Fellowship Hall Class

The year of the Bible

salvation and works

I have often understood the telling of Anabaptist history to be something that is changing; changing from a biased retelling in almost heroic imagery (seen in Dyck) to more recently a more honest “human” telling (seen in Roth). I am now seeing that even the “older” books tell a very honest story of struggle. A struggle with how to define the movement and struggle with how to move forward in terms of civil law and citizenship. I wonder how the future generations of historians will write our story. For the purpose of this reflection I will narrow the topic to a focus on service/aid to those in need and salvation concepts.

One small story in our reading this week caught my attention. In 1550s, Protestants in England fled the persecution under Queen Mary by crossing the English Chanel. Their boat somehow got caught in ice and the newly formed Mennonites near Wismar helped them. The interesting part of this to me is the how the persecuted Mennonites continued the desire to provide aid to others not in their group. It reminds me again of how important it is to see the needs of others around us even when things don’t look good inside our own group. During a time when early Mennonites were refugees themselves, they helped other refugees.

My church (Souderton Mennonite) is going through a difficult time in terms of our budget. We are limiting funding or even cutting funding to some ministries. Many of our members in the church are experiencing unemployment and/or reduced income. I cannot state that the lack of money is as great of a trial as persecution seen in the 1550s but our focus outward should be the same. My church needs to learn a quick lesson from our former Mennonite brothers and sisters near Wismar, North Germany, and also continue to provide aid to those in need even if it means our own suffering.

The final area of focus for this blog will be salvation theology. I find some similarities with other reformers in language but it seems to me that the Anabaptists had something more. A good example is the use of the word blood. Menno uses it and others also often reference blood. What seems to be unique is that blood language is not enough for the early Anabaptists. Salvation must be combined with works or acting like Christ. The blood on the cross is a part of salvation but does not stand alone as salvation. In our language today we would say that we need a non-violent atonement. Not to look past the death of Jesus on the cross but to not just hang out theology hats on this death alone. We also need to live like Jesus.

From my perspective, the early Mennonites struggled internally with theology and how to set up systems to survive as a movement. One thing that they focused on that allowed them to overcome internal disputes was the external awareness of the suffering of others and the decision to provide aid to them. This is the lesson for my church, Souderton Mennonite. Living like Jesus was a part of Mennonite history as their core salvation theology and Souderton Mennonite should also focus on this with its current struggles for unity and vision.

Mestizo

The forces of globalization need continued study from all perspectives. If the best window into God’s revelation is Christ’s earthly ministry then this globalization study needs to be rooted in Christ. Virgilio Elizondo does just this. In this blog I will work with the Elizondo text “The Future is Mestizo” as a tool for adding to the globalization study from the Mexican American perspective.

From the perspective of revisionist history, Elizondo’s view of Texas territory history is right on. The WASP invasion of the current Texas territory is well documented by several historians like Beard and Bard. These historians noted in the early 1900s that the common understanding in classrooms across the country needed revised. The horrific treatment of natives all over the “frontier” in the 1800s was a grave mistake; specifically the treatment of the already settled areas of Texas being possibly criminal. Revisionist historians also agree with Elizondo on the role of Mexican Americans in the war effort during the 1940s. These men and women did all they were asked to do and did not receive the expected honor. Some historians like Beard even go as far as to argue that minorities were placed in harm’s way knowingly by President Roosevelt and other commanders. Recent work was built off of Beard and Bard to bring this revisionist history into mainstream education. Authors like Howard Zin pull work together that again supports Elizondo’s work. Therefore, even though Elizondo could be grouped with other revisionists, he has a needed perspective when it comes to Texas and immigration policy.

Important to Elizondo’s focus is the claim to immigrant or native. The policies of our current congress do not understand the entire story and the rightful home of many Mexican persons in the Texas territory. Interesting note from a textbook perspective is that Elizondo seems to move away from caring about law and immigration policy and chooses instead to focus on the change and intermingling of cultures. This change and intermingling is creating a new culture that will begin to open up to new understandings of American history. Elizondo places his hope for the future in the unstoppable power of cultural mixing not legislation. He thinks that as America becomes more and more mixed, policy will change.

