.  I'd rather stand up and take a blow to the face for speaking out than sit by and let a wrong go.  It was not my job to win...just to fight.

But now, I'm seeing a lovely grace, an almost asian-master sort of goodness, in letting things flow.  Perhaps speaking boldly out is not always the way to go.  Perhaps there is collateral damage that could be spared.  Perhaps there is something to a more pacific attitude.  Perhaps this is not over-tolerance, a moopy spine.  Certainly it could be, just as my passion could be perverted to plain anger and hate.  But maybe this is a time for me to learn how to be meek in the truest sense.

Jesus did speak boldly.  He did enrage and agitate and even physically overturn.  But he also nurtured and helped and loved in a soft and tender way.

Perhaps the Greystokian animalistic nobility, the chivalric gentle warrior, is not God's ideal.  Perhaps it is far less inspiring.  Far more suffering (in the old sense).  Far more humble (in the old sense of lowly).

Please teach me the answer, Jesus.  What am I to learn from you in this yoke?  Help me to be pliable and open to you.  I fear I will lose my strength, my identity, and I don't know how else to be.  But I must lose mine to gain yours and I will be what you make me.

Holiness

It's been a while since I've posted anything.  After my last upheaval, which is not yet resolved by the way, there has been a lull.  A peace.  Not that I've been perfectly content or that things have stopped forming in me, but that I have been resting somewhat.  My mind has been given a break.  And since this blog is really a way for me to process my own journey, there hasn't been much to tell.

But one thing that has marked this time has been a desire for holiness.  A set-apart-ness.  This folds in righteousness, goodness, and all other virtues.  But mostly it has been a soft glowing desire for true holiness.  Like an old fire embering and pushing out the best kind of heat and a soft pulsing glow.  And it is old in me, ready to consume new dross and to blaze in the world on good fuel.  But not right now. 

Now is a stoking I think.  Long-tolerated sins are becoming known to me.  Strong sinewy flaws deep in my being are exposed.  I am examining the flex and stretch of the fibers; how they move and where they connect.

I am returning to basic disciplines, which are so easily overstepped, remembering old lessons and heroes, mentors, models.  This is more than a little fuelled by the election of a new pope...a Jesuit who chose the name Francis...the first, no less.  The first from the New World...the far west.  A man of the people who is admirably humble.

While I am not Catholic for several reasons, I have great respect for them as the preservers of our Christian history.  The ones to whom it has been entrusted.  The root institution from which all our other reformed, protestant, revertist, evangelical, charismatic, and every other type are intimately tied.  While the branches and changes have often been necessary and the Catholic church has been guilty of gross errors and injustices, are we not all guilty and all forgiven?  I personally can't disrespect them simply because my teachers and mentors have many been of or close to this denomination and this denomination has preserved their teaching so that I can learn from them even though centuries stand between us.

In that, I have respected Jesuits for their practicality and justice.  For their mission to the world's end even in deadly and unknown times and places.  And for their prayer through action.  At one time I considered becoming as closely aligned with them as I could as a non Catholic.

Then there is Francis.  One of my teachers and a heart which I greatly identify with and aspire to.  He has inspired me so much so that many life decisions were the direct result of following his ways applied in my life.

And this pope embodies them both.  And to top it all, a thing I will never forget, him humbly bowing before the world and asking for prayer.  This cemented in my mind that this is who I want to be.  Let all else fall off if my life can exude this humilty.

God, may it mark a permanent change in me.  Away with the course, brash, dirty, mean parts of me.  Let the peace and gentleness you instill in my deepest heart radiate through my mind, body, mouth, and into my life.