On Sunday, I heard someone say, “Sometimes when I pray, I don’t feel anything.”
Has this happened to you? It has for me.
There’s no magic. It’s like talking to the wall.
“Blah blah blah. meh.”
Sometimes we approach prayer and other spiritual practices with certain expectations, right? We want an experience or we hope for some immediate return for our effort. It shouldn’t be dull, we think. It shouldn’t be lifeless.
In trying to connect with God we wonder if it’s really a two way street.
Maybe it’s the same thing we wonder in our other relationships. Am I doing all the rowing on this boat?
In this, I’m reminded of the lessons from my seminary professor who made a point to tell us that Yahweh switched things up on his people–most of the time. No victory was won the same way twice. Was God pushing the limits of their expectations? Probably.
I wonder if these variances happened precisely because God is personal. I wonder if God is always the same by way of consistently changing: A characteristic of a living God and ongoing relationship. Usually personal beings resist manipulation, right?
What happens when we want something to be predictable…a sure thing? A wife and a prostitute can do the same horizontal function, but there’s something about doing it for cash changes the whole thing…a lot, I assume. The latter is less a relationship and more of a phlegmatic transaction with the veneer of allure. The outcome is very predictable. Hence, relationship as a commodity has a dehumanizing (or depersonalizing) consequence. (Refer to the above image posted outside a brothel. It’s a menu.)
Isn’t it spiritually healthier for us when God shows us that he’s not coin operated or predictable, but rather relational and multifaceted? We wouldn’t want to be treated like a vending machine either, so maybe it makes sense that God would “keep things fresh”. Strangely, God risks frustrating us to foster growth.
If you’re feeling like you’re “praying to the wall” lately, realize that you are the verge of a growth-enhancing switcheroo…better named: a new movement of the divine. Be on the look out for it.
Oh, and when you spot it then it’ll change again soon.
Through this God shows us that he’s intricate and personal, not static and mechanized. He draws us into something deeper. He gives us something for an advancement of faith, sight unseen.
Where are you right now?
On the verge of change or knee-deep in a fresh one?
The following list of 6 is semi-humorous and/or satire:
sat·ire
[sat-ahyuhr]
noun
1.
the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
The first 6 of 12 Ways to Spike Blog Hits
• Say “vagina”. (It doesn’t even have to relate to the rest of the post. Just wave the it around. The word, that is, not anything else. Wait! What did you think I meant?And also a shout out to Rachel Held Evans who’s keeping things vaginal. The word picked her, actually, and she’s a good sport despite the monkey business. Get it?)
• Threaten Violence. (This is especially powerful if the sentiment is violent but the reference is farcical. You come out smelling better this way too. Pretty even.)
• Disclose something sexual, or promise to.
• Be angry and let a rant loose. (Have you seen the 1st Harry Potter? Do what he did at the zoo, just with your words…obviously.)
• Feed people lurking around for controversy. (Stick to newsy bits, disputes, scandals, injustice, corruption, you get the idea. There are many prowling for this, so really, it’s SO Money.)
• Post about something sordid, or be a punk. (Titillate. Be explicit, rude, foul-mouthed, try adult-themes, sexual content, unhealthy habits, dangerous stuff, immoral activities, etc. Hello, bad ass.)
Many readers give in to their worst or weakest appetites. That’s just the facts.
These next 6 are the ones I endorse. They won’t get you the same sorts of quick spikes, but they will build a loyal and good-natured readership over a longer term.
They also have quite a but to do with generosity.
The last 6 of 12 Ways to Spike Blog Hits (and by “spike” I mean not that at all, probably)
• Thank others openly (Ed Cyzewski does this well. Thank you, Ed, for teaching me a lot here.)
• Be a credible resource or niche expert (I’ve mentioned my new niche here.)
• Be humorous, amusing, or feature those who are. (Remember this fruity Bert & Ernie classic? …What? I can’t hear you?…What a duo! I plan to “hat tip” this in an upcoming video.)
• Invite others into your limelight (Guest contributors are one way. So, Call me. By that, I mean tweet me.)
• Share your lists of favorites (It’s win-win. Alise Wright does this well.)