One area that change from intermixing cultures has already taken place is food. Food seems to be a key for Elizondo. Not only is food more varied from a cultural perspective but it also gives a common language. For example, there is no English word for taco. One word works with both Spanish and English. This seems menial and insignificant when taking into light the power of WASP in America. Yet Elizondo moves into a thought provoking commentary on how merging cultures like Mexican and European can blend without losing self identity. This is culture making rather than culture protecting. Little things like the taco are signs of this merger.

A second area where even a novice sociologist can see cultural change is in sports. For example, the sports world of baseball has increasingly moved to Spanish and with this comes a new common language and natural bridges to build on. Spanish names and Spanish language are chanted by fans of all cultural backgrounds. This force brought on by the globalization of baseball is powerful. More and more children are growing up with heroes from Spanish speaking cultures. The change is already in place and the outcomes will be seen in the near future.

I do wonder what will happen with the immigration policies of Mexican Americans. There still is significant resistance to Mexican immigration of which much is rooted in racist attitudes. As Elizondo states, racism against Mexican Americans is often seen in the work place. As cultural merging happens, maybe some of these racist attitude and thought will just fade away. I am not sure.

In conclusion, what does Elizondo bring to the table when talking about the future of the Church in America? The focus on Christ as an example of a mixed cultural person helps. A read of other authors whom also describe a centering movement re-enforce Elizondo’s premise. The future of the Church of America is mixed cultures just like Jesus experienced. As a Mennonite, I am concerned about mixing culture if it means losing our Mennonite heritage. After reading Elizondo, I am challenged to think that most of Mennonite culture is already lost and remade several times. To add more variety from other cultural perspectives is re-energizing rather than loss. The future is this mix of cultures and it will be/is good.

Suburban Revival: Possible or Dream?

I am a rural Christian who began moving out of rural settings with college at age 23 who now is in a vocation working with suburban Christians and can outwardly begin to call myself one. This blog will focus on the change and also reflect on Hsu’s text The Suburban Christian so that changes like I experienced can be focused and beginning questions can be formed.

Some of my observations in my shift to suburban living are centered on how money is spent. In rural life, money is spent and reinvested into rural living. For example, when my dairy farming family had good years, the money was spent on equipment or livestock upgrades. In suburbia, good years mean more lawn ornaments, new cars, and/or more clothing. One interesting comparison from my perspective is that both contexts do not attempt to pay down debt. I cannot state that spending on a new tractor is better than a new dress but the focus of that spending is different. The tractor has a value in terms of how it can improve work. A new cow has a value in its offspring and its milk (in the case of a dairy farm). I have yet to fully understand the value of a new dress or a desire to impress with a dress. I do not have the experience or possibly the intelligence to understand this desire to have a new outfit. I think I can say that it does not have the same long term use in mind as a cow or a tractor.

In suburban culture, money does seem to be the key and the goal to life. Therefore, showing your money is essential. In rural life that I observed years ago, money was almost embarrassing. You did not want to tell other farmers about a new tractor or show any new items. The value was in preserving old items like how many miles you could get on a farm truck. In suburban culture, this showing seems to be essential. When my current suburban home got new bushes in the front of the house a few years ago, the entire street made a fuss.

My first question related to Hsu’s text is centered on his future hope for suburbia. Can suburbia overcome it obsession with money? If it cannot, then God has no place. Can suburbanites do what Hsu calls them to and see money as extra that can do good locally, in proximity cities, and globally? I am not convinced. Our current economic climate leads these suburbanites to cling even tighter to their money as evidence that they do not see what they have.

Now to get more personal, I struggle with budgeting. I continually find the month to month balancing act to fall off the wrong end. Problems like refrigerators, dishwashers, clothes dryers and clothes washers continually plague our budget on top the regular issues like growing children and the cost of healthy food. I am not ready to give more or ready to give up on our suburban house and suburban life. Therefore, before I can go after those “other” rich suburbanites I need to go after myself.

