Monday, July 31, 2017

Gena Thomas & A Smoldering Wick

Gena Thomas served as a missionary in northern Mexico for over four years with her husband, Andrew. While there, the couple founded and managed El Buho, a coffee shop ministry that still serves the town of Hidalgo. Gena holds a Masters Degree in International Development. Her book, A Smoldering Wick, published in June 2016, aims to teach three things: a theory of biblical justice rather than American charity; a theory of humility learned from past mistakes; and a practice of development principles adapted for Short Term Missions (STMs.).

Gena, you write that charity doesn't equal empowerment. "Justice requires relationship. Charity doesn't." Can you expand on that thought?


Charity, as we know it, is a top-down approach to poverty. Essentially, those who ‘have’ give tangible items to those who don’t have. There is an automatic power-play in the process. The dominance of the giver is automated, while the subordination of the receiver is inherent in the process. Justice, on the other hand, equals out the power transfer. Justice, from the two Hebrew words Tzedakah and Mishpat, are defined by a life of right relationship & giving someone what (s)he is due. Therefore, biblically speaking, relationship is a crucial piece of administering justice. In the framework of approaching poverty through justice, we see that the label ‘giver’ and ‘receiver’ must be applied to both sides of the exchange. Empowerment comes from both seeing our own strengths and leaning on our brothers and sisters in Christ for our weaknesses. This must start happening from Christian Westerners doing “mission” on foreign soil. In most cases, Westerners are automatically seen as the haves while the non-Westerners are seen as the have-nots. The reality is that each person is rich and poor.


You observe that, in terms of Short Term Mission trips, from a spiritual perspective, salvation equals relief But sanctification equals development, which requires deeper relationships. Can you talk about this?

When referring to development principles, there is a spectrum: relief, rehabilitation, and development. Relief is what happens right after a major catastrophe. This would include making sure that people can survive. Immediate needs–water, food, shelter–are met. Then comes rehabilitation which would be meeting short-term needs (though the definition of “short” is relative to the disaster). This may include a monthly shelter or even a refugee camp. Development happens when those who were affected by the disaster can rebuild their lives prior to the disaster. That is, development happens when people are back to being self-sufficient. One of the easiest way to do damage is to give relief to a community when they need rehabilitation or development. Relief always has an expiration date. The longer it is in place, the more likely negative dependency affects the community.

From a spiritual perspective, I see relief is what happened to us when we were wrecked with the depravity of human nature and we accept Christ as our Redeemer. Sanctification is something that happens over a longer period of time, where we learn to trust Christ and fully embrace His upside-down kingdom. I guess we could add that development is more like discipleship than it is praying the salvation prayer. Discipleship/sanctification requires relationship with other believers for us to more fully understand the gospel and how it affects our lives and our world. I think most of the time, short-term mission trips are marketed as if they are doing discipleship or ‘development’ when in actuality, they are, at most, doing ‘spiritual relief’ in places that don’t need said relief.


You examine the phrase “THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD, GO I.” That it actually “implies we are somehow superior because a particular crisis passed us by.” Ultimately leading to thinking if you’re sick or poor, it’s your own fault. And the irony of “PULLING YOURSELF UP BY YOUR OWN BOOTSTRAPS.” Leading to a belief that “GOD HELPS THOSE WHO HELP THEMSELVES.” You ask a great question: “Really, did you do that spiritually? Did you save yourself?” Would you further explain or offer additional insight?



This is a phrase I heard so often working in crisis ministry. It always made me sad to think the person saying that really felt like God’s grace worked that way. I realize that it’s just a saying that most people don’t think about, but words are powerful, and the phrase leads us to believe that crisis equates to people being outside of God’s will or God’s grace. Clearly, that is not what the Bible says when we think about the book of Job, or the trials and tribulations that every person of faith goes through. Jesus doesn’t promise we won’t have suffering, in fact, he tells us the opposite. So, if Jesus says that suffering will be part of our lives, we cannot allow such phrases to dismantle that truth. In my opinion, this type of phrase gives way to the prosperity gospel that says life is grand and anyone who suffers is outside of God’s desire to make them prosperous. This false gospel is running rampant in American culture, and sadly, is being exported to the world. It is not biblical. God’s grace is bigger than our circumstances. If we don’t believe that, our faith will crumble when we walk one of life’s many low valleys. I believe the gospel walks with us through those valleys and speaks to us there. I believe the gospel has much to say to those who suffer, to those who are in pain; and I believe those of us who ‘have’ much have much to learn from those who suffer and maintain a strong relationship with Jesus Christ.

