A sad morning in court

This morning my friend Will Dungee and I had to go to court on behalf of one of our friends who was too sick to make his appearance (and we could not get in touch with his lawyer). At one point, Will said, "I wonder what the Lord is preparing us for by having us do things like this for our friend." I don't know the specific reasons yet, but it was an eye opening look into one part of our justice system.

The Assistant DA who was running the courtroom I had to go to (our friend's charges were being dealt with in two separate court rooms at the same time - how does that work?) made no effort to be pleasant. It was simple traffic court, but she made no ability to speak with kindness. It was clear that she wanted to establish that she was in charge and her rules were the only ones that counted. I understand a need for order, but her rules became laws that were immovable. For example, she misread the name of one woman sitting next to me, and so the woman didn't catch it. Realizing that the DA might have said her name but mispronounced it, she asked her if she could pause and repeat it (the DA was two names down the list by then). The DA said she could not and would not, and that the woman would have to wait. She did not say it kindly, and she seemed to enjoy being in charge. Thankfully, a lawyer later helped this woman, finding her case in the pile and giving it to the DA.

No questions were permitted, and people were treated like an annoyance. Will and I received the same treatment upstairs in the DA's office, as we had gone up to see if we could get the case continued without sitting through the docket. Another Assistant DA came out to see us and said, "Who are you?" in a way that made me feel like I was very small. When we explained our situation he told us just to go to the courtroom and listen for Kevin's name, and when we asked what we were to do then, he began walking away and said, "Just go down there." Will was in his courtroom, and said that he was extremely rude, telling people to shut up and asking who gave them permission to speak.

The thing about going to court is that it's not very intuitive for most defendants because they/we don't spend a lot of time in that place and culture, and if you don't know what you are doing, it's hard to play the game. I see why so many people hire lawyers because it's tricky and time-consuming for an average person to navigate the legal system. And unfortnuately, the rules of the courtroom game don't permit you to ask questions without being treated like an annoyance. Sure, the DA lays down some ground rules before calling the calendar (say either "guilty", "not guilty", "continuance", or "attorney" when you hear your name called), but what happens after that is for them to know and you to find out. For example, I said "Continuance" when my friend's name was called, and then they took out the stack of continuances and began to read the names and assign another court date. But there was a small stack of "continuances" whose names were not called, and were just left there. My assumption is that my friend has overextended his continuance graces, but that was never explained or addressed or mentioned, and I dared not ask.

The ADA also treated the room like a group of 5-year-olds, telling people to sit down rather than stand in the back, which is fine, because those are the court rules, but her tone and demeanor was that of a teacher talking to a group of Kindergardeners who had never been to class before. What I sensed from her was fear and control - she drew these really fine and tight lines and there were no exceptions because unless the laws/rules were kept to the letter, who knows what might happen? (sarcasm) People who had the audacity to challenge those by asking a question or not getting them right the first time were shamed. I also felt that she enjoyed being charge, but hated her job and disliked all the people there who were overloading her docket and were probably up to no good anyway (note: she did not say any of this - this is my perception).

Looking around the room, the defendants were 98% black and Hispanic. The people in charge up front were 99% white (I saw one black attorney) and mostly male (the ADA in my court room was a woman and there was one other woman lawyer). The power dynamic was clear - there was a way of talking, a way of operating, and if you didn't know how to talk and operate in that way, you were in trouble. At first I thought of this as a racial divide, but really it was a class divide. Now, race and class are not easily separated here in Greensboro - the have's tend to be white and the have not's tend to be black and Hispanic - but Will helped me clarify that this was primarily a class gap. The ADA was communicating in a way that was not familiar or effective to the class/culture mostly represented in the courtroom, and the defendents' way of communication was not acceptable to her, for the most part.

It made me sad that our legal system has created a dependance on lawyers not to defend
us but to play the game for us because it's too hard to play for ourselves, and to see that the racial makeup of those on trial was overwhelmingly black and Hispanic showed that our society is still slanted along lines of race, class, and power.