I relate to most of the Hsu comments in the first part of his text. I also avoid some aspects of suburbia like Wal-Mart and intentionally try to shop locally and even support the local farmers as much as can be done. I have also given myself to the quest for spirituality similar to Hsu. But it is here that I have found more frustration than Hsu seems to express. As a farmer, the dependence on God and nature were hand in hand. The thankful spirit for the rain and the sun just happened naturally. As a suburbanite, these spiritual actions are rather pushed or even fake. The only time God moments are real is when tragedy is involved. A good example just happened Friday afternoon on our way down to EMU for our nephew Miles’ graduation. We just traveled into the state of Virginia when we saw that the state bird is a red Cardinal. In 2006 Miles’ mother (our sister-in-law) died of brain cancer and during her last few weeks of life, red Cardinals visited her and she shared that they were God’s sign to her that she could make it. Back to Friday, we were no more than a mile or two past the state line when Erika saw a red cardinal flying with us along the road. It seemed to be going 70 miles an hour with us for about ten seconds. We all saw it. To us it was God’s sign that we can make it through the weekend.

I try to keep our garden goals moving forward. Each year we till up more grass and grow more garden crops. Last year was the first season where we actually had enough crops to freeze, blanch or can some for the winter. Our kids really get into the work for a few minutes and they love to eat the fresh food. Even the frozen corn or beans they enjoy and spend time talking about how cool it is that they came from our garden. The education is great but the spirituality is hard. The kids realize that if we don’t get a good crop from the garden, we just go the store. The same dependence on God for livelihood is not there.

In conclusion, I am not sure what to tell true suburbanites. I also see some farmers fall off the same deep end of the same money trap. When farms are sold and money is made they change into different people. Status and wealth replace hospitality and community. In other words, money is the root of all evil and God is lost. “God please help us but don’t do it through tragedy”.

Hip-Hop Classroom

The Hip-Hop Culture in the United States is a very powerful force in the lives of the youth at Christopher Dock Mennonite High School. This blog will focus on some ways to connect what Efrem Smith and Phil Jackson reveal in their text titled “The Hip-Hop Church” to my setting.

For those who have not read the text yet, the culture of Hip-Hop needs some brief description. According to Smith and Jackson, Hip-Hop is post-soul, outside civil rights, outside politics, an entire culture, a coping mechanism, and a tool to speak out for justice. It is what most young people listen to and if they don’t listen to it they are inadvertently affected by it. We can see it in the clothing, in the attitude, in the physical posture, and in the way youth sit/slouch in their cars. Many of these components of Hip-Hop culture are well in line with what I see in terms of needs for our church today. But Hip-Hop is also very bold in its style and uses images and language that is offensive. Smith and Jackson are attempting to have the church work with the strength of this cultural movement but not get sucked into the offensive components. The authors work with how successful Hip-Hop is and how unsuccessful the church has been so that they can bring up a need to work within the Hip-Hop culture to incarnate the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The phrase they use is to work toward a “Hip-Hop Church” and both Smith and Jackson have some success stories to share of this avenue for the gospel.

Turning now to my context, the high school classroom, I want to make two observations from last week. Both of these observations are only a beginning for me but I have hope that I can build on this. I want to state up front that a way to work with girls is missing. I am eager and willing to explore this but at present, I have not.

Jared is a junior in my class. He is a Euro-American, middle class, suburban teen that is representing this Hip-Hop culture. He dresses the style, talks the talk, and carries an attitude towards authority. As I was reading the text at home this week I often thought of Jared as a prime example of the influence of Hip-Hop outside of urban life. I decided to give him a challenge for class Thursday and Friday. He was to bring in a song to play for the class that demonstrated a good message for the church. I told him not to worry about language but to focus on the message. I expected him to find a Christian version so that he would not push the limit of the class but that was not the case. I also thought this might be hard for him to pick since most songs (according to me) are negative messages. This also was not the case. I cannot remember the names of the artists or the titles of the songs he chose but for a few minutes my classroom was transformed. Heads bounced, feet tapped and many kids laughed as they waited for the “F Bomb” to come up. These students then began to tell me all about the message of these songs and how they love to play this song in certain situations. One student even shared how he likes to mix this one in when he is deejay at parties (news to me). I found that what Jared brought to class helped my work as an educator. The topic from history I was intending to cover was the changes in place for Luther and the reformation and we spoke about how this Hip-Hop message is speaking to the changes in place today setting up a new form of church now. I also want to note that Jared did not sleep in class and did not try to put up his hood and slide down into his chair. I ran into him at church Sunday and he asked if he can bring in another song after spring break.

