The Lutheran Zephyr

Preparing for the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul

This week at St John's By The Gas Station we will be celebrating the Feast of SS Peter and Paul, which falls every year on June 29.  I always love when a Feast Day falls on a Sunday, giving us a special opportunity to reflect on the life and witness of the saints as exemplars of the life of faith.  We will read two of the "alternate" readings appointed for this Feast - 1 Corinthians 3:16-23 ("do you not know that you are God's temple?") and Mark 8:27-35 (Jesus says to Peter, "get behind me Satan").

A few random and assorted thoughts:

• Why do we Lutherans refer to this day as a "Festival" but the Roman Catholic tradition refers to it as a "Feast"?  Is there any significant difference in meaning between the two words?  Our friends in the Missouri Synod offer that there is no difference between the two terms:

Note: “Feast” and “festival” are synonymous in this context; both reflect the Lat. dies festus; “feasts and festivals” indicates only that both words are used in reference to certain special days other than fast days.

• Another question - in Evangelical Lutheran Worship, we refer to these guys as Peter and Paul, not as Saints.  What's our hang-up about using the title "Saint," particularly for Biblical figures?  Aren't about half of our Lutheran congregations called "Saint" this or that?  (The Lutheran Book of Worship, Service Book and Hymnal, and Common Service Book all refer to "Saints" in their calendars)
• The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity - a celebration that marked its 100th year this year - begins with the Feast of the Confession of St Peter (January 18) and concludes with the Feast of the Conversion of St Paul (January 25).  An early alternate proposal suggested that Christian unity be celebrated on (and prayed for) on the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul (June 29), the day that the church has historically commemorated their martyrdom. 

So my question is this: Why the focus on Peter and Paul for Christian unity?  Is this because of the rivalry between the two?  Or is this because Peter is a favorite saint of Roman Catholics, revered as the first Pope, and Paul is a favorite saint of Protestants, revered by them as the great grace-preaching evangelist?  Is there some other reason?

• On this day we lift up two saints, two cornerstones of the church.  Yet we hear Paul speaking to the people at the church in Corinth (in 1 Corinthians 3) that "you are God's temple," a wonderful corrective to an excessive ecclesial piety that would limit God's presence and work to the institutional church and its traditions.  God is at work in the church - God promises to be uniquely present in the ministry and fellowship of the church - yet God is also at work beyond the church walls in the lives of the faithful, and indeed in the world at large.
• I also love the tension of Peter - the rock on whom Christ builds the church - being called Satan by our Lord.  It's got the sinner/saint paradox written all over it.  Sin is part of the church's life.  Yet it is from our place of sinfulness that we hear our Lord's call to be the church - to live in forgiveness, grace and mercy.
• A question naturally arises on this day: what is the church?  What does it mean to be church?  As Lutherans we teach "the church is the assembly of saints in which the gospel is taught purely and the sacraments are administered rightly" (Augsburg Confession, Article VII - from The Book of Concord, trans. Kolb/Wengert).  In the nearly 500 years since the Reformation an overly-simplistic dichotomy has developed, one which says that the Protestants emphasize preaching the Gospel and the Roman Catholics concern themselves with sacramental rites and rituals (as if the Catholics don't preach the Gospel and Protestants have no ritual!).  Yet in the Augsburg Confession, both strands of church - the Gospel-preaching ministry Protestants have emphasized, and the sacramental ministry of such importance to the Roman Catholic church - are held together.  As Lutherans we are Evangelical (ie, Protestant) and Catholic. 

This Evangelical Catholic theme also works if you accept another over-simplification about the Catholic/Protestant divide, which was suggested above - that Peter is especially revered by Catholics, and Paul especially so by Protestants.  On this day, we hold the two together - the "Catholic Saint" and the "Protestant Saint" - as models of the Godly life and pillars of the Christian Church.

(A note about oversimplifications - if I use these characterizations in my preaching, it will be in part to break them down and attempt to articulate a new way of speaking about Christian ministry and the church.)

That's it for now.  If you have any thoughts, please share!

Weekly Mix Tape

After a long drought, here is my Weekly Mix Tape - ten songs, shuffled not stirred, from my iPod.