From the mouths of babes 2

If you are a parent of young kids, you will appreciate this. The other night, Eliza asked, "Mommy, does Jesus skidoo into our hearts?"

It's something like that.

James 1:5-8 - Belief, Doubt, and Prayer

My good friend Alex is studying some in James, and he left a comment recently about James 1:5-8, which says, "If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That man should not he think will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does."

Alex wrote: what did you/your small group do with chapter 1 with the part where God gives genrously to all without finding fault UNLESS you're a doubter, in which case you shouldn't expect to receive anything at all. It seems that's a pretty significant blockage...and I'm having a hard time finding a way around it.

This is indeed a troubling passage when taken at face value. It seems that it's all up to us - God will give generously, but with a condition. But, as Alex knows, we have to use the full counsel of Scripture to interpret passages that are confusing or don't seem to jive with the God we know, and so that is where I started in thinking about this. If this verse were true at face value, then the man whose son was possessed by a demon in Mark 9 was in trouble, because his "prayer request" for healing was followed by, "I believe; help me overcome my unbelief. "Sounds like there is doubt there to me. Yet Jesus healed him, generously.
The NIV Bible Commentary says this, "This father was not oscillating between belief and unbelief. He desired to believe--and even asserted his belief--but because he felt keenly the inadequacy of his faith, he asked for help in believing. He was not facing both directions at the same time like the "double-minded man" of Jas 1:8. In spite of his conscious weakness, he had set his heart to believe. And Christ responded to his faith and healed his son."
There is also the passage where Jesus tells us that if we have a mustard seed faith, we can move mountains, which once led me to despair. If all it took was a mustard seed to move a mountain, I must have incredibly little faith, because I had not moved any mountains. But perhaps Jesus' words were less a commentary on the required amount of faith, but rather on the powerfulness of the faith's object - that God is so mighty that He takes the mustard seed that you give and moves the mountain.

We also have to let verse 5 inform 6 and 7 - God's gives generously without finding fault. We as Christians are in Christ, and we have sonship relationship with the Father. He loves and longs to be generous to us, which Eugene Peterson shows well in his Message translation of these verses:
If you don't know what you're doing, pray to the Father. He loves to help. You'll get his help, and won't be condescended to when you ask for it. Ask boldly, believingly, without a second thought. People who "worry their prayers" are like wind-whipped waves. Don't think you're going to get anything from the Master that way, adrift at sea, keeping all your options open.

My friend Macon came up with this a helpful analogy (or he borrowed it from our favorite theology professor, Gary Deddo) to talk about the role of faith in prayer. Macon asks the question, "How much is enough to get my prayer answered?" So, does God require that I be 100% certain? How about 98%? Or is it just a majority, like 51% sure that tips the scales on my behalf? If I have 49% or less, am I unable to get God to move? Knowing my own heart, there have been few, if any, times that I have had 100% faith when I prayed. On my BEST prayers I've been in 90% range, I think. Yet God has answered. God has moved, using the the faith that I offered. See, Jesus lives in me and He lives for me. I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. I no longer pray, but Christ prays in me. And so I offer Jesus my 30% faith and He takes that prayer, perfects it, and offers it to the Father on my behalf as a 100% prayer.

It seems that Scripture is full of doubters and strugglers, men and women who did not have 100% faith, and yet God still moved for and in them. Think about Gideon's fleece, John the Baptist's father, Sarah's laughter. It seems that God is not limited by our faith, or lack thereof, in the way that we think He might be. Yes, faith is important. But God can work with far less than we offer, and He answers feeble prayers just as much as He answers confident ones. Prayer being answered is not about our rubbing the magic lamp just right so that the genie comes out and gives us our wish. It is a recognition of need that we cannot supply, and whether we are 100% certain that God will come through and meet that need as we see fit, we still recognize that we need help and are asking with all the faith that we can muster.

So, all of this gives me a new lens through which I have to read James 1:5-8. One key phrase in this passage that the NIV Bible Commentary points out is, "he is unstable in all he does." The double-minded man is not someone who prays to God and has some doubt that He will answer, or someone who has imperfect faith. Rather all that the double-minded person does is characterized by flip-flopping and indecisiveness in their relationships, their work, their walk with the Lord.