Jon is a junior in my class. He is a Central American, adopted, middle class, suburban teen. He also represents Hip-Hop but for him it is a connection with minority persons and the struggle for justice that pulls him in. He is in the same class with Jared and wants to play some of his selections. He said “mine aren’t a nice as Jared’s”. I told him to give it a try so we will see what I am getting into after break. I assume the message will be good but the language will not be. What I do notice is that showing the connection to current challenges of the church helped Jon also get/understand the challenges of the church in the 1500s.

In conclusion, the inclusion of Hip-Hop in class will help build connections/applications. As Smith and Jackson state, the challenge is to clarify what the message is and add prophetic insight from the gospel. We do not need to put down artists but rather work with what they reveal about culture (injustice and frustrations) to help spin a relevant gospel of the good news in Christ.

Hipps blog

Hipps blog

One perk of being a Mennonite educator is the Mennonite Educators Conference. The winter 08 conference was in Pittsburg and the key note presenter was Shane Hipps. I must admit up front in this blog that Hipps took me by storm and by surprise. I had already decided to limit my children’s exposure to some types of media but I did not understand or begin to understand logical reasons why outside of the basic time management issues. I was not consciously aware of the power of media. Hipps began in me a struggle to see this power in my own life and also to use the topic of media as a very helpful tool/perspective for the study of history. How can we survive the cultural and religious shifts around us without being aware of the hidden power of media?

The first caution is for the church. What message is our media sending during Sunday morning worship? I have been in some conversations at SMC related to this and I even presented a sermon on this topic. My current thoughts are that SMC sends the message that only the Power Point notes are important and when a video is played it represents a perfect image of the topic of the morning. None of these messages are the intent. In my opinion, Power Point replaces listening skills, is an extension of the preacher’s voice, can revert into a lack of attention to the spoken word, and retrieves individualism and monologue presentation (based on Hipps page 42). More and more technology does not increase the ability of the application or impact in our lives from the message. In our present culture that values relationship, Power Point is the wrong media choice. The better choice would be “break out” groups or small discussion circles after a given focus question or topic of reflection.

My second caution is for my classroom. Dock has provided teachers with very nice mounted projectors including DVD, Video, and computer projection options. I could just use some of the many presentations on U.S. History or Church History found on web sites or movies/documentaries and bypass making lesson plans. What is the message to my students if we watch “The Witness” to teach about the Amish or “Saving Private Ryan” to teach about WWII? The message seems to be that I do not want to work with the harder questions and the potential for difficult conversations. It also send the message that I think those portrays are accurate. Is the movie business better than I am at teaching? Even worse, do I not care about the students? In the past I used more movies than I do now and I have noticed that student behavior and achievement change. Negative behaviors related to attention getting has noted reductions and achievement has noted increases. Therefore, the hidden power of this type of media in the classroom is not positive.

A related note needs to be made about the study of history. Using media as another tool to help define a given period in history is new to historiography but could be very helpful. The above mentioned movies come from the 80s and the late 90s. What did the popularity of these films and their method of presenting history and culture say about the last two decades of the 20th century? Possibly the hidden message is that relationships can cross barriers previously not possible. In Saving Private Ryan, geeks become friends with heroes (even becoming heroes themselves) and in The Witness, violent cops fall in love with nonviolent Amish (who speak German not PA Dutch).

Another caution is related to student use of cell phones on school sponsored trips. I have led a service learning trip to Washington DC two times a year over the past 14 years. When we started, students did not have cell phones. Eventually all students had cell phones and could call one another. Recently, the change is to texting. Observing these changes in the use of media is beginning to disturb me. One of our goals/objectives is to have the students create new friendships. It seems that most of the time is spent texting with friends not on the trip versus building relationships with people right next to them. On a more safety related concern, some students text while walking the sidewalks and do not pay attention to the traffic patterns or other people around them. The hidden power of texting seems to be a shallow level of relationships for these teens. In April I begin another Social Issues class and I am leaning toward a cell phone ban with open discussion about why. I would want the students to take ownership of this ban but I don’t know if they will.

Hipps text “The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture” continues to be a significant text for my work. Once these ideas are in the thinking of people, the electronic culture losses some of its luster. Newer, faster, smaller, and multi-featured devises are just re-creations of old ideas and also have a negative side. One just needs to spend time working on the four observations posed by Hipps and mentioned above.