You mention “numbers lust,” as in “we fed 1,000 people today.” In contrast to “we hung out with and developed relationships with a dozen people today.” Would you care to comment further on the dynamic between numbers lust vs. developing relationships on STM trips?

As Westerners, we are very quantitative by culture. We use numbers and data for EVERYTHING. So much so that most of us don’t know what qualitative analysis is. We love to measure effectiveness, but usually success is measured by higher numbers, not deeper relationships. In their book, When Helping Hurts, where the quote comes from, Corbett & Fikkert discuss how difficult it would be for us to return to our American church and measure our successful mission trip by saying “We hung out with and developed relationships with a dozen people today.” We lust after big numbers: numbers that tell us we are effective; numbers that prove our ministry works; numbers that allow our stakeholders to sign off on another project. It’s a cultural sin that most of us are blind to. Unfortunately, it’s a sin that often harms receiving communities we ‘serve’ as we do our best to check things off our list so we can tell our congregations what all we did.


Early on in your book, you mention that salvation is a holistic completeness, not a one-time event. Can you explain further?


This is tough to explain. In Q2, I talk about ‘salvation’ in the way most people think of it: praying the sinner’s prayer. Without trying to confuse anyone, I must first admit that I lack the right words to describe this issue, and may have used the word ‘salvation’ interchangeably throughout the book. I do believe that we often diminish salvation to a one-time event, rather than seeing it as something that happens over time. A more holistic look at salvation would encompass spiritual relief, rehabilitation, and development. In so many ways, we look for finite methods of measuring concepts that are immeasurable. I understand why people say ‘salvation’ as a way to define the first step of repentance and acceptance of God’s kingdom. But the Greek word Soteria involves a present salvation as well as a future inheritance within the eternal kingdom. Therefore, salvation is present and future; here and not yet.


I thought the way you defined how Jesus looked at success (as loving your neighbor and loving God) was interesting. How did you reach that conclusion?

In Matthew 22:37, Jesus answers the question about what is the greatest commandment. He says, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” When Jesus was tempted in the desert by Satan (Matthew 4), Satan was trying to convince Jesus to define success differently. He was trying to persuade Jesus that the ultimate success is accomplished by possessing all the kingdoms of the world (v. 8-9). But Jesus knew better. He knew that that is the ultimate temptation of success, but that earthly glory and power do not define success. Over and over again in Jesus’ life he is proving that there is a higher metric of success than our earthly one. Throughout the biblical narrative, it is clear that when human beings learn to really love God and really love others the Gospel comes alive on the earth. We must be about loving God and loving neighbor, and do our best to live grounded in the good news that those two are inseparable. And that on those two all the Law and the Prophets hang -- which means that the fulfillment of the laws, the way to become a peculiar and set-apart people happens when we follow these two commands. In today’s jargon, this ‘fulfillment of the law’ is the definition of success. 


You write, “Wisdom doesn’t even start until we fear God.” And until that happens we can wind up spreading the wrong kind of knowledge, coming from our own wisdom. Can you elaborate on that?



In the book, I discuss the concept of the Leviathan, which is found in several passages of the Bible, but I discuss Job’s take on it. This has always been such a compelling, mystical section of the story to me. Whether one believes this beast to be real or to be imaginary, the narrative seems to clearly point to the idea that if there were such a giant sea beast, a Loch Ness monster, Kraken, or any other mystical creature, that can ‘whip the sea like you’d whip an egg into batter’ that God is EVEN bigger and stronger (Job 41, MSG). “If you can’t hold your own against his glowering visage, how, then, do you expect to stand up to me? Who could confront me and get by with it? I’m in charge of all this—I run this universe!” In the context of Job’s very challenging life story, this is a crucial piece: it’s only when Job awakens to this reality that he says, “I’ve uttered things too wonderful for me.” Not until he acknowledges God’s bigness can he see his own mistaken theology that said God is bad because I am suffering. In my own life, especially in the midst of family poverty, I feel as though I did the same thing. I believed God to be wrong/bad/unjust because I was suffering. The story of the Leviathan reminds me not to think that way.

In our American culture where we are encouraged to reach for independence and individualism, we cannot forget as Christians that there is still a God that sits on the throne. There is still an Almighty God who will challenge our individual beliefs and our individual successes and our individualized way of looking at scripture. I don’t think that all fear is unhealthy. I will advocate till I die that we cannot go around living in 100% total fear of God, because that is no way to have a relationship. But there is a balance that should be found in this concept. God is our friend, he is our lover, he is our brother, but he is also our King. I think too often we elevate our own education, experience, and platforms as our counterfeit kings – as our reasoning behind why we get to have a microphone and tell the world what we think. But in the end, opinions are not the Word. They are not the Gospel.


