Focus, Prayer, Ragamuffin

I am back in Actionville, IL. I am actually quite glad to be back for two reasons: First, I never actually viewed Colorado Springs as “home.” Since I was only there 3 1/2 months, I kept the mentality that this was just an extended visit and did not feel it necessary to tie down any roots. Still though, Colorado Springs was wonderful to me and I thank the Lord for the opportunity to visit such a town, state, and institution (Focus). My experience at Focus was truly wonderful. While the classes were wonderful in learning practical, real life application skills in terms of family, marriage, and evangelism, I can say that the most beneficial aspect of the Institute were the friendships that were made. I have come away with so many quality friends that are honestly pursuing the Lord. There is no apathy at the institute. In fact, it would be essential to say that each person’s personal (but not private) faith spurned and encouraged each other’s faith when it comes to personal devotion and discipleship. Focus is a class act organization. From the meals to the modes of transportation, the opportunity that Focus offers is extremly holistic.

Secondly, do any of you ever feel as though your prayers are insufficient, mundance, boring, or “tame.” I am really having a struggle with prayer right now. From the routine of prayer to what I actually say in prayer, I am having trouble understanding God’s view on such a delightful discipline. It seems meaningless that the God of the ordered universe would care to listen to me. Though I know this is not the truth, it is hard to look past this mindset. I feel that we know the truth, but choose not to accept or believe it for personal reasons of insuffiency. What scares me is understanding the truth and impact of prayer. We should be deriving all sense of direction and truth from the Lord through constant conversation of prayer, but instead I find myself so often rationalizing my thoughts and personal choices as “God’s will” for me since (and Get This) “God puts passions in our hearts that must be of him.” I use this ploy so often to do what I want. I casually say, “well, I have desire, emotion, or passion to do such and such, I guess it is from God since everything good comes from Him.”

I went to lunch today with Duncan and Gramps and had a purely amazing time. I feel as though I am gaining a real father and grandfather by marrying Christian. There is absolutely no akwardness when we talk together and I thank God for the situation He has me in with her family. Duncan made a statement that I think was absolutely awesome. We were talking about prayer, seeking God’s will, etc. Anyway, Duncan said he has been praying to God in terms of asking whether or not a certain situation is exhibiting disobedience or obedience. For if a situation is exhibiting obedience, then we have nothing more to do than to continue to obey. And if some person is upset with our decision, action, etc and we know that WE HAVE OBEYED, then the person upset has to take their grievances out with the Lord, NOT US.

I want to leave you with a beautiful qoute by Brennan Manning from his book, “The Ragamuffin Gospel.” It has taken me three months to get through this book, and honestly, I am glad it has takem me that long. This book has been by far one of the best books I have ever read. Anyway,:”Life is the temptation to lose the inner self while preserving the shell of edifying behavior. Suddenly I discover that I am ministering to AIDS victims to enhance my resume’. I find I renounced ice cream for Lent to lose five extra pounds. I drop hints about the absolute priority of of meditation and contemplation to create the impression that I am a man of prayer.At some unrembered moment I have lost the connection between internal purity of heart and external works of piety. In the most humiliating sense of the word, I have become a legalist. I have fallen victim to what T.S. Eliot calls the greatest sin: to do the right thing for the wrong reason.”
Why is it that Brennan Manning was writing specifically to me in this paragraph. God, I feel as though we are such imposters most of the time. Where is the consistency, the honesty, the integrity? Are we more willing to trust in ourselves or accept that we have a savior that seems to be most attracted to sinners such as myself? How often can we repeat the phrase: “accept that you are accepted” as pure religious mantra and simply not believe it or live by it. Anyone for some spiritual vomiting? I could go for hours.

Your local religious bureaucrat,
Andrew

C.S. Lewis: “It may be that salvation consists not in the canceling of these eternal moments but in the perfected humilty that bears the shame forever, rejoicing in the occasion which is furnished to God’s compassion and glad that it should be common knowledge to the universe.”