Tamara Lunardo has only been blogging for a couple of years, but thanks to her openness on some touchy (and important) topics, her audience has grown rapidly. Sometimes Tamara uses salty language or speaks about the realities of life…and sex, and it turns out Christians have a huge fascination with that sort of thing. Go figure!
Enjoy a snapshot of our time together, were we discuss her community project through Civitas Press called What a Woman is Worth. Through a collection of essays, this book (due out in a few months) confronts disparaging views of women and affirms the female gender to do whatever God has uniquely gifted them to do. You go, girl! Be assured this video is all very PG, honest.
16 other videos interviews are at the YouTube channel (you can subscribe to the channel and never miss out on the latest enlightening chat).
I’ve been both a victim and a participant in the American cultural norm…Scope out opportunities to rejoin comments with, “That’s what she said.”
(To be sure, the phrase was around long before the TV show “The Office”, but a certain Michael Scott character seemed to usher the phrase into a broad and sweeping cultural vernacular. Am I right?)
So now, it seems thousands of words and phrases are hijacked, and church gatherings are not immune to it either. Or, maybe it’s just me. It can be hilarious, dreadful, or just plain embarrassing. Recently, a few worship songs have sort of had their way with me on this, so to speak.
“Bride of Christ” by Marion Coltman (I thought it was entitled: “Jesus, keep your hands where we can see ’em”) …and it’s all just a bit too much for me.
I didn’t want to think it at the time, but the Casting Crowns song “Your Love is Extravagant” sounded just a little too much like a “friends with benefits” song. Golly, all you have to do is take the “t” off Christ, and you have a fine mess (in my head):
Your Love is Extravagant
Your love is extravagant
Your friendship, it is intimate
I feel like moving to the rhythm of Your grace
Your fragrance is intoxicating in our secret place
Your love is extravagant
Spread wide in the arms of Christ is the love that covers sin
No greater love have I ever known You considered me a friend
Capture my heart again
Spread wide in the arms of Christ is the love that covers sin
No greater love have I ever known; You considered me a friend
Capture my heart again
Your love is extravagant
Your friendship, it is intimate
Don’t get me wrong, Casting Crowns does so many great worship songs I really enjoy. This may be one your favorites, which is fine. I hope it creates a worshipful experience for you, and for everyone, but I get derailed.
Basically, if a worship song talks about touching, my mind wanders. Such as Kari Jobe song:
I wanna sit at your feet.
Drink from the cup in your hand.
Lay back against you and breathe, here your heart beat
This love is so deep, it’s more than I can stand.
I melt in your peace, it’s overwhelming.
The fact is love is risky. God is risky…Obviously risky and risqué has sort of been a fine line in songwriting. But, to be honest, I realize that love can often feel awkward as it gets emotionally deeper. When it starts to change and effect us–and affect us. The awkwardness is part of the path to greater spiritual maturity. (In this case, I’ll let you know for sure when I get there.)
Admittedly, the psalms that King David wrote got quite amatory, and for some it feels embarrassing. I can handle David getting up close and personal with God. I’m fine with Song of Solomon’s sexy talk, and David’s passionate poem songs, but maybe in singing those things corporately, we confront those issues of intimacy differently than we do in our times of personal devotions, songs, or prayers. What do you think about it?
I think the challenge, for me, is a renewing of my mind a bit more, and praying for better ears to hear. Thank you for your patience with me, Lord.
Lastly, for all you songwriters out there, if you’re writing something sweet to sing for Jesus, please–for me–don’t put the words “intimate,” “secret place,” and “rhythm” too close together. (It can be a “worship hijack” for some of us, okay, for me.)
When was the last time you felt embarrassed/awkward at the worst time?
Rachel and Mark will launching books on the topic this fall, under the same publisher. Don claims he uses his blog to float book ideas and topics, so he’ll likely take a crack at it too. He’s been asking girls “why they give up sex” (sic.), and guys “why they hook up”, in separate posts, this week. He’s deleted 2 controversial gender-themed posts that he cranked out (his words), also.
Most often this issue is termed (generally) “gender issues” or “gender roles in the church”. We find words like “leadership”, authority”, “power”, “ordination”, “justice”, and “equality” used. A lot.