You include a quote from Doug Birdsall “Does the church in America have the humility to learn from us (native peoples)? Or do they consider themselves to be the world’s teacher?” Why is that question so important?


This question is raw. It took a lot of trust building and relationship building for Doug to get to a place where a native pastor would ask him such a bold question. Most Western church leaders who go on mission trips do not have this type of relationship with the native church leaders. I think that most native church leaders have this question, they just don’t voice it. This is so important because unfortunately what we often do in missions is take the stance of a colonizer. We act as though we are the world’s teacher, often unconsciously. We think that our Westernized version of the gospel is the purest form of the gospel. We assume we know more than natives do on theology, on culture, and on the best way to be a Christian. Without humility in these circumstances, we will continue to spread a false gospel that says, ‘We Westerners know it all, and without us you won’t get very far.’ Our pride often precedes us before we step foot in another culture. We must recognize this, and do all we can to humbly learn from our global brothers and sisters. Short-term missions will never be effective when pride is the M.O. (whether conscious or not).

You also quote Laurel Fiorelli on creating community. She says, “If we mistake a worldly community for God’s true kingdom come, we miss out on the beautiful opportunity to walk closer to God and hear Him speak to us through true community.” You go on to mention Dietrich Bonhoeffer warning us not to mistake short term bliss for real life’s everyday struggle. And then you say that “real Shalom community can only exist if it is built on the love of Christ.” How do we get there?


Laurel’s full quote is: “Easy-to-make friends and easy-to-talk-to neighbors and easy-to-click-the-donate-button gifts to our worldwide ‘community’ are a cheaper version of God’s true vision for community. If we mistake a worldly community for God’s true kingdom come, we miss out on the beautiful opportunity to walk closer to God and hear Him speak to us through true community.”

Wow. This is a great question. One that I think I’ll spend my whole life trying to figure out. I think the first step is recognizing that there is a counterfeit community. In The Screwtape Letters, Screwtape tells Wormwood, his demon nephew, that there will be both benevolence and malice in his patient’s soul. “The great thing is to direct the malice to his immediate neighbors whom he meets every day and to thrust his benevolence out to the remote circumference, to people he does not know. The malice thus becomes wholly real and the benevolence largely imaginary.
There is a counterfeit community, a community that is out there that we can pretend is our real community. I would say that those who travel to orphanages a lot on missions trips but are never involved in serving the vulnerable children in their own community are unaware that what they are often doing is spreading their benevolence to the remote circumference. I am not saying people should never go on short term mission trips to orphanages, but I do firmly believe that a good majority of those trips do much more harm than they do good.

Step two is to start to form authentic community where you do live. I don’t think this always has to be a small group, but I think church small groups are a good start in this direction. Real community must be built on the messy, justice-minded love of Christ. The love of Christ is not clean and clear. It’s messy and beautiful and involves vulnerability, authenticity, and speaking truth to each other. 
Being accountable to friends and/or a community is another step in the right direction. In chapter 5 of my book, I have specific questions that accountability partners can ask each other in order to go deeper in their relationship.

I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts on ways we can build up authentic community. While I think the biblical idea of church was meant to do this, I unfortunately don’t think we see that much in Western churches that are set up for once-a-week entertaining ‘experiences’ rather than being in-depth community-building gatherings.


Gena, you mention “We need to encourage our missionaries to be honest,” getting beyond telling only “salvation stories.” And you say, “Charity pats us on the back. Justice sometimes kicks us in the knees.” Can you explain the importance of justice in mission work?


Unfortunately, many missionaries feel like they have to hide certain aspects of their lives. For example, if they speak out politically against where their supporters stand politically, they could lose their support. If they tell their supporters they went on vacation, they often get flack from them rather than supporters rejoicing in the missionary’s chance to Sabbath. I remember one point where we were concerned we’d get funding revoked because it took longer for us to reach certain milestones that we had told our supporters we were going to reach by a certain time. There are so many variables on the field, and having flexible supporters who want to know the truth not as authoritative elders, but as supportive friends is crucial to a missionary’s support system. Charity is a framework in which missionaries have to prove to supporters through numeric metrics that they are accomplishing what the supporters expect them to accomplish. Justice, a life of right relationship, is a completely different set of metrics.

A justice framework allows missionaries to build relationships and go deeper with their local community. That would be the whole foundation on which any ministry was built. Justice within the supporters’ framework would give the missionary room to say: hey this is working really well, and this is working horribly. Rather than having to tell only the good or only the bad (I talk about telling the whole story in chapter 7) in order to gain more support, the missionary could simple tell the balanced truth and their honesty wouldn’t frighten their supporters. Accountability would be so much stronger between missionaries and their sending churches if this were the case. So that when it’s time for supporters or a missions pastor from the sending church to hold the missionary truly accountable, that accountability will be received well.


