Saturday, June 27, 2015

Walking as a Spiritual Discipline

I serve as a pastor of two churches. The first one is three miles from our home, and the second is just three more miles down the same road. On Sunday morning it takes ten minutes to drive the six miles. Lately I have been wondering how long it would take to walk the entire twelve-mile round trip.

Besides the physical challenge of making that journey, I remembered hearing about Christians who practiced walking or hiking as a spiritual discipline.
About thirty years ago I saw a photo like this one of Pope John Paul II hiking in the countryside. As a kid I was struck by seeing the white robes in the woods and being surprised that the pope would do something so ordinary.

Later on in life I learned about the basic spiritual disciplines of prayer, meditation, reading, and fasting. Most of these activities involve sitting in a room alone, trying to concentrate on God. I'm all for concentration, and I attempt to practice at least one of those alone-time disciplines every day. However, I also like the idea that God can work in our lives while we are moving around. So I recently I tried combining walking with prayer.

"Prayer Walking" is not something you can read about in the Bible. Jesus certainly walked around a lot, but the gospels never say he prayed while doing it. The closest we get is the story of Joshua walking around the walls of Jericho, but that was in preparation to kill everyone inside -- not exactly the kind of activity I had in mind. Instead, I was thinking about walking as a way to pray for the people in the neighborhood. In our churches we have been asking God to open us up to the needs of our neighbors, so I thought that walking past their homes would provide an opportunity to pray for each household.

Last week I took my first prayer walk. (I'm proud to say that I shaved off 40 minutes from the time that Google Maps said it would take -- 3:30 instead of 4:15.) It was a nice chance to have something to do while praying, and I found that the physical activity made the time go faster. But, unfortunately, walking was not a magical formula to make praying easier. My mind still wandered. It was still hard work to actually pray for the houses and cars that I passed.

But here is something that helped me stay focused: I found a passage from a Psalm that brought a mental image to mind to use in my prayers. For instance, yesterday I read Psalm 102:25 before setting out: "Long ago you laid the foundation of the earth and made the heavens with your hands." So for each house I walked past, I prayed that Jesus Christ would be the spiritual foundation (or cornerstone, also borrowing from Ephesians 2:20) of the people inside. It might seem agonizingly repetitive to use the same image for dozens of prayers, but I actually found it helpful to have one organizing idea. When praying for lots of people at once -- especially ones you don't know -- a central theme can keep you focused. Trying to come up with original prayers for each house would be really difficult, especially in neighborhoods where the homes are close together.

During my walks I also pray for the people in my congregations -- even the ones who don't live along the route that I walk. I have also told them when I do these walks so that they can join me in prayer too. I trust that God will work in our lives as a result of these Prayer Walks.

Here is a three-minute Youtube video from the Salvation Army about Prayer Walking as a way to intercede for people:


Saturday, June 20, 2015

Fighting our Enemies

The story of David and Goliath comes up in the rotation of preaching texts for this Sunday's worship services. All week I've been working through 1 Samuel 17, trying to find the key places that this story intersects with the lives of those I will be preaching to tomorrow. There is something primal about seeing ourselves as David -- the God-favored underdog who defeats godless opponents, all while proving one's self to a sociopathic ruler and skeptical family members. Given the opportunity to "place yourself in the scene" -- a practice that is used in some devotional methods of reading the Bible -- most of us would line ourselves up with David. We all want to be the shepherd with five stones and a sling.

Then on Wednesday a young white man murdered nine black worshipers at a service at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston. I instantly thought, "He thinks he's David." Admittedly, I haven't heard the shooter specifically reference Israel's boy warrior, but I have no doubt that he saw himself as a savior, fighting alone against the odds. Reading 1 Samuel -- or any part of the Bible -- in the wrong way can be very dangerous. Indeed, trying to make every Scripture passage fit our own personal agenda or situation can lead us astray, especially when we assume that the Bible endorses violence.