In sum, I think that when I operate as a person under the Law, James is very troubling. The Law view of prayer would say that there is a standard that I have to meet in order to unlock the power of God. But Jesus has met that standard for me, and lives that standard in and through me now that I am in Christ. I am not a double-minded man, because I am in Christ and I have the mind of Christ (Col. 2:16). I am not abandoned to my weak faith, but can in all things depend on Christ, crying, "I believe, Lord help my unbelief."

What do you think?

Overwhelmed for dependence's sake

It's been a hard few weeks since Jacob arrived; of course there is the normal lack of sleep and adjustments to a new child. Then last week Diane was in the hospital for 36 hours receiving a magnesium IV to lower her blood pressure (induced by pregnancy), which meant a couple days of scrambling to get childcare and make sure Eliza and Palter were OK, a night spent sleeping on a couch in the hospital room (watching UNC loseto Va Tech) and another night at home getting up with Jacob to give him his bottle. Needless to say my resources are depleted, to say nothing of my poor wife's energy and resolve, given Jacob's every-two-hours feeding schedule and her time in the hospital.

So today I was reading in 2 Corinthians 1:8-9 which says, "We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about the hardships we suffered in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired even of life. Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead."

There is a rumor that makes its rounds in Christian circles that says God won't put more on a person than they can handle. If that was true, then what happened to Paul? He was under pressure greater than his ability to endure, clearly more than he could handle, and he said that God let that happen in order to create dependence, not relying on himself but on God. (This thinking is actually a mis-application of 1 Corninthians 10:13. which says, "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.")

It seems to me that God constantly gives me more than I can handle. Life is more than I can handle - it was too much when I had no kids, when I had one, when I had two. This week I feel like I am at the end of my patience. I feel like crying sometimes for no reason. I feel distant from my wife as each of us is preoccupied with caring for the little ones. All this is happening that I might not rely on myself, but on God, and until today I was trying everything but, from buying and selling cell phones on ebay, to checking email, to angrily throwing a bowl full of cereal and milk into the sink and storming off the bedroom when Eliza informed me that she didn't want milk on her Cheerios.

If I could handle life, I would not need God at all. I believe that God's ultimate purpose for all people is for us to depend on Him for all things. And so He often gives me more than I can endure, taking me to the limits of my patience, ability to love, time, and energy so that I have to say, Lord, I give up. I need you to live through me. Reconnecting with Him through Scripture and worship has reminded me that relying on Him is life, the only life and hope that I have.

James Thoughts, Part Three

Context, Context, Context
James 4:2b says, “You do not have because you do not ask God.” This has been pirated by "name it and claim it" folks who use the verse to put the fault/potential on the Believer to get God to do what we want Him to do. You simply must ask, with faith. If you don’t have insert thing here, it’s because you are not asking. But the context for this verse is so important, because the issue that James is addressing is not faith (or lack thereof) but dependence on God. People are trying to meet their own needs by fighting and quarreling, coveting and killing. They don’t have because they are trying to supply their own needs rather than asking God, depending on Him to supply their needs. Their motives of independence and self are revealed in verse 3, when they are called out for spending their blessings on themselves.

Smackdown… Or Is It?
So in 4:4-5, it seems that James is finally letting them have it – now they can feel nice and guilty for being such rotten Christians. Calls them adulterous people who are making the Spirit of God jealous. Go ahead James, land the knockout blow! But then, in verse 6 it says, “But He gives us more grace.” They’ve blown it, raised God’s ire – adulterous people for crying out loud. This is true for all of us. BUT He gives us more grace. If you operate in independence (pride), God opposes you. But if you are dependent (humble), He gives you more grace. Humility and dependence begets grace.

Jacob Pictures

Here are a couple of links: first Jacob's birth , then Jacob's first week. Enjoy!

P.S. In this photo he's thinking, "Did State reallybeat Carolina? The Heels needed more intensity."

