Vocational thoughts.

Thursday night I led a small youth group from a rural church through a series of activities and accompanying discussions about racism, poverty and ministry to urban youth. They offered insights, voiced frustrations, listened to my instructions and (what really impressed me) to each other. The proverbial light bulbs came on. The desire to understand broke out and became contagious. It was cool, you guys. It was cool.

I think that maybe this is work I can devote myself to. I want to steep myself in knowledge about the conditions of our cities and the Church's responsibility to the poor -- and then educate those who are willing to learn. I want to have thoughtful and respectful discussions about our intentions and strategies for ministry. I want to watch the Spirit of God drive Church communities to postures of compassion, humility and effective action.

Let's not get into the Should-we-even-be-sending-30-of-our-brightest-affluent-youth-to-solve-complex-adult-problems? discussion right now. The way I see it, youth leaders (rightly or not) will continue bringing them. And as long as they're here, they might as well be taught.

Until now, I did not think I would get the opportunity to use skills I picked up during undergrad. A defeating and demoralizing student teaching experience convinced me that my philosophy of education was ridiculous and made me question whether I had any skills to offer at all. But now, I am beginning to imagine my strengths and convictions lending themselves beautifully to bridging the chasm between suburban and urban churches.

This is not to boast that my efforts in urban ministry have been effective in the past or that I am suddenly some kind of expert. I admit I am a novice. I struggled to be effective in the past, but learned much as a result of those struggles. One thing I can do, though, is design lessons that leave deep impressions on students. Throughout college, my professors wrote words like "dynamic," "aggressive," "provocative" and "edgy" on my lesson evaluations. "Sometimes too edgy," said Dr. Ager.

This shouldn't surprise you. When I was little, my dad nicknamed me The Instigator because I seemed to find something wickedly pleasurable in getting a rise out of my siblings. And I have been playing Instigator, Devil's Advocate, Exhorter, Soapbox Orator (and other roles) ever since.

"Instigate" -- I love that word. Do you? It means, "someone who deliberately foments trouble." "An inciter, provoker, and firebrand." "To rouse." "To induce, stimulate, encourage, push." "To initiate, start." "To urge, provoke, or incite to some action or course: to instigate the people to revolt."

I realize this definition has some negative connotations, and I don't want you to misunderstand: those who deliberately foment trouble in the Church are deserving of rebuke. (Galatians 5 comes to mind...) But I like the idea of a teacher who rouses, incites and provokes people to action -- in the Hebrews 10:24 sense of the word. "And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds..."

The Triune God instigated the Creation of the Universe and the salvation of souls, even when those souls were unfaithful to Him. Alleluia. Teach me to act in Your righteousness and wisdom as I play the instigator in my family, work place and church community. Amen.

A memo to American Christians

Yesterday, Minnesota congresswoman Michele Bachmann announced that she will run for President in 2012. One statement she made about problem solving in America struck me especially. She said, “More than ever, [Obama’s] Washington is the problem, and the real solutions will come from our businesses, our communities, our schools and the most basic and powerful unit of all — our families.”

Now, I am no student of politics, but I know rhetorical bullshit when I see it. What she is suggesting — that we pride ourselves on an illusion of “wholesome” family values and give ourselves over to a work ethic consistent with the American Dream in order to eradicate deep and complex problems at work in society — is asinine.

I want to say: Obama’s administration isn’t the problem. Michele Bachmann’s administration — should she be elected — won’t be the problem either. Sin is. And the real solutions will come from our selflessness, our devotion to studying and carrying out the teachings of Scripture, our unshakable commitment to serving and sacrificing for our local communities alongside the Church and the most basic and powerful unit of all — the blood of Him who loves us, which purges us from sin and makes atonement for our souls.

American Christians know the solution to the problems. But they want to solve them in a way that doesn’t involve sacrifice. Working out complicated issues requires more effort than pointing fingers at the Left and checking a box for the Right. It requires more than preparing meals at the local Gospel mission. And it requires more than sending a group of 30 teenagers, once a year, to paint a gym and pat some kids on the head in Haiti.

We need to empower and mobilize Church communities who will then empower and mobilize local communities. This is the only way that the sin that infests our businesses, our schools, our governments and ("the most basic and powerful unit of all") our families can be rooted out. And until this comes to pass, I am convinced that one marred man’s policy will be no better than another. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Where Truth is beauty, Bias is Truth's cheap, tasteless bargain-bin second cousin.

Speaker and Musician Affiliated with Wild Goose Arrested for Disturbing the Peace. →

If Mike Morrell & Co. think this bit of PR will draw attendees to The Wild Goose Festival (an ecumenical celebration of art, Christianity and social justice which will take place this summer), they may want to reconsider the type of attendees they would like to see gathered in the first place.

Sure, a spark of controversy in Jesus’ name can and will draw the progressive Christian hipster masses (all in their early 20s, worn copies of The Irresistible Revolution or God’s Economy raised high) out of their cozy coffee shop hides. But I had thought the purpose of the Wild Goose Festival was to draw Christians who disagree on political, social and spiritual issues together in order to dialogue and resolve differences — not to attract like-minded folk in order to celebrate how “right” their opinions are.

This bit of biased PR automatically excludes those who are politically conservative from the discussion (and, in doing so, many members of my parents’ generation). The article also lauds these gentlemen as heroes instead of presenting facts and allowing readers to draw conclusions for themselves. David LaMotte and William Barber are my brothers in faith, but I do not support their actions. I want to hear their explanations, but after reading this article, I feel that my own opinion may be unwelcome.

It seems to me that this article accuses those who disagree with Barber and LaMotte of acting “contrary to the teachings of Christianity.” Quite frankly, it shuts the door to healthy dialogue and difference of opinion within the Church. I want to strongly encourage those working on the Wild Goose Festival to write articles that would spark curiosity and eager conversation rather than draw lines of demarcation between “us” and “them.” After all, if I wanted to attend a festival where everyone thought the same way I did, I would attend Creation instead.

Catfish was pretty good.

I guess it doesn't hurt when your stars are easy on the eyes. But also, I think it achieved its aim to raise questions about how humans connect in a digital age. Here are some questions the movie raised in me.

1) How does the avatar we "fashion" for ourselves contribute to our identity as a whole?

2)Is there anything psychologically taxing about fooling ourselves or others into thinking we are more like our avatar and less like ourselves?

3) Why do we feel some need to turn from people outside of our immediate proximity and toward other Internet avatars to know and be known?

4) What are some healthy guidelines for "being real" online (or connecting with others in a "real" way)?

5) Specifically, in the instance of the woman Angela: how could we, as the Church, have sought out a woman deep in the pit of hopelessness to provide for her need? We ought to begin by identifying her physical, emotional, and/or spiritual need(s).

6) a. If the chief end of man is "to glorify God and enjoy him forever," what is the role of the Internet in this? b. Does putting time into "fashioning" online avatars glorify Him?

(My gut on that last one: no.)

You think; I'll think. And then we will meet with each other face-to-face and discuss.