You quote Muhammad Yunus: “When the poor have the ability to control their own destinies, they can achieve a lot more a lot faster.” Can you explain what Yunus was getting at?


In chapter 9, you can find a typology of participation chart. That chart can explain how self-mobilization is the ultimate goal for participation. When the economic poor are self-mobilized to participate in more economic opportunities, the change that happens in their lives is much more likely to be sustainable. This is called participatory development. In general, as human beings, when we participate in our development: whether intellectual, spiritual, or economic, we will sustain our development and achieve a lot more, a lot faster.


After offering a few templates for guiding group development of mission work, you mention “We must actively align ourselves with justice and remind ourselves that every tool we use for the sake of the gospel must somehow lead us to a deeper relationship with people, otherwise it is futile.” Can you elaborate?


The Hebrew word for justice is defined as a life of right relationship. I think if we look at short-term missions as means to the end of a built school, a compassionate reputation, a finished project, a resume full of numbers of things we’ve done, it will never go beyond a smoldering wick. But, if we look at short-term missions as a means to the end of forming deep and meaningful relationships with our global brothers and sisters, then I believe STMs can be a strong fire that brings light and warmth to this world. So any tools we use for more ‘effective’ STMs have to be used with the end goal of justice in mind, not the end goal of charity. Tools can build up or they can tear down. How we use them is critical to bringing justice to the earth.

 

Is there anything else you’d like to mention?


I’d love to connect with people on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @genaLthomas and I’d be stoked for others to join the monthly Twitter chat on missions under the hashtag #JustMissions that happens the first Thursday of every month at 1 p.m. ET. We talk deeply about missions and love to sharpen each other there.

My website is www.genathomas.com

I often write for Missio Alliance at http://www.missioalliance.org/author/gena-thomas/

You can find my book at Amazon


Monday, July 24, 2017

Flee, Be Silent, Pray: A Review

Ed Cyzewski's latest book is subtitled An Anxious Evangelical Finds Peace with God Through Contemplative Prayer. But even if you don't have an Evangelical background, his book is relevant, revealing and refreshing.

Early on, Cyzewski describes two places in the Bible where God (the Father) speaks directly to Jesus. At the time Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist (at the start of his ministry) and when Jesus was transfigured, standing with Elijah and Moses. 

Both times God emphasized his love and affirmation, saying "This is my son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

Cyzewski says we need to receive this same message to grow spiritually; to know that God loves us, unconditionally.

Cyzewski breaks down the Father's message to his son:

You are my child.
Whom I love.
With you I am well pleased.

Cyzewski says it's important to receive this because we can't give away to others what we don't have.

And through contemplative prayer we learn to be in the present moment with God.

It seems like these truths would lead Christians to a profound unity and love of each other and others, but Cyzewski says instead, "it's far safer to treat people who disagree with you as threats, dangers and heretical outsiders."

This leads to "a perfect storm for anxious religious people who are always trying to outdo each other in their commitment and purity...We are so eager to be on fire for God, to make extreme sacrifices for God and to prove without using the word 'prove' that we are holy and worthy of Jesus' ultimate sacrifice on the cross."

Cyzewski suggests that much of the answer to relieving this spiritual anxiety lies in Contemplative (Centering) Prayer.

When prayer isn't working, Evangelicals seem to think it's because there must be something wrong with them. They're focused on results and progress. But Contemplative Prayer teaches that God's love is always there and very little is dependent upon us. 

Cyzewski quotes Francois Fenelon: "How can you grow in maturity if you are always seeking the consolation of feeling the presence of God?" 

Contemplative Prayer begins by acknowledging God is present. It pulls us away from striving, fear and defending boundaries, says Cyzweski. It focuses on God's presence.

So what is Contemplative (Centering) Prayer?

Cyzewski sites a Catholic tradition of Contemplative Prayer stemming from the Desert Fathers & Mothers, monks who fled to the desert to seek God. Most recently Thomas Keating, Richard Rohr, Thomas Merton and Brennan Manning were/are modern-day advocates.

At it's core, Centering Prayer consists of entering into God's presence by sitting down for 20 minutes or so, in a comfortable, upright position, closing your eyes and silently repeating a word that reminds you of a character of God (i.e. love, grace, mercy, forgiveness). When distractions come, and they will, you gently come back to repeating the word you have chosen.

It's simplicity is a bit deceiving. Cyzewski notes his own journey to remain silent wasn't easy. To sit still and enter into the presence of God, letting Centering Prayer do its work.