From the mouths of babes

Eliza really enjoys pretending and making up stories with her Belle and Arielle dolls, and the last couple days she has been pretending that they were in heaven talking to Jesus, and that He invited them to stay for a sleep over. Today I overheard her saying, "Well, Jesus died on the cross for your sins," followed by, "OK, God, if you say so - I trust you." It's just that simple, folks. How sweet.

James Thoughts Continued

Mercy Triumphs Over Judgment

James 2:12-13 says 12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment!

I think that it is easy to read this and see only, “Speak and act as those who are going to be judged,” but what are we being judged by? By the law that gives freedom. James is showing a new or different standard; there is a judgment without mercy (v. 13), but we are going to be judged by a law that gives freedom. Mercy triumphs over judgment. Love triumphs over evil.

We are to speak and act as people who are judged under mercy and freedom. We give away what we have received from the Lord, and we trust that the way of mercy is the best way. Judgment without mercy is given to those who do not show mercy, but we have been judged with mercy.

Mercy Leads Us to “Do”

James 2:22-23 is a call to be do-ers of the Word, not just hear-ers. A worthy call. I think that we as Christians should be authentic, living what we say we believe (I believe that Steven Curtis Chapman said it best with, “It’s got to be true, I gotta’ be living’ what I say I believe, even if nobody but Jesus is watchin’ me. G-O-T T-O-B T-R-U.”). However, there is a lens of law and a lens of grace. Law says, “Do it because I said so, and if you don’t you don’t measure up.” On first glance, that is what James is saying. But grace says, “I have given you all you need to ‘do’; I have loved you first; therefore ‘do’.”

James 2:25 gives that grace motivation. If you look intently into the perfect law that gives freedom (there's that concept again!), and continues to do this, he will be blessed in what he does. There is a correct order – look into the law that gives freedom, and then be a do-er of the Word. If you “do” from the position of freedom, there is blessing.

I wonder if James, who addresses his letter to the 12 tribes scatterd, is writing to a Jewish-Christian audience, and so he uses the law a lot, knowing their tendency to depend on the law for right-standing with God. Could it be that he is revealing the inability of the law to bring righteousness, calling them to depend on mercy and grace.

Coming up next: Context, Context, Context! and Smackdown... Or is It?

New Eyes For the Book of James

James is About Grace!
When I was in college, I read the book of James. I knew very little about grace (i.e. I had not experienced grace on deep levels), and so when I read it, I felt very guilty, as though I were not doing enough. After all, there were lots of admonitions in there about doing things, showing faith by works, being nice to the poor, not saying bad things and controlling the tongue. The book made me feel like I was REALLY not measuring up, and I had done a pretty good job of that myself as it was.

Recently James popped up in my Bible reading schedule that my small group and I are going through, and I remembered how much I had avoided James (except for the times when I referenced the passages about the treating the poor well). I also had been struggling (again) with feeling helpless to help the homeless in Greensboro and knew what James had to say about loving the poor, so I asked God to help me read this and receive conviction when He had it in mind without guilt. And what I discovered is that James is a book about grace, mercy, love, dependence on God and humility. Who knew? Sooo, I am going to try and download some of what I found in there. I have not checked this against a commentary (Eugene Peterson would be scolding me from the pages of Eat This Book – I promise, Mr. Peterson, I am taking in what you are telling me), so there is a chance that I could be off, but just figured I would put it out there and my legions of blog-reading fans could correct me when they want to. I don’t usually use this blog to post teaching stuff, leaving that to my esteemed colleague Alex Kirk and his blog “Piebald Life.” But what the heck!
Note: OK, at the end of this I did check a commentary, and got some good stuff from it!

Laws That Give Freedom?
So, the first verses that really jumped out to me were 1:25 and 2:12; each of them referred to a law that gives freedom, which has never seemed like a concept that makes sense. Laws don’t give freedom (I thought) – they bring bondage (when you break them); they restrict (when you keep them), and even when you keep them you can fall into the temptation of pride in how well you keep the law on your own.