Goody Two Shoes - Adam Ant
Tonight I'm Free - Byker Grooove!
High and Dry - Radiohead
Who Are You - Dada
White Love (radio mix) - One Dove
Whip It - Devo
To Have And Not To Hold - Madonna
Where The Streets Have No Name - U2
Natural Blues - Moby
I Know It's Over [Live] - The Smiths

A Different Kind of Faith Conversation

Our first "Summer Faith Fellowship" went very well tonight.  Inspired by the Pub Theology/Theology on Tap efforts of other churches, this event was designed to be a loosely structured conversation that reflected on a "real life" issue in light of faith.  Sixteen of us met in the living room of a member's house, where we shared drinks and snacks before settling down for some conversation.

Tonight's theme was the price of gas.  I opened with two questions:

• What is the lowest gas prices you can remember?
• How has the recent increase in gas prices impacted your lifestyle?

These questions generated some opening conversation about the changes to our nation's economy and their impact.  Then I played a report from NPR's Morning Edition about a family from Ohio with five children and two large SUVs (from Wednesday, June 18 - Ohio Family Struggles with Costs of Driving SUVs).  Following the report, I asked a simple question:

• What jumped out at you from the report?

I had a few additional follow-up questions also planned, but I didn't need them.  The conversation in response to the NPR piece flowed very well.

As response to that piece slowed down, I played another NPR report (also from Wednesday, June 18 - Energy Costs Drive Up Prices of Nearly Everything).  Again, I asked a simple question:

• What jumped out at you from the report?

That report and question led to a conversation about economic theory - will consumers really just keep paying more for oil and oil-derived/dependent products?  Again, I had detailed follow-up questions, but I did not need them.

In response to these two NPR reports, our conversation touched on a variety of issues - consumption, town planning/suburban sprawl, public transportation, packaging, waste, sanitation/health concerns, a "throw-away" mentality, environmentalism, carbon footprint, poverty, priority-setting, and more.  People shared insights from their youth, their friends and families, their travel overseas, their areas of expertise, their daily lives . . . It was really great.

Then I asked the God question:

• Where is God in all of this?

Flowing from this question we talked of living lives of gratitude; stewardship; concern for the poor.  We talked about Genesis, and wondered to what extent the issue of environmental stewardship - as a calling of faith - should lead us to political and social activism.  We talked about living faith every day instead of only on one hour on Sunday mornings.  We talked of the difficult choices that lay before us, and acknowledged the complexity of the issue.

For this part of the session that focused explicitly on the God question, I had planned several talking points based on the premise that the increase in fuel prices represented a hardship.  However, these questions really didn't go anywhere, because for most of the people gathered for our discussion the increased expense of fuel was not a significant hardship (either because they do not drive much or because they can absorb in the increased cost without much difficulty).  Nonetheless, the preparation I put into these questions helped me even as the conversation moved in unplanned directions.

At about five minutes prior to the agreed upon time - 9pm - I wrapped up the conversation and closed with a prayer and the Lord's Prayer.

Overall, this event went exceedingly well.  A few changes I plan to make for next week:

• Ask the God question earlier.  We spoke for about 45 minutes about oil prices, and for 25-30 minutes about the God question.  I would like to spend a little more time on the explicit God question.
• Start slightly earlier.  This was our first night, and after introductions and a later start - to allow for mingling and casual introductions - we didn't get started to about 7:45-7:50.
• Offer more substantive God content.  I had two 4 minute NPR reports to initiate conversation about gasoline prices, but no multimedia to inspire the God conversation.  Next time I will seek a brief multimedia piece - from Here We Stand's video clips, NPR's Speaking of Faith, Nooma, SermonSpice, or some other resource.  At the least I will cite specific Biblical passages or liturgical/historical material.  We need something more concrete to inspire a good God conversation.
• We ended with a prayer, following which most of the folks promptly returned to their cars and drove home.  It felt too abrupt for me.  Next time I will try to wrap up our conversation in a way that allows for folks to continue the conversation even as some leave and we begin cleaning up the space.