Other than a willingness to set aside the time, there really isn't a lot else you can do to make it work. Except be patient and practice.

However, Cyzewski suggests that there are a couple of things you can do to supplement Contemplative Prayer.

One is to read short passages of scripture, out loud, four times, using the Lectio Divina method, which consists of asking:
- What does the text say?
- What is God saying to me in this passage?
- What do I want to say to God about the text?
- What difference will the text make in my life?

Cyzewski says that the goal of the Lectio Divina method of reading scripture "is to rest in God's presence and let the (Holy) Spirit and scripture do its work."

"We read the Bible in order to be present to God," Cyzewski writes. "Prayer is the practice of becoming present for that love"

Another practice that Cyzewski suggests comes from Ignatius of Loyola's Examen who gave us a series of steps for reflection. They are:

- Become aware of God's presence
- Review the day with gratitude
- Pay attention to your emotions
- Choose one feature of the day and pray from it
- Look toward tomorrow

The whole idea of the Examen, writes Cyzewski, is to "sift away our thoughts and emotions so that we can see the present moment with clarity It can also shut down ongoing loops of negative thinking, internal commentaries or mounting stress and anxiety."

On the importance of using the Examen, Cyzewski quotes Richard Rohr: "In terms of soul work, we dare not get rid of the pain before we have learned what it has to teach us."

Cyzewksi quickly notes that the Examen also allows us to take a look at what has gone well, spiritually, in our lives. He suggests using the Examen first, along with reading from the Daily Office - a series of daily prayers - before moving on to Contemplative Prayer.

He also recommends getting rid of "digital distractions" (like smartphones and ipads) which he sees as "a far greater threat to Christian spirituality than any mindfulness practice that may allegedly resemble an eastern religious practice."

Cyzewksi describes the difference between solitude and action, and the place for solitude in building up our faith. He says "I can only surrender to the deep mysteries of God in the silence." It is in silence that we create the space for our truest self to emerge.

Cyzewski quotes Brennan Manning who wrote, "If I am estranged from myself, I am likewise a stranger to others."
Ed Cyzewski

When we become silent, writes Cyzewski, we remove ourselves from the noise around us and keep ourselves from contributing to it. "Silence can be a tool of transformation, freeing us from entanglements of slander, offense, arguments, deception and angry words."

Centering Prayer, writes Cyzewski "is not an out of body experience or spiritual epiphany," but its intention is "surrender and connection with God."

Flee, Be Silent, Pray also includes a great discussion on what has been called The Dark Night of the Soul, which is defined as seasons of doubt and uncertainty. Evangelicals tend to avoid any discussion of spiritual dark seasons, other than to try to fix them. But from a Contemplative Prayer point of view, these seasons are a natural part of our faith journey. In fact, such seasons can help us face our false self, which Cyzewski calls "an image of ourselves based on our relationships, accomplishments and actions." 

"We need intimacy with God," writes Cyzewski. "We need prayer. We need contemplation. We need to be united with Christ." And that's the whole point of Contemplative/Centering Prayer, the Examen and the Daily Office.

To get a copy of Flee, Be Silent, Pray, click here.

Monday, July 17, 2017

Ethics & The White House

Walter Shaub, Jr. the current head of the Office of Government Ethics is resigning this week. He's the government's top ethics watchdog and gave an extensive interview to the New York Times over the weekend. 

One of Shaub's top concerns was that the current president and his administration "is flouting or directly challenged long-standing norms that threaten to undermine the United States' ethical standards."

As a case in point, the Times noted over the weekend the US Women's Open was held at one of the 45th's golf courses. The Women's Open paid to have their tournament held there. The 45th has visited his family's business properties on at least 54 days within the first (almost) six months of his presidency.

(It's also been reported that a sister of Jared Kushner has been offering special EB-5 visas to Chinese business folk as an incentive for them to invest at least $500,000 in family properties). 


Such activities, say Mr. Shaub "create the appearance of profiting from the presidency." And misuse of position is what the Office of Government Ethics investigates.

Meanwhile, a growing list of high-priced lawyers have been hired by the 45th and members of his administration to defend against on-going investigation of possible ethics violations. 

Shaub has offered a few recommendations to help cut down on such potential conflicts of interest. Among them are:
. Give the Office of Government Ethics limited power to subpoena records (like tax returns)
. Mandate that presidential candidates release their tax returns
. Revise financial disclosure rules

As Shaub prepares to leave his job, Chair of the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee, Rep. Trey Gowdy, and the top-ranking Democrat on the same committee, Elijah Cummings, are set to meet with him.