The Two Graces

I was sitting in my bed at 2:00 Am this morning trying to fall asleep. I do not know if anyone would agree with me, but does anyone “think” better the later you are awake? I find myself thinking more abstractly and clearly when my tiredness meets my subconscious in an intellectual battle of supremacy. Anyway, I was sitting there thinking about grace and what modern grace has evolved into and how it works itself out in the church. And if you were thrown off by the idea that grace “evolves,” it shouldn’t, I only use “evolve” to explain at how we have arrived at our idea of grace. So, I was thinking (and perhaps there is more thinking to do) and came to the conclusion that there are two graces. The first grace is the salvific grace poured out on us by the Lord through Christ’s work on the cross. Secondly, there is the grace I will call “practical grace.” This is the grace we read in the Bible, apply it to our understanding of God in relation to ourself, and then apply it to the world and the relationships we have within it. Of course, salvific grace is grace that is perfect and cannot be critiqued, because if it did, I would essentially be telling God how He could have done things differently. Salvific grace is a grace that can only be descripted in further analogy and contemplation of the divine reworking of God’s plan.

Practical grace is the point from which I wish to expound further on. Practical grace is the grace that makes worldly sense. For surely, all the definitions of salvific grace cannot explain the rationale of God for allowing us to kill His Son FOR us, other than a motive of love. What I do not understand with practical grace is that we have separated the salvific from the practical. In all theological circles, all range of denominations, their is constant conversation on being vessels of grace in this world. Honestly, I don’t think its working. If you honestly evaluate your church, is it well-oiled with grace? Our speech does not match our reactions and responses when the call to grace is needed.

I think practical grace is being destroyed by power-hungry moralists who would rather identify someone by their actions instead of identifying by WHO THEY ARE. From the principle of personal conviction to ecclesiastical tradition, the method of practical grace is only extended to the degree that we allow ourselves to accept grace. Why is it that we hate what is bad more than we love what is good. Grace comes off our lips so smoothly! Within a postmodern context (and I myself am guilty of such ponderings), the power of language is a pretense to the meaning we attach to life. Also, within postmodernism lies the former literary tool of deconstruction to our everyday lives. I believe deconstruction is synonomous with the word cynical. How easier is it cut down than build up. It is evident that the more I learn, the more I have to go in becoming a disciple. I am begging all of you, along with myself, can we try to extend the grace that God gives to us to others in their own life? I have more to say on this later as I further develop this.

Blessings,
Andrew “The Drewskie” Walker

Horn Creek

If you know me, you would probably know that I complain quite heavily with the form and method of praise and worship or PAW as we affectionately call it today. Throughout this semester, you could count on there being praise and worship Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday. Let me preface my complaint by stating that there is nothing inherently wrong with Praise and Worship, I just tend to get a little jaded at the routineness and frequency of it. It seems that we cannot have any fellowship without there being PAW. Worshipping our King is one of the greatest gifts God has given us, but the last time I recall, PAW does not limit itself strictly to song, raising of hands in the air, and closed eyes. Why can we not give as much aknowledgment to praising him with our minds or everyday lives? Why not praise Him more openly through His created nature? Is it perhaps because we are too afraid we would become like pagans or earth worshippers? Is it perhaps that we have separated the secular from the sacred when there is no biblical separation. We worship what we assume is holy, but is it possible that what we recognize as secular may in itself be a Truth of God. Has our praise and worship gotten so frequent and uncritical in reality that the noise of the instruments only contributes to the emptiness and distractions within us? I have sat through numerous classes this year that begin each day with a devotional (AKA PAW) and at the sound of the first chord you can count on several holy rollers by default automatically raising their hands. Sorry to be blunt, but it just really bothers me. I read in Matthew and Isaiah where the Lord speaks to the emptiness of our traditions and the Lord’s hatred of our conformity and mindless consumption (though I do not mean to say that PAW necessarily parallels these descriptions). Honestly, and as I have previously noted in other blogs, I think my greatest qualm with PAW is that God is not something to be comprehended with our minds. God is not be dictated within a angle, box, or area. And honestly, this frustrates me that God is not more physically evident. Rather, I have taken my qualm with his infiniteness and exchanged it for worshipping him FOR HIS INFINITENESS. I worship Him for being above us all, through us all, and in us all.