Feel free to share your thoughts or insights.  As I get ready for next week's event I'll post additional thoughts and plans here.  Thanks!

Thursday morning update:

I was asked by someone for a list of future topics.  I don't have topics mapped out nor publicized ahead of time, and that is partially intentional.  As much as a topic is the central point of discussion, the exercise is about having a discussion about an ordinary "daily life" issue and, part way through, asking the "God Question" - what does God have to do with this? 

I care less about the issue than I do about that turn - the turn from the secular issue to the sacredness of the secular. 

The hope and intention of these gatherings is to model how to ask the "God Question" about anything, how to see God in/with/under the stuff of daily life.  I fear that if I publicize the issues ahead of time that these sessions will become "Hot Topics" debates, and that is not the intention.  The discussion issue is simply a catalyst for talking about God in daily life.

- - - - -

Below is posted - as a Word document - the outline I used for last evening's discussion.  I meant to hand out copies at the end, but I forgot . . . Oh well.  Click on the link and you'll be able to download the document.

Download gathering_1_oil_prices.doc

Brian Wilson for Commander in Chief

This is an oldie, but goodie. As McCain and Obama trade foreign policy accusations on the campaign trail, I ask if we want this reckless man as our Commander in Chief?  I'd rather have the Beach Boys in the Oval Office than this guy.

Pub Theology (minus the pub, minus the guru)

In the past few days I have researched the "pub theology" or "theology on tap" events that churches of various backgrounds - but largely Roman Catholic, from what I can tell - have done in recent years.  From what I can tell - and from what Beth commented on my previous post - the pub theology events seem to be fairly straight forward:

• Get a pub/bar with a semi-private space conducive to group conversation but open to newcomers
• Get a good speaker to present a topic/issue
• Drink beer and talk about it

What has surprised me is just how simple and straightforward this is.  This is essentially a Sunday morning adult forum that takes place in the evening at a bar.  Otherwise, the format - an expert sharing thoughts about a particular faith topic, followed by questions - is not very innovative.  But moving this discussion to a new location at a new time is more than a gimmick.  The move makes this discussion of faith and theology more open to a crowd of folks who might not flock to church on Sunday mornings - a new energy and dynamism is created, new questions are asked, and new community (hopefully!) is formed.  In this way it is an evangelism move, but also a move toward new and fresh reflection on life and faith.

Yet these events are largely serial in nature - 4 or 6 weeks in a row, and then nothing for several months.  They are expert-driven, and despite the discussion that ensues, it is largely dependent upon a guru to provide the fodder.  I'm not sure how much "community" is formed in this kind of setting, though perhaps that is not the goal.

Here at St John's by the Gas Station, we are initiating a "Summer Faith Fellowship" meeting Wednesday evenings in people's homes.  It is meant to be a time of loosely structured faith discussion and activity, a place for folks who might be intimidated by traditional Bible study to come, share and learn about faith.  Here's the description we've published in the newsletter and bulletin:

Come and share conversation about the stuff of life and wonder what God has to do with any of it.  From family and finances, to politics and current events, to American Idol and the internet, we'll discuss what's happening in our lives and what God is going about it.  We do not promise to have all the answers to our questions, but we will guarantee good questions  and honest conversation about life and faith. 

Come and share life.  Come and share faith.

Unlike many of the "pub theology" gatherings I saw profiled, our gatherings are not dependent upon a guru or single long-format presentation.  Rather, structured conversation and brief times for presentation and group activities will mark our time together.  We will also enjoy the hospitality of one of our members, who will offer snacks and drinks.

I'm still working on the format and content for our first gathering (Wednesday evening), but the general outline looks to be something like this:

• Gather for informal conversation and introductions (why are you here?)
• Discuss Hot Topic of the Day with various questions, reflections and (perhaps) activities (first topic likely to be gas prices).  If the group is large, we will break into smaller discussion groups.  As we get talking, the topic likely splits into several spin-off topics and areas of discussion.
• Part-way through the discussion, ask the God question - what does God have to do with any of this?  Introduce passages from the Bible or Christian tradition (quotes from saints, liturgy, etc.) that might have bearing on the issue, generating more conversation and reflection.
• Wrap up with Q&A, prayer, and suggestions for next week's topic.