As James spoke of a law that gives freedom, he was already shaking my understanding of what he is teaching of us. This perfect law that gives freedom is the law of love. It is not an enslaving legalistic system, but a law that gives freedom and the Believer is enabled to keep it by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). Here is further info on this (all commentary comments are from the NIV Bible Commentary) - James's term "the perfect law of liberty" (literal translation) deserves special attention. The word "law" (GK G3795) reveals his Jewish orientation and that of his readers. But he qualifies this word to make sure that his readers do not misunderstand, describing it as "perfect" (GK G5455) and as characterized by "freedom" (GK G1800). It is not merely the OT law, nor is it the Mosaic law perverted to become a legalistic system for earning salvation by good works. When James calls it the "perfect law," he has in mind the sum total of God's revealed truth--not merely the preliminary portion found in the OT, but also the final revelation made through Christ and his apostles that was soon to be inscripturated in the NT. Thus it is complete, in contrast to that which is preliminary and preparatory. Furthermore, it is a law that does not enslave. Instead, it is freely accepted and fulfilled with glad devotion under the enablement of the Spirit of God (Gal 5:22-23; see Jas 2:8, 12 for more on this concept of law).

So, this may not be groundbreaking to many of you. But for me, to find that there is a law that gives freedom, a law of love, and to know that God gives us the love that He asks us to extend to others, is good news. More to come on God’s grace leading the way.

Coming next: Mercy Triumphs Over Judgment and Leads Us to “Do”

Jacob Marshall Benbow is here!

What a wonderful day it was yesterday, as Diane delivered Jacob at 6:42 pm. He has brown hair, giving us a brunette, a blonde, and a red-head, and he is very laid back and sweet. In fact, he is so laid back that Diane is having trouble getting him to wake up and eat! Check the video below for Eliza and Psalter's first meeting with Jacob. Will post some photos on Flickr as soon as I figure out how to make a new grouping on the site.

First video for Jacob, who is arriving tomorrow

Still more technology from flickr

Here is a GUPY 2006 photo. Click it and this will link you to more pictures on flickr.

Check out the GUPY 2006 Slide Show!

A book that lives up to its name

As I was reading Practical Justice: Living Off-center in a Self-centered World by Kevin Blue, I had the thought, "Man, these chapters are so practical." Then I remembered that the book was living up to its title, and really appreciated the skill and intent of the author. In yet another super book from IV press, Blue (who is a colleague of mine in InterVarsity Urban Project circles) clearly, prophetically, and theologically exhorts Christians to see the Bible with eyes of justice, and to live out the teachings and call of Jesus. The thing that makes this book such a great resource is that Blue doesn't just talk theory, but rather gives simple and practical next steps, some of which are very challenging and some of which are accessible to anyone. For example, in his chapter "Giving a Man a Fish" which teaches on meeting immediate needs of the poor and homeless, Blue gives four pratcitcal steps. 1) Buy a homeless person food and sit and eat with them and offer to pray with them about their circumstances. 2) Volunteer at food pantry or serve at a homeless shelter. 3) Visit a convalescent home that houses residents who are economically struggling. 4) If you live in a less-urban area, identify the pockets of poverty that certainly exist and ask God how you might be used there.

Blue also made me squirm with conviction a couple of times. In particular his chapter "Should I Help?" adddressed some of the excuses that I often make in not helping people. Here are the paragraphs that messed with me.
"Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime. Therefore don't give him a fish." This is the cultural mantra of much of the middle and upper class. While Jesus says directly to give to those who ask (Matthew 5:42), we are encouraged to interview, be suspicious of, and ultimately not give to beggars. Why? It seems that we think people are poor because they ought to be. Or is it a disease that can be caught if you associate too closely? We are taught that those who are poor don't want to work, are manipulative, don't care about themselves or others, are criminally dangerous, or are unmotivated to do better. Yet Jesus doesn't mention any of these conditions as a reason not to give to someone in need.

Now, Blue has more to say in this chapter, and he is balanced and grace-filled as he speaks truth. But he calls Christians to embrace God's heart of justice and show us ways that we can participate in that, and he writes to exhort, encourage, and challenge. I highly recommend this book.