Friday night all the FFI students traveled to Horn Creek (mountain retreat center, 9,000 feet elevation) and just basically hung out and relaxed. It was awesome to see the level of community formed by our three months in Colorado. I digress. Anyway, we ended the night with a praise and worship service that I was not really looking forward to. My expectations were not as I assumed they would be. First, if you know me I have always been rather conservative and reserved in my worship. The extent of my bodily or visible worship would be eyes closed. For some reason, Friday night was different. Maybe the intensity of the songs were different. Anyway, I found myself in tears through out it and at a few points, my hands raised in the air to full extent. I am always worried of the appearance of my worship because insincerity and attention-grabbing are not two qualities I look highly upon. I really felt God’s love in this room.

Also, my mom has made me aware of a spelling error I have made throughout the last few writings. I apparently have been spelling “erred” as “aired” in regards to saying that I may “aire” on the side of caution. More later.

I am leaving for Jacksonville on Tuesday morning at 7 AM. I will be staying in Kansas City on Tuesday night at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary with my mentor and friend, Matt Creath. I should be getting home on Wednesday afternoon around 3.

Brian McLaren Interview with RELEVANT MAGAZINE.

I would like to clarify from my previous blog by s…

I would like to clarify from my previous blog by stating that any emergence of a cohort would not be intended to displace the utility or the function of a church body. Secondly, as brilliantly stated by my friend Matt Creath in his comment, “there is no definition for authenticity,” I take this to mean that authenticity is a subjective or elastic definition. Personally, my intentions would be to foster the environment that would lead to the successful definition of authenticity as it relates to each individual (though fostering an environment that ACTUALLY tailors itself to each individual is a whole other problem). Whether small group, lifestyle evangelism, or missional life as Matt briefly remarked about, it would be desired that each person’s wishes for “authenticity” would be met by their own personal pursuit of authenticity that would ultimately add to differing perspectives on such a topic within a cohort. I fully believe appropiate spectrums are welcomed in such a cohort that welcomes theological vitality over spiritual sameness. A group that openly demands authenticity in different forms, in my opinion, is a healthier group than that of a group that routinely meets, is aware of the underlying paralysis undermining their search for community, but yet hesitates to critique in fear that such a discrepancy would lead to disunity. I would really recommend reading Al Mohler’s latest Blog: “Pastor as Theologian” in regards to his ordering of such church maintenances.

Also, it would be a wise to download Mohler’s latest radio program on the definition of “evangelical.”

Cohort

Missional Baptist Cohort

Because of my interest in the Emergent Church movement, I have wondered how SBU students would respond to such a “conversation” that may be called the “the missional baptist cohort.” I have toyed with the idea of developing some kind of cohort based off principles within the emergent church, but that are not soo sketchy or dare I say, “liberal” that such an idea may be associated with such a movement that is seen as dangerous, but simply alternative. Within the emergent movement, it is essential to say that the movement itself is not readily defined or oriented in one direction. While there are some like Brian McLaren who may aire on the side of evangelical liberalism, there are others like Mark Driscoll who embodies evangelical doctrine, but may practice it in other forms. Driscoll has been able to build a church in Seattle (Mars Hill) of 5,000 while not giving any theological accomodation on the main issues. I would not even call Driscoll conservative as much as I would call him merely “Biblical.” Let’s go beyond “liberal or conservative”. Within my journeys and insights of evangelicalism, I see the moan and groan from a newer generation for new methods and forms of evanglicalism that does not compromise itself for cultural relativity. As my friend Kristen Shuffield here at Focus has said, “there is a difference between being relavant versus being relative in our theology.” How right is she. I believe people are hungry for truth, because, at large people spend their time creating their own truth.
I would like a place for SBU students that is not solely focused on habitual praise and worship, but focuses on other methods of worship that have been barred from evangelical protestant churches because of a somewhat “catholic” or “monastic” undertones. Perhaps in our purposeful distancing from Catholic theology (which is fine by me), we have left behind some inherenly good practices that have been practiced by the monastics. Three principles that would be essential for a missional baptist cohort: missional living (orienting ourselves toward the outside more than the inside), authenticity (which, by and large, is not being fostered in the church), narrative theology (who are you and where are you going in God’s large story?), and Christ-likeness (where we put aside the stuffy and wordy theological terms, though not abandoning them, and instead focus on living as Christ instructs us (1 John. 2:6)), alternative worship (going beyond praise and worship but practicing the disciplines as layed out by numerous Richard Foster books). I know these are not novel ideas, but I myself am wanting more than what the typical baptist church has to offer, but yet not at the expense of abandoning the baptist denomination. I would like a place where conviction rules over self-righteousness, and open conversation takes place on issues that the church has neither the direction or gumption to tackle. I do not intend to engage in evangelical revisionism, but just shaping a different elasticity to our herirage that biblically fits the needs of a younger generation.