P. Tickle blog

P. Tickle blog
“…it will rewrite Christian theology … into something far more Jewish, more paradoxical, more narrative, and more mystical than anything the Church has had for the last seventeen or eighteen hundred years.” (162) I must admit that some parts of the text The Great Emergence has been hard to swallow. As I work with leadership at Souderton Mennonite Church and include references to Tickle’s work, I am beginning to take little bites and many small swallows.

The first small swallow I took down was the analogy of the cord. I can easily see SMC in this analogy. Our traditional shared history is now open (the outer waterproof covering). Even our leadership board is five to two; five raised Mennonite and two not. Our congregation is even more varied. Traditional teachings are not known in a growing percentage of the congregation (example: peace theology). The desire of leadership is to find ways to center on a core or root of our congregational faith (topic at the board and pastor retreat 2-29-09). This is evidence that the cover is open and we are struggling to find ways to fix it.

The cord analogy goes next to the mesh sleeve or common imagination of our time. SMC is again divided and unsure how this one will be decided. Some are still bent on conservative versus liberal and some are thinking spiritual versus rational (realist versus idealist). In other words, our congregation and our leadership teams have not agreed on how the world works and then how we respond.

The inner part of the cord is the threefold cord: spirituality, corporeality, and morality. In this I can see some decisions and direction to aid the work on the above mentioned two parts (Tickle makes a similar argument for the US Church). Spirituality is defined as experiential and to some degree emotional. Church programs/ministries are focused on this and the main gathering time or worship Sunday mornings is also weighted toward experiential sharing with emotional proof. A typical Sunday service include someone’s personal sharing related to a ministry or life event which adds application to the sermon topic. I see this as SMC’s answer to the spirituality quest – it is seen as experiential. Second is corporeality as in the embodied evidence that religion exists. SMC is ready to tear apart the Bible so that the “inconsistencies” can be made right. They seem to have gathered behind the Christocentric methodology of applying scripture. With this lens, they accept that potential human exaggeration and outright sexism/racism/nationalism of the biblical writers can be found by “weighing” these accounts to the standard/truth of Christ. This allows SMC to keep scripture as embodied evidence even some passages are evidence of human fallacy and others are God’s divine leadership. The final part of the cord is morality. I am certain that leadership and the congregation have not come up with a unified or even majority answer to this one. A working description would be, “don’t do stupid” (Martin Weins – VP at Dock). I am not sure if there is a “sin” that is too bad for acceptance but I do have conversations with some members about some other members sin in terms of discomfort (not good gossip but maybe not stupid).

The work at the above mentioned retreat was centered on what is SMC’s foundation or truth that all else grows out of. I mentioned a willow tree image. Our roots are in our Anabaptist story and the revelation of God seen in Christ Jesus. Our branches grow up and out and then bend down and touch areas all around our church; the streets and homes in Souderton. As we grow and nourish the tree, we can reach even further out with potential to transplant and start new trees. After reading Tickle I also see a comparison in the definition she is working with for current “emergent” churches. SMC lines up with her working definition. We mentioned at the meeting that we want to lead in a way that allows for belonging before believing. Tickle sees this as part of the working definition of emergent churches. To further the case for SMC’s emergent status, we also are more centrist in our links to the four quadrants in Tickle’s work. We also love to talk over the pulpit about the tensions or paradox in our lives: individualism with community, present kingdom with the future fullness of the kingdom, corporate with private faith, inward journey with the outer journey.

The parts of Tickle’s work that I am not able to swallow yet relates to her work with truth. I cannot comprehend that truth is a construct of society and religious perception. Truth is made by human design and the pattern of this design re-enforces the human creation of it. That is one big bit for a former farm boy from Amish country. I am not sure where Tickle comes out in her own faith journey but what is God’s role in this transition? Is there an ultimate answer to truth or is Tickle another post-modernite who finds no ultimate truth outside of human psychological construct? What is the role of the church to refocus this pluralistic culture on God? How much can we change/emerge without losing God as our foundation? As I keep working on this big bit maybe, with the help of my community, I can start taking smaller bits of this one also

Genesis comments

Post topics or questions you would like our class to work with by commenting on this blog. Mark is starting by sharing his faith story and also sharing his vision for work and church.