If I were really, really rich for just one day...

I would buy one of these in heartbeat.











And give lots of money to starving kids all over the world.

I would most likely be donating said money via previously coveted -I mean mentioned - iPhone, which has internet capability. So I would donate money while listening to songs (or watching a video) and fielding a phone call, but not while I was driving.

My kind of church

Yesterday (Sunday) we held a goodbye party for one of our co-labor-ers here in the neighborhood, and so we used the Eagle's Nest (fellowship hall) at our church for a simple meal of pizza and soda and generic cookies. The party opened with a DVD of kids and moms and grandmas from all over Glenwood saying their video-goodbyes, complete with a blooper reel at the end, and concluded with people in the room saying their goodbyes "live." A group of women from a recovery home (all of whom were baptized together just a few weeks ago) sang a beautiful song about hope in the midst of feeling in chains. And we prayed for our friend to have a safe and transformational time away.

In the room were single moms and singles without kids. Young married couples with babies, and older marrieds whose kids were in college. There were poor and moderately wealthy, black and white, struggling and established, many walking with Jesus and some teetering on the brink of falling away. I watched Eliza and Psalter playing with some of the kids who come to tutoring and felt the ease with which everyone in the room interacted and loved each other, not dwelling on racial and class lines. The community love there was genuine, not a forced attempt at reconciliation or a sense of the haves giving to the have nots. And I couldn't help but think, "Now this is church."

That is not to say that my worship experience earlier that day was invalid or not spiritual. I was fed from God's Word, I worshipped with Brothers and Sisters in Christ. But as I continue to read Scripture with the lens of reconciliation and transformative justice in place, I can't help but believe that church is should be more than homogeneous, more than based on worship preference, more than good sermons. It should be a place where the boundaries of our culture and prejudices are overcome by love and good deeds, by a commitment to relationship for the long hall, and by a commitment to gathering people of varying background, cultures, and financial means.

And that gathering of a diverse people should be a more concentrated gathering than what I typically experience. There certainly are people of several races and cultures who worship regularly at my church. There certainly are people of varying economic levels in service on Sunday. But they are scattered, not concentrated, and are therefore often overlooked and unheard, and their transformative presence is not felt by the Body at large.

I am both sad and thankful for the gift of our time yesterday. Thankful because it was sweet to my spirit and gave me a hopeful picture of a beautiful church. But sad because most of our friends from Glenwood who were at this party do not attend our church on Sundays, and I wonder how long it will be until yesterday's snapshot becomes a living reality.

Getting Reconciliation Blues

I can count on two fingers the number of books that I have read on one day – The Hobbit and, now, Reconciliation Blues by Edward Gilbreath. Granted, I read this book over the course of a day of traveling from St. Louis to NC, but the day wasn’t that long, and the book kept my attention.

I think that this is a new must-read for the Church, both for those of us who already are on board the racial reconciliation movement, and for those who are not sure or have not even begun to think about it. What I think this book does very well is that it presents the racial divide in the American Church in a way that is palatable and readable. In a review quote on the cover, Phillip Yancey calls Gilbreath a “gentle prophet”, and that description is right on. Because Gilbreath is a black man who has lived, worked, and worshipped in a largely white evangelical context, and who identifies himself with the evangelical label, he can speak with experiential authority of the struggles of minorities in the evangelical world. But rather than cast stones and bitterness, he presents his experiences in a truthful and gentle way.

Another strength of this book is its breadth. He does not get bogged down in statistics, nor does he spend a lot of time on one particular area, but instead he covers a broad swath of the evangelical world, from worship (an EXCELLENT chapter) to politics, and he also has some insightful chapters on black evangelical leaders like Martin Luther King, Tom Skinner (click to check out this talk from Tom at Urbana 70, but I would listen to it sitting down because it is amazing and jarring), and Jesse Jackson, and talks about why some/many in the evangelical world hesitate to identify Jackson, and even King, as evangelicals.