In a released statement, Cummings said that "The Office of Government Ethics has had an impossible job under this administration because President Trump has ignored its advice, undermined its authority and openly flouted ethics rules."

The Times article noted that every other president in recent decades has voluntarily sold their assets before taking office to avoid conflicts of interest. Instead, the 45th has "put his hotels, golf courses and other buildings and marketing agreements into a trust controlled by his adult sons and other Trump Organization executives."

It's significant that Shaub is resigning from a position that is typically held for five years.  He was appointed by President Obama in 2013.

The Times story included a quote from Hui Chen, who served as an ethics expert in the Justice Department's Fraud Section. She said, "Anytime when we see a company with a chief compliance officer making what we call a 'loud withdraw,' it is considered a red flag for a company."

Mr. Shaub said, "Historically presidential candidates and office holders have voluntarily released their tax returns and divested their holdings. Mr. Trump has not."

To avoid appearance of partisanship, Shaub is considering recommending that new rules for the Office of Government Ethics, if enacted, not take effect until 2021, after the current president's term.

Shaub explained, "My goal from the start has been to advance the ethics program, not a political goal."

NPR had earlier reported on Shaub's seeking help from the House Oversight & Government Ethics Committee in handling investigations in response to the current president filling White House and federal agency positions with former lobbyists and consultants with potential conflicts of interest. These individuals were appointed to leadership positions without having to fulfill ethics requirements.

As a final thought, faith-minded individuals can recall that there are numerous references in the Bible to "false scales" or weights (for example: Leviticus 19:36, Deuteronomy 25:13 and most of the 11th chapter of Proverbs).  In a nutshell, God doesn't appear to like them and offers lots of warnings against unscrupulous dealings. We're cautioned to stay away from unjust, unethical individuals. It doesn't turn out well for them or their associates.
-----

If you're curious as to Mr. Shaub's recommendations, take a look.



Photo Credit: NPR (top)
NSW Dept. of Justice (bottom)


Monday, July 10, 2017

Rainy Day Thoughts

This morning I woke to a thunderstorm.

It started off in the distance and, as the thunder got closer, the rain came.

Liquid sheets of it.

The kind of rain that goes deep into the earth. Waking up dried out roots. Soaking everything in its path.

In Michigan, June was a dry month and July, until today, hadn't been much better.

So the wetness was very, very welcome and refreshing.

I lifted one of my cats, Abbott, up to an open window and he immediately began to smell it. The scent of the raindrops. Distinct and subtle and even sweet.

Rain can oftentimes be viewed as an inconvenience. But to farmers, like my brother David, who manages an apple orchard, it's lifeblood. No rain, no crops. It doesn't get much simpler.

Then I got to thinking about virtues. Like generosity, forgiveness, patience, love.

They are lifeblood too.

Generosity is defined as the quality of being kind and understanding. It's thinking of others. Putting others first. Reaching out to help. Being inclined to put the needs of our neighbors and those in need above ours. Among the benefits of being generous are that it keeps stress in check, it's beneficial to the greater good, promotes mental health and leads to a longer life.

Forgive is the root of forgiveness, which is "to stop feeling anger towards someone who has wronged us, to stop blaming them." Forgiveness isn't dependent upon if the other person asks for it. In fact, forgiveness is a decision, not an emotion.

Normally what happens when we perceive that a wrong has been committed against us, we have two choices. We can choose to remain angry. Among unresolved anger's consequences are a weakened immune system, increased anxiety, depression and a shorter life span.

Not surprisingly, the consequences of not forgiving are the exact opposite of being generous.

Patience is "the ability to wait, or continue doing something despite difficulties." It's also "the ability to suffer without complaining or being annoyed." So patience doesn't always express itself by remaining still or being inactive. In fact, some of the most striking examples of patience involve a steadfast pressing on despite circumstances.

Of course, to know when to wait, or when to keep going requires wisdom. I will freely admit that I'm not, by nature, a patient person! So I find myself daily needing wisdom. (Thankfully, the Bible speaks about God freely giving wisdom to those who ask for it. James 1.5) The Message translation puts it this way: "If you don't know what you're doing, pray to the Father. He loves to help. You'll get his help, and won't be condescended to when you ask for it."

And how about love? Well, one definition is "a feeling of strong or constant affection for a person, attraction that includes sexual desire."

Although love can certainly include strong feelings and physical attraction I would submit that love is a lot more than that.

How about this classic definition from the apostle Paul's 1st letter to the Corinthians?

"Love is patient. Love is kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable and keeps no record of being wronged. It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful and endures through every circumstance." (1 Corn. 13: 4-7).

Paul goes on to say that "love never fails."