Blog on Murray’s text “Post Christendom”

Murray’s text Post Christendom has become a significant additional source for my teaching load at Christopher Dock Mennonite High School. This blog will focus on four over-arching principles found in Murray’s research; first the language of pre-Christendom, Christendom, and post Christendom, second the open ended style of referencing Constantine’s’ faith, third is the dualism of Christendom’s expectations on Monks and Nuns and Priests, and fourth is the instructions/conclusions he makes for the current church.

The class I teach related to Murray’s work is titled “The story of the Church” and it carries a significant focus or bias for the Anabaptist movement and the Mennonite story. Previously I language the sections as “Christ to Constantine”, “Medieval Church”, “Reformation”, “Anabaptist Movement and the Mennonites”, and the last unit was “Visions for the Church”. Murray’s language is very helpful in that it addresses the focus I have tried to keep and the need for new visions in our current situations. I see the next syllabus having four units titled similar to Murray’s research as mentioned above. This language will help give hooks to hang new information on. For example, when the class gets to the end of the fourth unit and they begin to spin visions for the Church, they can understand that there are similarities to other movements in other periods of our study but they can also see that we are not in a direct redo of past periods. New names with similar root words helps teach the spiraling of this church story.

As I read the section about the Emperor Constantine I was challenged to present to my students a similar style of research. Murray states that the evidence from the sources imply that Constantine encountered a God message and sign similar to the Biblical account of the apostle Paul on the road to Damascus. Yet Murray carefully shows that evidence can be found that would lead researchers to a conclusion in another direction. Constantine could have been attempting a combination of monotheistic faiths; sun worship and Christian worship. The key is not to prove one way or the other but to show the possible conclusions and let the students decide. I already have my understanding but I do my students little good to just give them monologue about my thinking. I need to invite them into the decision making process by showing the case and asking them to come to their own conclusions. I think the reader of Murray can determine what Murray thought, but the style and method by which he worked through the evidence was a great model for me.

Murray’s research about the time of Christendom is marked by two sections; the first several centuries of expanding and sealing the deal on Christendom, the last group of time is maintenance of the existing territory. It is in this last period that Murray works with the dualistic approach to understanding Christ’s teaching. He claims the view of this time was that since most people could not live up to Christ’s high level of morality, only the monks and nuns and priests would try to. One irony of this concept that Murray does not seem to address is that many reformers were from Monastic orders and Priestly positions. Luther was from the Augustinian order, Sattler was from the Benedictine order, and many others were Priests (Zwingli is mentioned in Murray’s text). Since these leaders of the reformation were in this dualistic mindset of ethics, it is no wonder that they also struggled with how to lead the people into a new way of viewing law and state authority. Most reformers decided to lead in a continued form of Christendom. Sattler was the only one I mentioned above that came to the conclusion that all of people in the Church can live as Jesus did. Sattler’s work was a key to the early Anabaptist movement that grew into a fringe group facing persecution from the different forms of Christendom. As Murray states, this Anabaptist fringe is a model for Christians today as we struggle with the lure back into a Christendom mindset even though we stand in the Post Christendom period.

Murray works clearly with the present situation of Church in Post Christendom. The leading challenge for me is the importance to avoid Christendom language and assumptions. My classroom often gets into discussions about law and politics. Most of the time, the focus is on “legislating morality”. This Christendom language is not going to be helpful. “Legislating for the common good” language will be helpful. I still wonder what Christians in post Christendom are to do with hot button issues like abortion but the language does need to be “common good” versus “legislating morality”.

In conclusion, I gained language, style, theology, and applications from Murray’s text yet I also need to mention some questions I still have. One such question is the topic of church discipline. I understand Murray’s point that true discipline is in a level playing field in terms of authority. My point is that even on level fields, discipline seems too hard to be worth it. Support and teaching is one thing but to actually go up to a friend and tell them what they need to change seems impossible. I can understand giving counsel or advice but cannot picture telling someone they are wrong or in need to change. The second and final question for this blog’s scope is the issue of government. I grew up with the traditional Mennonite concept of avoiding all government involvement including voting. Now I am voting and willing to participate in active non-violent action (although my actual practice is very short). What is my motivation or end goal? I don’t want to recreate Christendom but I also don’t want to stand by and do nothing. Maybe I can only do local actions for the limited goals. I need to work more with as the reader can tell.

Church attendance

student perspective on church. click here to open this word document and see what one student thinks.