JFA

Last week we, alone with Justice For All, traveled to Greeley, CO to the Universtity of Northern Colorado. Basically, we manahged to hold up large pictures of aborted babies and discuss the issue of abortion. Here is my response, which is less-than-affirming. Enjoy!

The ride up to Greeley had high anticipation attached to it. Early in the morning, I was too tired to collect any type of rational thought. But as soon as we hit the exit for Greeley on the highway, I found my stomach had that stark and well-known unsettled feeling. The feeling you get when you are about to give a speech; your hands get clammy and you have that mild awkwardness about which we try to disguise. I really wanted to give the exhibit a chance. Though I would not choose this type of method, I was anxious to see how fellow students would respond. Walking onto campus, I was afraid I was becoming the type of Christian that I dislike the most; the kind of Christian that is more known and interested for following a political idea or side more than following Jesus. Prior to arriving at campus, I had a weekend discussion over the role of Jesus in this exhibit. In the midst of the chaos, in the midst of the protest and polarization, where could we expect to see Jesus? Would he be behind the gate in front of the exhibit? Would he be protesting us? Would he be over at the crisis pregnancy table?

I had several very meaningful conversations while at the exhibit. On the first day, I found myself discoursing with individuals that left me subconsciously wanting to mare their intellect and prove them wrong; quite frankly to build myself intellectually. Frankly, I succeeded. I, along with a friend, was able to logically get three feminists to say that they could not pass judgment if my friend decided to kill me. They were in agreement. I was not proud of myself. I found that such people, even when backed in such a ridiculous position, would not concede in their argument because the argument, not debate, was not over the issue any longer, but now centered on pride. On Tuesday, I got to know on a first name basis the president and vice-president of the Feminist Alliance at UNC. We actually talked quite a bit and at the moment we have become friends on facebook.com. People are people. No matter the issue, it comes down to the fact that people have passion (and isn’t passion a beautiful thing, despite how warped our passions can be at times?). When we were not focusing on the issue of abortion (which we hardly did because, sadly, there was more discussion on the decency of the exhibit than there was over the role of abortion), I found myself laughing and joking with extreme liberal, pro-choice, feminists. It was a beautiful thing. Above all, when I was talking with the president of the Feminist Alliance, she mentioned she was not against the debate or the discourse, but the effectiveness of the exhibit. She said that panels of the same size with appropriate dialogue would be more effective. All I could think about through the two days were some wise words echoed by Paul in Romans 2:4, “Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance, and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you toward repentance?” We as Christians argue against pragmatic and utilitarian tactics and philosophies, but was the exhibit not a cognitive tactic that emphasized results over the feelings of others? This also got me thinking we must be careful that the issue of abortion does not become political vindication, but rather spiritual redemption. After talking to Kristen, the president of Feminist Alliance, (who also identified herself as a nominal Christian) she made me realize that our best intentions of being non-hostile, non-confrontational, and non-condemning through the exhibit were just that, intentions. Though our intentions may have been directed in one direction, we may have to face the reality that our intentions were not met in agreement by those we had intended to discourse with. What do we value more? Our good intentions or our actual results as remarked by UNC students? I mean, I know when speaking of matters of truth, polarization is expected and assumed, but does the medium from which we present the truth have to offhandedly throw off-balance our attempts at discussion before they have begun? And to be honest, I find there to be a false analogy between the justifications of the exhibit by the description of the Crucifixion scene as presented in the Gospels? Sin produced the crucifixion. Sin produces abortion. Though theologically true, does the fact that Christ went willingly to the cross parallel that the unborn are not sacrificing themselves willingly? Similar appearances do not equal similar causations. I do not mean to be hard on JFA. I really appreciate their services, I just wonder if such an issue could be presented more tactfully and responsibly. Abortion is extreme tragedy. Tragedy is also severing those from hearing the gospel because of political emphasis, which I hope we have not done. It is my prayer, “Dear Lord, please do not let them reject the truth because of me.” Though I find the method questionable, the presentation of hope and destruction of life were not balanced. The exhibit should have placed substantially greater value on hope and forgiveness than was presented. Acts 17 presents a model by Paul from which he presents an appeal to the Gospel by meeting the Athenians on their own terms, not shocking them into belief.