Here’s the trouble. These decades-old (or worse) labels (i.e. egalitarian, complementarian) don’t work well anymore. The popular writers discussing it right now haven’t tried to leave the worn out and confusing labels behind. We need a new model. We need more accurate descriptions, which is what labels try to do.
But, WHY Label? ugh.
I’m not a big fan of labels in the first place. I find them quite constricting. Yet, even if we don’t like labels, we have to agree that this sort of position makes us an “anti-label person”…this is, obviously, you guessed it, a label. Run everyone, a circular argument!
Categoriesare limiting and inadequate, and yet they are also necessary. We can’t hope to communicate without them. Keeping that in mind, I don’t want to be under the choke hold of worn out labels, as I enter this “hot topic”.
So, for the sake of discussion and mutual understanding, I’ll start very differently than all the others I’ve seen covering, or dancing around, the topic. I’ll propose some new terms and categories. Innovation moves us forward. Yes, we are living in very exciting times, my friends.
This is what brought me to this point: In the red corner, we have Rachel Evans. She claims to be an Egalitarian. In the black and blue corner, Mark Driscoll flexes his Octogon man muscles, and puts the smack down on the issue with his version of the Complementarian view of gender roles. Is Donald Miller in the yellow corner? He might assist Rachel in a tag team sort of thing. We shall see.
Where does that leave us? I. don’t. know. But, I’m seeing very little positive progress.
CH- ch-Ch-Chan–ges! When it comes to these issues, most recognize that change is afoot. Authors are taking it on. People are making statements, and firming up their positions. Still, nobody can really define where we are going, or where we should be.
For instance:
Conservative churches who have women leading ministries rarely dare call these females “ministers” or “pastors”*. Oh, no. They are “directors“. Is this satisfying? What’s going on, here?
I think I can hear some of the inner monologue now…
“Darn those working women of the last 30 years. Things have gotten confusing once we operated on the assumption that women were capable. Why can’t they just stay in line? Hurry, hurry, define what male and female is! The sky is falling.”
DeLayian Thought: Simply put: I’d like to propose a new term and viewpoint. Let’s try the word and idea of “Capacitarian”. Yes, my friends, a new word for a new time.
If you noticed that the root of this word, I just made up for the purpose of coining it and creating a new term of engagement, is capacity, give yourself 28 points. (It’s like Shrute bucks.)
You want Biblical backing? No problem. It’s based on Paul’s admonitions, no less. That’s right, the big leagues. 1 Corinthians 12-13. More on this later.
(You probably thought I’d go with Jesus being the first Rabbi to have female students, right? Or God allowing the scandalous idea of Jesus’ Resurrection to be validated by females. Nope. Why drag Jesus into this? It’s uncomfortable territory many complementarians aren’t ready for quite yet, anyway.)
The Capacitarian Axis:
Rather than look to gender, the garden of eden, body parts, or middle-eastern morays of 2 millennia ago, to pick up on the conversation (as usual), how about a Kingdom of God vantage point, which, by definition, transcends gender and culture both? See Galatians 3:26-29. It’s so crazy, it just might work. It’s a fresh starting point.
In the next post:
Defining “Capacitarianism”
pronounced: <CAP-pass-it-Tarry-ann-is- uhm>
It’s long overdue to create new and fresh smelling dialogue and definitions for how we operate and cooperate in community and within the church. In the next few posts I (and I hope we) will deal with moving toward a recoup of the way we follow Jesus.
Here’s where you come in.
This is no place to go it alone (I don’t plan to).
Share your thoughts on the issue. Do you feel comfortable with the typical labels that relate to doctrine on gender?
Please, chime in, interact, and contribute to finding a more abundant path–together. A pathway for communion and fellowship with each other, at a better spot, where we don’t use our labels as crutches or bullets. And, a spot where power and agenda isn’t part of the equation. A precious place where we enact and embody the gospel of grace in and through our interactions.
Begin with me, please. Thank you for your help.
–Lisa
Endnote:
*A quick look at the word and context of the word “pastor”, indicates a shepherd vocation. So, a helper, servant, and guide, not a kingpin. Just saying…
Photo Credit: Fabio Pierboni via Compfight (brothel menu)