So, according to this definition, love isn't an emotion (although it can cause you to feel things at times), it's primarily a decision.

Here's something I'm beginning to understand. If I focus solely on current events I can easily become very cynical and my emotional state can turn into parched earth. (I am, by no means, advocating for ignoring what's going on in DC or elsewhere in the world. But I do feel the need to keep focused on the reality of the underlying good that exists in God and us - if you choose to believe in God - and virtue. Some faith traditions call it focusing on what is "good and true.")

We can choose to look for opportunities to be generous, forgiving, patient and loving. And by doing so, help make the world a better place and actually promote our own health and well-being at the same time.

Of course, always seeking wisdom to know how and when to put these virtues into practice.

And when it comes down to it, wouldn't you rather be leaving the world a better place each day because you are in it?

Photo Credits:
Top - elenakalisphoto.com
Middle - imagarcade.com
Bottom - Public Domain Pictures

Note: All definitions that are quoted, with exception of the definition of love from the NIV Bible, are from Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary.


Monday, July 3, 2017

D.L.Mayfield - Assimilate or Go Home

D. L. Mayfield lives and writes in Portland, Oregon with her husband and two small children. Mayfield likes to write about refugees, theology, and downward mobility, among other topics. Her book of essays, Assimilate or Go Home: Notes from a Failed Missionary on Rediscovering Faith was recently released by HarperOne. 

You mention, of your early days as a teenager, “we didn’t yet understand what it means to stick around long enough to experience the fullness of how messy life is on the margins.” Why was this such an important impression/lesson for you?

I think when you are young you have simplistic solutions to everything. I also really believed that right beliefs would always lead to right actions, and that if you are truly following God then everything would be taken care of. As I got older, I saw how damaging that theology can be (“if things go wrong then I must have done something bad and God is mad at me.”) Now I really cling to the idea that Jesus is present with us in our suffering, not that he promises to instantly deliver us from our life circumstances.

You write about a nun, principal of a Catholic school on Chicago’s south-side in the 1970s. When “white flight” left neighborhoods mostly African-American, reflected in this school’s population. One day she goes into each classroom and changes each crucifix that has a white Jesus dying on the cross with a black one. A student asks her why she’s doing this and she replies, “Well, we don’t know exactly what Jesus looked like, but I am sure he looked more like you than he looked like me.” Why did this nun’s actions stick out in your mind?

This story came from an episode of This American Life I heard and to me it was such a good picture of how we have completely made Jesus (and Christianity) into something that venerates and perpetuates the myth that whiteness is the norm. But it’s not the norm, and Jesus certainly wasn’t white (or culturally like the west, for that matter)! And as someone trying to live like Jesus it became important for me to think about dismantling all the white Jesus’ I had put up, without ever realizing it.

You write, “A refugee, for all intents and purposes, is someone who has no past to go back to.” Why would understanding this truth help us understand and empathize more with refugees and immigrants?

I primarily wanted to distinguish between immigrants and refugees here, because I think many of us believe refugees want to be here, they want to work our jobs, take our resources, etc. But it’s the opposite. They want to live in their own countries, they want to raise their kids how they themselves were raised, they want to be at peace in their own culture. They have been forcibly removed through war and trauma and violence, and they have no choice in where they are resettled. They didn’t choose to come to America and take advantage of the mythical “dream.” They are the products of suffering, and their life in America contains similar elements of sadness and suffering, even though they might not be in the immediate threat of death anymore. Hopefully this does give us empathy, and allow us to see them in a larger, more complicated narrative than the ones being told to us by politicians.

You mention that “the best way to humanize an issue is to be involved in it.” How do you view today’s current level of polarization in America, in light of this statement?

True proximity means becoming involved in the suffering of others, to the point where you will never be truly at peace until justice comes. Until we get to that point, issues are just issues we can either ignore or dismiss or gloss over. I don’t really want to be a depolarizing force in the world, because the language surrounding refugees and immigrants is incredibly dehumanizing and deserves to be confronted. But I am interested in imagining ways to get people in proximity to those who are suffering at the margins of America.

There’s a story you relate of a mom who comes to an English class you’re teaching and one of your students,  Nadifa, says something in Somali then hurriedly leaves, very distraught. One of the other students translates that Nadifa forgot to give one of her kids anti-seizure medication. The student goes on to explain that Nadifa’s husband just left her and she has five kids. The students begin to say “Alhamdulillah!” (meaning, “It is God’s will.”) You tell your students “No, no, NO Alhamdulillah!” How would you answer the question, What is God’s will?