The training was very effective. I find the abortion debate to be rather simple. Honestly, it’s logical, it gives respect, it upholds the sanctity of life. Sadly, it’s people realizing the hollowness of their own worldview that I found most disturbing. If I could choose to participate in this event again, I would decline. For me, this was a one time event. Though a trip I found very enlightening. I am definitely glad I went. I may not have agreed wholeheartedly with the exhibit, but I can honestly say that God confirmed my abilities through the two days we were there. Though the exhibit may leave a bad taste in some people’s mouth, I have found that God has gifted me in the ability to communicate with all spectrums of life; politically and theologically. Some people are meant for more intense dialogue; I, on the other am not. Though I would aire on the side of caution when dialoging on such an issue, I cannot say that such methods should be prohibited, but exercised very cautiously.

Drawing the line in mass communications and media

On Monday’s class we discussed the effects of mass media on our worldviews and assumptions. Along with this, we discussed how media has eroded our moral compass. We were asked to write a very subjective respone titled, “Where Do You Draw the Line?” Here is my response:

Where do I Draw the Line?

I draw the line when there seems to no longer be a coherent line. What that line is I hope to explain throughout this reflection. But grounding myself in the belief of absolute truth and the respect and dignity of humanity, I believe there is a line of decency, a line of truth, and a line of fairness.

It seems that in today’s media-driven world, the need for consumption is not quenched with our insatiable desire for more entertainment. While at the same time, our capacity and high level of communication does not follow through on the promises it gives of contentment and a 24 hour companion. Though we have more variety in media, we are now more alone than ever in our feelings. I find it rather brilliant on the part of the producer that by and large, the same show can be produced but in a different package. Having said that, I find it rather degrading with America’s incapacity to seek newer and creative (and God forbid, wholesome) entertainment. I probably should not make generalizations like I am going to do right now, but if we looked back over the last fifty years in America, could we honestly say that much has improved (with exceptions to our high levels of technology) in regards to our higher levels of technology, communication, and media yet we have statistically lower self-esteem, a lower view of morals, and the ubiquitous message of essential bodily perfection.

I draw the line when inanimate objects (TV) sitting in a room can incapacitate us to levels that can only contribute to America’s lessened attention span. I draw the line when parents trade in their responsibilities for TV’s instruction on children. I draw the line when children are being medicated at such high levels all because the relaxed atmosphere of a classroom cannot keep their attention as well as the newest cartoon. I draw the line when objects and subjective emotionalism replace truth and objectivity. As said in class, I draw the line when we “accept reality as it is solely presented” through the means of mass communication. I draw the line when the need for reflective contemplation is sought, but the opportunity cannot arise because of the bombardment of distractions. I draw the line when image takes substance captive in hopes of appealing to a larger, more degenerative audience. I draw the line when means of communication (TV, movies, news) replace the need for human dependency and community. When the medium of communications replaces the essence of the message of communications; that is when I draw the line.

I draw the line when mass media/communications frustrates a marriage because of its “necessary” and accidental addictions. I draw the line when our ability to critically think is overcome by the habitual Saved by the Bell rerun. I draw the line when a newly married couple are not enjoying themselves sexually because the husband would prefer to catch the last few minutes of Sports Center while the wife, feeling unpursued and unsought-after quietly falls asleep. I draw the line when communication turns people into objects of ridicule and carnality and when these objects become the fleeting hope and hollow ideals that we faultily lust after.

My line is not a line that requires a large leap to cross, but my line is a line that is best drawn with caution. My line does have elasticity because truth is found in many arenas; not solely evangelical-condoned media.

Fresh Breath

Here is quite frankly, a fresh breath article on the resurrection from RELEVANT. Please read!