I'm doing lots of prep work for our first gathering - from strategies for facilitating good conversation (it is too easy to kill a conversation) to content for discussion starters to passages from the Christian tradition that have something to say about the topic.

If you have any thoughts or ideas, please share in the comments below, or by posting something on your blog and sharing the link here!

Pub Theology - How's it done?

I'm beginning a summer series of down-to-earth faith & life conversations in homes (or backyards, decks, etc.) this summer.  Though I already have a bit of a plan, I'm wondering how those "Theology on Tap" or "Coffee House Theology" events are structured.  If you've ever led or attended such an event, please share your thoughts and insights here.  Thanks!

assembling & preaching, but not blogging much

The blog has been slowing down over the past month or so.  Not counting this post, I have written only five posts since Memorial Day.  There were times when I was writing five in a week's time.  Well, with three children, last month's Approval for Ordination interview and decision, and various church stuff going on, the blog has taken a back seat.  I wonder if the blog will end . . . it was born, after all, as my outlet to explore thoughts of theology and ministry while I was working outside the parish setting.  But now that I am in an internship and, more importantly, moving toward my ordination and call to a congregation, I wonder if this blog will no longer be necessary, or if it will serve the same purpose.  We'll see.

I just got back from synod assembly.  It was relatively low-key as far as synod assemblies go.  But besides seeing all kinds of folks, one of my highlights was serving as a liturgical streamer bearer, or as the Bishop called it, "that twirly thing."  These streamers were on the longest fishing pole I had ever seen - about 30 feet - and the streamers themselves were about 25 feet long, perhaps.  We held worship in a large gymnasium and two of us had these long streamers to swirl and twirl above the people during the processional hymn, the Gospel procession, and the recessional hymn.  Only once did we bang our twirlies and get tangled up . . . oh well.

Also, I've been preaching every Sunday for the past few weeks, but not at my internship church.  I've been preaching Sunday afternoons at the English-language service of an independent Korean Christian church.  The primary service is in Korean, but I serve the English-language service which is attended by non-Korean speaking children and spouses of the Korean membership.  It is a fascinating and interesting experience.  There is no lectionary, so I have been taking the opportunity to preach on stories that rarely - if ever - appear in the lectionary (tomorrow, for example, I'm preaching on Judges 6:11-24 - The Call of Gideon.  I've also preached on Deuteronomy 7:6-11, and Matthew 17:1-23, vs. 14-23 not appearing in the lectionary). 

That's the update.  If I get any deeper thoughts and an abiding desire to post them online, you'll be the first to know.  Thanks!

First thoughts on Senator Clinton's speech

Just a few quick thoughts on her speech, which I listening to on the radio.

• Senator Clinton offered a good speech.  She's not the dynamic speaker that either President Clinton or Senator Obama are - or, at least, she doesn't have their speechwriters - but her enthusiasm and passion were clear in today's speech.
• In the opening minutes of her speech she made two strong references to gay rights.  Isn't that two more than she made over the past 16 months?
• She painted a great picture of the advancement of women's rights and opportunity for all people in our country.  It's a great storyline that continues with Senator Obama's nomination and eventual election.
• She made a great deal about her gender in the campaign and in today's speech, and she has done so much to advance to the cause of women in the public sphere.  But she also spoke about Senator Obama's race and his unique place in history as the first black candidate for president of the United States - yet that is something that he has rarely done himself.  If he is not making his own race an issue, why should she?  Admittedly, she did not make much of the race issue, but it still bothers me a little bit.
• The selective use of anecdotal stories of voters - only of voters from states she won - was a bit much.  Are there not single moms or uninsured grandmothers in Iowa, Virginia, Illinois, North Carolina or the majority of states that Senator Obama won?
• She continued to flex her muscle and promote herself - mention of the "17,000,000 cracks in the glass ceiling" was rhetorically effective in the discussion about the advancement of women's rights, but it also served to promote the silly argument that she won the popular vote.
• I was extremely disappointed at the small number of supporters who booed at every reference to Senator Obama.  At the sound of those boos Senator Clinton should have departed from her manuscript and called them out, in the same way that Bill Clinton has often called out hecklers and protesters at his appearances.