Gilbreath is a journalist and an excellent communicator, and I have found his book a terrific blend of facts and experience. While Divided By Faith is an profound and prophetic look into the state of race in the Church, readers can easily get bogged down in the numbers and sociological language, especially if they are just starting down the road of racial reconciliation. This book is easy on the eyes and challenges the heart and mind, but does not leave you feeling condemned or hopeless.

An excerpt from his chapter called The First Shall Be Last:
“Pursuing diversity is not just for the benefit of minority groups; we all stand to gain from it. But without a sustained, intentional effort to make changes, it’s easy for evangelical institutions to fall right back into their “white” default mode.
"I don’t mean to sound jaded or cynical. I understand that a big reason for this lack of a sustained intentional effort is the natural human tendency to gravitate toward that with which we’re most comfortable. But I’m also guessing that much of it has to with appeasing donors and constituencies. Money and economic control go to the systemic root of a lot of our race problems in the evangelical church – but I don’t want to dwell there. Suffice it to say, it’s risky for a nonprofit to upset its funding base. Whether it’s a matter of donors, subscribers or even chuch members, it’s a lot easier – and cheaper – to keep an existing patron than to find a new one. When Jesus said, “You cannot serve both God and Money (Matthew 6:24), he was foreshadowing one of the fundamental complications of running a Christian organization today. Ask any pastor or ministry leader – it’s a crazy balancing act. Yet it speaks to the heart of where our priorities are, and who we are as the people of God.”

Loving Your Enemies on the Street Corner

Diane pulled up to the house and I could tell she was upset (the tears gave it away). When I asked her what happened, she told me that as she was putting up a sign for our yard sale, a homeless woman who was panhandling on the same corner began to yell at her. “Why are you putting up a sign to sell your junk at a yard sale, when I’m out here hungry? You don’t look like you’re missing many meals (she seemed to miss the fact that Diane is 32 weeks pregnant). You probably wouldn’t even help me. Don’t put up that sign.” Diane put up the sign, told the woman that she had intended to help her but wasn’t going to now, and then drove off, watching the woman pull the sign down.
When she got home she was angry and hurt and frustrated. We feel like we are one of the “good guys” when it comes to the poor, and here Diane was getting blasted by this woman for no reason. She was also upset at herself for getting so angry with the woman. I was fairly angry, too, but then, as only God can do, the chapter of Luke that I read today came to mind. In Luke 6, Jesus tells the crowds that if they love people who love them, what does that say? Even sinners know how to love people who love them back. But followers of Christ are to love their enemies. To bless when we are cursed, to do good to those who don’t do good to us. And so instead of offering to go and give the lady a piece of my mind,  I offered to go and take the her some food.
But my sweet wife wouldn’t have that. Instead, she collected herself, then collected a big bag of food, and went back out to find this woman. When she found her, she got out and apologized for her attitude, and they actually hugged, and the woman apologized for how she treated Diane. Diane told her, “I know you weren’t angry at me.” And the woman said, “You’re right; I wasn’t. I’m just angry.” Diane noticed that the woman’s hand was bleeding (she had scraped it in a fall), and so she came back to the house and got her some band aids and wet wipes and Neosporin, and went back out again.
Amazing that God gives us chances to see His word prove true in action, giving us chances to let Him live through us. I could not figure out why the verses about loving our enemies stood out to me this morning – I don’t really have any enemies, and I wasn’t sure how to apply it. Then the Lord gives my wife the chance to live that out in a powerful way. How cool is that?

Is Homelessness Wrong?

Wild Willie, my anonymous random blogger who can be found posting on this site , asked the question, “Is it wrong to be homeless?” Well, first it depends on what we mean when we say “wrong.” Do we mean is it immoral? Sinful? Is it undesirable? Unsavory? Unacceptable socially? Wrong can mean different things, and I think that there are many answers, and I’ll give my best stab at a couple of them.