We've all read 1 Samuel 17. On the surface it is a  pretty straight-forward account that teaches "trust in God, and you'll defeat your enemies." No doubt that's a part of this chapter's meaning. But many of us take this a step further and assume that behind this story is a God who approves of violence. Here are a few reasons why I think this is a wrong approach:
  • We're not totally sure about David's motivations here. Sure, verses 37 and 46 have David claiming that he's fighting for the Lord. But in the lead-up to his big showdown with the giant, David is promised a reward for winning. Verse 25 says, "The king will greatly enrich the man who kills him, and will give him his daughter and make his family free in Israel." I don't know too many young men who would be able to go into this battle clear-headed and not consider those offers on the table. There is some hint of David's personal motivation in his brother's accusation in verse 28: "I know your presumption and the evil of your heart; for you have come down just to see the battle." Did David have the Lord's best interests in mind, or his own? If he trusted only in God, then would he need to use a weapon at all?
  •  God never tells David to use violence. In fact, God doesn't talk in this story at all. The Lord is not slow to speak in this part of the Bible -- just look at how many times he directs Samuel in the previous chapters. But in chapter 17 God says nothing -- it seems as if David has decided for himself how to resolve the problem of the giant's challenges. This is a life-long struggle for David, and at the end of his life David's violent ways disqualify him from building God's temple (1 Chronicles 28:3).
  • It wasn't a fair fight -- for Goliath. Malcom Gladwell, the best-selling author, has an interesting take on David's fighting methods. In the video clip below, he claims that David craftily shifted the terms of battle into his own favor. Goliath probably suffered from a brain tumor, which caused him to grow larger than normal and affected his eyesight. David brought a gun to a knife fight and killed a man who was being manipulated and coerced by the Philistine armies. (Here's the link to the talk, in case the image clip below doesn't show up in your email or blog reader: https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_the_unheard_story_of_david_and_goliath?language=en)
The Black Church in America has a long history of being targeted by violent racists. While it seems inconceivable that anyone would consider African-American Christians as an enemy, the murders in Charleston are the latest in a long line of similar travesties. We have a long way to go in this country to repent of all the ugly and intertwined sin and evil that have infested our collective psyche and individual souls. As long as people tolerate or encourage violence as an appropriate means for solving problems, then we will be constantly tempted to find enemies -- real or imagined -- so that we can exercise these tools of war. Here's a suggestion for attempting to undo the evils of racism in America: Let's stop interpreting our scriptures in ways that endorse violence. The bigger message of the Bible is that God will bring about a new kingdom of peace. Violence has never been a part of God's plan. God's people are meant to use forgiveness and hospitality to win battles, not the weapons of war.

Sunday, June 14, 2015

Itineracy

This is Annual Conference season in the United Methodist Church. Here in eastern North Carolina we just spent four days in Wilmington, where we worshiped together and discussed the business -- or order -- of our denomination in this part of the world.

Part of the ordering of ministry that happens at Annual Conference is the setting of pastoral appointments. On the final day of the gathering the Bishop read out all changes in appointments for the UM churches in her area of responsibility. Thankfully, I was reappointed to Salem and Harris Chapel and will not be moving this year. Of course this came as no surprise -- I would have known beforehand if a move was in the works. The Bishop, through a District Superintendent, collaborates with pastors and churches to set appointments. Gone are the days when the Bishop would surprise the pastors and their laity by announcing changes for the first time during Annual Conference. 

Itineracy is the word we use to describe how pastors are moved around and appointed according to the Bishop's direction. This is one thing that sets the UMC apart from other church traditions. Our pastors move at the behest of the Annual Conference instead of the local congregation. Local churches certainly have a voice in deciding on pastoral appointments, but the ultimate decision resides with the office of the Bishop. As I prepare for ordination as an Elder in the UMC, I agree to accept this aspect of ministry.

This is very different from churches who call or hire their own pastors. It would be difficult to make a case from scripture for one method being right or the other wrong. Methodism has placed such a high value on itineracy because Bishop Francis Asbury saw it as a mark of apostolicity. In other words, preachers who were willing to be sent out wherever needed were following in the same tradition as the early apostles. Many times those pastors were called on to move every year or two. In places where churches were being planted -- where the Methodists were meeting in homes or cell groups -- a circuit-riding preacher might only visit once every few months. Having a "station" or permanent pastor was considered a luxury for more established congregations.

These days the church in America is no longer a frontier movement. Moving new preachers into different pulpits is less important than the stability of leadership over the long haul. It's now rare for pastors to get moved around frequently, and some stay in their appointments for a very long time -- decades rather than years. Of course there are both pros and cons about long-term appointments. In a culture where people trust leaders less than they used to, it takes a pastor a long time to become known and respected in a community. People who study such things say that a pastor needs at least 7 years in the same appointment to see significant growth or change. However, a long-term appointment can also tempt a congregation to build a personality cult around a specific pastor. If a change in pastors causes a church to collapse, then too much of that congregation's ministry was centered in one person. A good pastor is important, but it's not everything when it comes to being the body of Christ.


A Manual for Personal Piety: The Book of Hours

Book of Hours manuscript kept at Harvard University People have always encountered God outside outside of the times and spaces designat...