I think the simplest answer is God’s will is for the kingdom of heaven to be here on earth. The kingdom of God is made plain by Jesus, who in his sermon on the mount shows us that it is the exact opposite to the ways of the world. Living with Muslims has shown me how similar some of my own beliefs are to theirs--that since God is in control, God must be ok with suffering and sadness. But I don’t believe that! In the movie Selma Martin Luther King, Jr.  tells a man who just had his grandson shot in cold blood by the police that “God is the first to cry.” What a beautiful theology. A God who suffers with us, not one who bestows suffering at will. God’s will is that we would all know how beloved we are, and that we would love our neighbors in the same way.

You write: “God also loves the oppressors, the abusers… the gluttons and the cowards.” Why is this so hard to believe?

I’m a pretty black-and-white person, so this one is hard for me--but it’s the truth of the gospel! No one is a monster in the kingdom of God. There is always a chance for repentance, for change, to write the wrongs that you have done. The people in the Bible were absolutely terrible.  And God still loved them with an everlasting love, just like he loves me, how he loves ISIS, how he loves Christians who commit terrorist attacks here in America. This doesn’t mean we can’t stand up to evil and oppression but it brings us back to the central point that everyone is made in the image of God, and no one escapes the love of God.

How about “God loves everybody, exactly the same. No matter what you do.” I don’t remember hearing this as a kid growing up!

Isn’t that sad? I definitely grew up hearing that God loved me but I also picked up the subtleties that weren’t exactly said aloud--that God really loves people who do amazing things, who work hard, who get results. But as I said in my book, absorbing the hierarchies that religions create led me to the place where I was using my work in refugee communities to prop myself up, to make me appear better before the eyes of God. This meant that I was using my friends and neighbors. This was a crushing realization, but led me to a better place: there is nothing I can do to earn the love of God. To be honest, I still struggle with this concept. I still don’t quite believe it. But I am trying.

“He (God) is asking us to run, run in the direction of the world’s brokenness. Is this the crux of Christianity, the essence of God?

I think it is a good way of viewing the life and work of Jesus. He was obsessed with really dangerous people--both the demon possessed and the sick and also the powerful religious folk who he knew wanted to kill him. There are so many kinds of brokenness, and Jesus seemed to find it all irresistible, because he was in the business of liberating people. I want to believe more in this liberating, all-consuming love, and just like Jesus I have discovered it in the margins of society.

I love your description of King David. That the “man after God’s heart” was also an adulterer, murderer and terrible parent. David showed his humanity and the fullness of his ability to take everything to God. Would you like to elaborate?

David is such an interesting example. I actually originally wrote that David was a rapist (because he was, if you think about the power differentials--was Bathsheba even able to say no? Most likely not). He is such a problematic person. He did terrible damage and suffered enormous consequences. But through his psalms we discover the pathway to a relationship with God, which is authenticity. God wants us, not our religious words or ways. If we are hiding who we are, the fullness of our broken selves, then we aren’t actually in relationship with God, and we can’t be transformed by the love of God.

The example of King David sort of goes along with what you write later in your book. “To be the one in need. It confirms that this is quite possibly the only posture that Christians in this day and age can take, to be in a place where we freely admit our shortcomings, where we desperately need our neighbors.” How does taking this outlook help us be better followers of Jesus?

It’s hard not to make comparisons between my community (white evangelical Christians) and the religious folks in the gospels. The Pharisees and others were so obsessed with their own holiness and right beliefs that they walked away from every encounter with Jesus without being liberated. Who were the ones who are the faithful of the gospels? The needy ones--either physically, emotionally, or spiritually. They are the ones to whom the good news of Jesus is actually good, and I want to be in this category so badly.

How about “Everything Jesus said is true, not just the parts I want to believe.” What parts of what Jesus said do you find hard to fathom?

This is such a big question! I guess the big one would be forgiveness--how vital it is to our spiritual health. But forgiveness is so hard, especially in such an unjust world. And yet, this is what Jesus calls me to. Same thing with his call to love our enemies, and live lives of self-sacrifice for our neighbors. All of this is incredibly difficult in practice (although it’s easy to talk about!).

Is there anything else you’d like to mention?

I’ve been working on a few big articles and one or two essays, but currently my life is very full between taking care of small children, hanging out with my neighbors, teaching English classes, and helping start a nonprofit aimed at welcoming immigrants and refugees in the Portland area. Thanks so much for these thoughtful questions--I hope it sparks some discussion.


To find D.L.Mayfield on the web

To purchase Assimilate or Go Home 

It's on SALE for $1.99 on Kindle!!!

To follow D.L. Mayfield on Twitter

Photo Credits: d.l.mayfield.com

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!

Pinocchio: Art Credit, Disney If ever there were a time for a national "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire" award, it's now. And certai...