I don’t think it is a sin to be homeless, with sin being my definition of “wrong”. I do think that sin usually causes and sustains homelessness, whether that sin is personal, societal, familial, or a combination of those and more. People can end up on the streets because of their addictions (this is personal sin, which is often a response to numb the pain from familial or societal sin). People can end up on the streets because of mental disability (mental illness is a result of the Fall and also a societal sin of not caring well for the sick). People can end up on the streets because they lost their job or had a financial emergency and do not have the same financial safety net that I might have through family and friends (this is a result of societal sin, where wealth is predominantly concentrated among the few). People can end up on the streets because they just don’t want any rules in their life (which I think is a sign of rebellion in their spirit, which leads to rebellion against God’s authority, which is the root of sin). Children can be homeless because their parents have one of the above conditions (this is a combo of all of those above). Teens can be homeless because they are running from family or life (this is a result of their sin, familial sin, and more).

However, I have not met a homeless adult who said, “You know, the whole living in a house thing just wasn’t for me. So one day I decided to just give it all up and become homeless, because it seemed like a good idea.” (Homeless teens have sometimes given me that response, though I am not 100% certain that they believe that themselves). Certainly there are homeless now who remain in that position by choice – there are no rules, ultimate freedom (if freedom is defined as “being able to do what you want to do when you want to do it”, which I think is a poor definition of freedom). They may remain homeless by choice because they have given up hoping for anything else. They may remain homeless by choice because they are not yet sick and tired of being sick and tired. They have carved out a life for themselves on the street, and they like it that way.

Societally we do have a mentality that people should work for what they get, and we tend to not see panhandling as work, and so when we see someone with a “homeless, please help” sign on the side of the road, we tend to think that this is wrong. I don’t think that it is wrong in the sense of sinful, but is it God’s ultimate hope and plan? I just don’t know about that. It seems that we have been created with more dignity than what I see written on the faces of the homeless panhandlers – there is shame there, there is a feeling of not being productive, there is a feeling of being judged and looked down on, and work is a part of living out that dignity. Work is a good thing, given by God as part of what we do as humans.

Of course not all homeless panhandle. Some have jobs that just don’t pay living wage (societal sin); some scrape enough money to get by collecting cans and recycling them and provide just what they need. Homelessness has many more faces than I once thought, and it’s not just the people under bridges. It’s also the family that I know who has not lived in their own place in four years, and they have lived in at least 7 different places in the last two.

So is homelessness wrong? Yes. I think that it is wrong that there are people sleeping under bridged and in cars. I think that it is wrong that there is a homeless veteran in a motorized wheelchair who lives behind a gas station here. Homelessness is a sign of the brokenness of our world, of the lack of shalom (God’s peace and right living) all over our cities. A person is not in sin because they are homeless, but they are often homeless as the result of sin and brokenness, both in their own heart and life and from the sin and brokenness heaped on them by others.

I could be wrong. I’m not expert. Those are simply my two cents.

They're Still Out There

Last night I had the chance to go out on Nightwatch again with the Salvation Army. In Nightwatch we visit various places where homeless people live in the city and take them some hot food, coffee, a blanket, and pray with them. We climbed under a lot of bridges and had the chance to talk with about 20 people and pray with each of them. Around 2:00 am (we started at 8:00 pm), I came home and got into bed, and a nagging thought has stayed with me from then until now – “They’re still out there.”

As I woke up at 10:00 this morning and went to take a nice hot shower, I thought, “They’re still out there.”

As I watched UNC beat State in football, I thought, “They’re still out there.”

They’re still out there – each of the men that we prayed with and gave food to are still sleeping outside on the street. One was sleeping in the front doorway of my church – we had spoken with him at about 8:30 pm, and saw him sleeping, somehow, on the concrete at 2:00 am in the cold night. There were men sleeping on pipes suspended beneath the bridges, men sleeping in abandoned trailers, men in church doorways, men on foam mattresses beneath highways, men in a shed behind a local business.

Sure, it’s nice that we gave them a warm hat and blanket and prayed with them. It’s nice that 5 Christians gave up their Friday night to do some good deeds. But for the rest of that night, and the rest of that week, those guys are still out there. And I don’t know what to do with that.