Overall, a good speech.  She made a first huge step toward unifying the party and electing Barack Obama for President of the United States.  Now it is time for her supporters to stop whining, follow Senator Clinton's lead, and work to defeat McCain in November.

Part Revival, Part Book Tour, Part Fashion Show

The Church Basement Roadshow just might be coming your way.  Part revival, part book tour, and part fashion show - ok, it doesn't bill itself as a fashion show, but the guys wear odd clothes - The Church Basement Roadshow promises to combine "old time revival flair with a 21st century gospel" (for full press release, click here).  It's the latest big thing to come from the emergent church folks. 

[I blogged about emergent a handful of times, particularly a few years ago.  Those posts can be found here.]

I admit to being simultaneously baffled and awed by this show, featuring "three of the most outspoken emergent church leaders and authors" - Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt and Mark Scandrette.  I'm baffled by the rather odd early-20th century cultural motif they've chosen, but at least it's a change of pace from the skinny-white-guys-with-Apple-iBooks cultural motif that has characterized emergent in recent years.  The YouTube promo videos - one showing grainy images of Tony singing a twangy Roadshow theme song - are just odd.  For fans of Tony, Doug and Mark, these are surely interesting and engaging.  But for me, anyway, this is all a bit strange.

But I'm awed, too.  First, I'm awed by anybody who can do something that looks fairly ridiculous to your average bystander and pull it off with some sense of integrity and earnestness.  Adopting fictional personas, wearing early 20th century clothes, touring the country in a biodiesel RV, and producing a Christian marketing/evangelizing road show is so weird that it just might be genius.  Or lunacy.  I'm not sure.

And I'm impressed, too, by the entrepreneurial spirit of these guys.  Yes, this show is part revival, but it is also part book tour.  There's a $10 cover charge for each show.  There are various institutional sponsors undoubtedly providing financial and/or in-kind support.  And surely while you're at the show you'll be encouraged to purchase a few books.  As a former sales representative for Augsburg Fortress Publishers - and as one who took a bookstore display on the road to synod assemblies and church conventions - I'm impressed by their imaginative marketing.

But I remain more baffled than awed.  A pay-to-enter "revival" is much less a revival than a marketing enterprise calling consumers rather than converts, pocketbooks rather than pious souls.  And the cultural trappings of the early 20th century - from the grainy video to the twangy music and accents to the clothes and facial hair - simply contribute to my fear that this roadshow might be long on production value and short on substance.

I hope I'm wrong.  As I've written in the past, I'm intrigued by the emergent project, but I remain unconvinced of its methodology.  I wish I could attend the Roadshow's stop in my neck of the woods - at American University on July 31.  But alas, that's the night before I leave for an 11 day trip to El Salvador.  I'll miss it.  But if any of you are able to catch the Roadshow, please leave me a note and let me know what you think.

Thanks.

Time for the DNC to exert control (sorry MI, FL)

Today's meeting of the Democratic National Committee Rules Committee is much less significant for its impact on the current race - give Senator Clinton all the delegates she supposedly won in those farse elections, and she still trails Senator Obama in the delegate race - than it is important for how the 2012 and 2016 Democratic presidential nomination processes are structured.  If Michigan and Florida receive all of their delegates - no matter how they're apportioned - the DNC makes it clear that it has no control over its own nomination process, and that states can do what they want in scheduling their primaries in the future. 

The sense of righteous indignation that folks in Florida and Michigan feel is misplaced.  Except for dedicated party loyalists and political junkies, nobody really cares about state delegations to the party's national convention.  Furthermore, a party's nomination process is not a public election but rather the governing process of a private political organization.  After a primary is complete, nobody takes office - they simply gear up for a general election.  Parties can do what they please in their nomination process.

I hope that the DNC penalizes Florida and Michigan today by awarding them partial delegations or no delegations.  They must exert control over their own nomination process.

And as a next step, it should get out of the practice of outsourcing its primary process to the states.  Parties should retain full control over their primaries and not allow elected officials - particularly those of the opposing party - to dabble in their internal affairs.