In some stories, hope is wrapped up in the obvious and tangible elements of the plot, but other times, hope is revealed through a surprise ending or a twist—giving new life to the story in foreshadowed glory. The Easter story is a vivid example that things aren’t always as they seem. In a way, Easter is a celebration of the greatest story twist in history, one that is so subversive it changes everything for all time.

Sometimes the Easter story gets glossed over, and we forget the surprise and shock of the resurrection. It’s easy to read through the Gospels without that “aha!” moment it really delivers. We have the privilege of reading the resurrection into the teachings of Jesus—we know how the story ends—but for the disciples, the moments before the resurrection were steeped in fear, darkness and confusion. For them, the resurrection provided an incredible twist—in Sixth Sense fashion—that made the story come alive in a new way; past experiences began to make clarion sense. It changed everything. Eugene Peterson explains it like this in his book Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places: “The Christian life begins as a community that is gathered at the place of impossibility, the tomb.”

The scandalous plan of God, revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus, reveals to us that what we see is not all there is. Easter tells us that a man convicted is not really guilty, that a cruel instrument of torture and death is really a symbol of remarkable hope and grace; it also tells us that an empty tomb is what we should have expected all along. On the surface, the story of Easter reveals a plot by the religious leaders of Jesus’ day to take down a rebel, once and for all. As Jesus is handed over to the authorities, the picture that is painted is that Caesar is king, his kingdom rules and the Roman means of punishment—the cross—would have the last say. Even homeless peasants with an unusually impressive following and a supernatural track record would be trumped by the empire for rebelling.

But all of this is merely a divine setting for the most miraculous moment in history. As Jesus took each step closer to the hill, with the cross on His back, the people would have seen the rule of Rome and the conviction of a would-be criminal as ultimate reality. Who could deny it? But there was much more to the story. The path to the cross was a willing conviction accepted by God in the most subversive act on earth—a conspiracy to take on the sin of the world and launch a counter-kingdom that would overthrow every worldly empire. Not by violence, not by brute force, but by love and sacrifice through Christ. Colossians tells us that with each step, Jesus was making a public spectacle out of the pseudo powers and authorities, that with the cross He was triumphing, and what looked like defeat was actually ultimate victory.

Easter reminds us that even though injustice may run rampant at present—even though it appears that darkness is pervasive and final—we know God is working, that His love is greater and that resurrection is real. As morning came on the third day a sun-cast freshness burst on the scene to reveal a subversive hope that thrusts us into a new story, one that rests on the work of Christ—a grassroots grace that upends every injustice. Through the brilliant light of the resurrection we can walk in newness of life. In a time when the Caesars of our day still claim to rule and injustice seems commonplace, the revolutionary hope of new life springs up in our hearts as we embrace the promise of Christ and experience the call of an extreme God to believe.

This new way, this subversive hope, is a call to live counter to the mainstream tendencies of darkness and selfishness, and to embrace the resurrection life. In this we not only celebrate the story of Easter, but we join it as ones who have received an unspeakable gift. As Miroslov Volf says in his book Free of Charge:

“When Christ died on the tree of shame outside the gates of Jerusalem, God bore our sin, and we were both condemned as sinners and separated from our sin, and in our lives, God lives somewhere unfathomably deep within us—behind our faculties of knowing and willing—and swallows up our sin and transforms our lives.”

This transformation through Christ is our twist in the story—our aha! moment. Through Christ we continue to live out the resurrection life in our own generation, carrying on the subversive plot that God initiated in Christ. So this Easter, relive the surprise ending; relive the story with a fresh passion for the genuine hope that we embrace: the reality of a risen Lord. The reality of new life. Let this hope continue to paint our future in every possible way.

my brother in law

Click on the link below. My brother-in-law Bob Amsberry has recently been named the head coach of Wartburg College’s Women’s Basketball program. Wartburg is apparently a very prestigious school and their program can only get better as Bob is a well known and tremendously successful coach; having turned around the Rockford college Regents from a history of embarrassment to consecutive NCAA Division III division wins and playoff births. Bob has also been named “Coach of the Year” for his division and was recently named “Division III Coach of the Month” nationwide for the month of December. Through what I have heard from my sister and read about Wartburg, it seems as though all directions point upward for Wartburg. My brother-in-law is a class act, and I believe will fit in very easily at such a respectable and noteworthy school as Wartburg.

Click here for the Press release about Bob