Theology – Page 14 – Lisa Colón DeLay | Spiritual Formation and the Way of the Desert Elders

9/11; and the Interview & Confessions of a Funeral Director…

View my 3 Part video interview with Caleb here.

The 10th Anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy a week from this Sunday. We will once again see images and recount the horrors of that day, and try in memorial to accept the reality of this world. Most of us don’t encounter death and our own mortality too often. Most of us don’t constantly see suffering, and witness grief and loss.

Please take some time today, or this weekend to remember that the events of 9/11 still bring pain to many. Loved ones are missed, and we can’t gloss over the national tragedy that left a collective hole in our hearts, even ten years later.

This seems a fitting time to discuss an author who is very acquainted with death. It’s his job to be, and his perspective can be very helpful to us. As promised a couple of weeks earlier, the following is my personal interview with blogger and upcoming author Caleb Wilde, a 6th generation Funeral Director, seminary student, husband, and expectant adoptive dad.

My Questions for Caleb:

1. Being a 6th generation funeral director, you have quite a unique vantage point on life, loss, and mortality. How do you think you live life differently than other Christians because of where God has placed you?

Caleb: In traditional religious calendars, the day in-between “Good Friday” and “Easter” is called “Holy Saturday”.  “Holy Saturday” is the day the disciples’ hopes and beliefs were engulfed in death and silence, as they viewed their Messiah’s death without the knowledge of the resurrection.

In some sense, I live the life of Holy Saturday.

As funeral directors, we’re paid by families to be a human shield to death, whereby we make death somewhat easier, less real and more proper.  As this human shield, I’m affected.  I’m affected by the brokenness, by the grief, by the hopelessness I see in faces, by the newly fatherless/motherless children, the tragic deaths and the accidents.

All this has made my personal faith more sensitive to questions of God’s goodness and justice.  It’s not easy for me to understand ideas of “eternal hell”, or ideas of “meticulous divine providence” or even “absolute foreknowledge” or “omnipotence”.

Sometimes I wonder if I’m still a Christian.

2. What do people misunderstand most about your work?

Caleb: We’re a lot like pastors.  Our jobs are really quite similar, except that one is recognized as “ministry” while the other is “business.”  That’s probably the largest misconception … there’s no way funeral directors can meet with grieving families through the most difficult time of their lives and come out on the other side as “business people.”

Everything else is true, though … we are dark and we are odd people.

In ancient times, death practitioners were ostracized from normal society by rule.  Today, we’re partly ostracized from the norm of society by practice.

3. The constant stream of customers (people dying, and their families burying them) can make one grow numb or cold toward the concept and process of death and burial. Do things still surprise you or impact you? What kind of things?

Caleb: There’s something so unnatural about death that (save the very old) it’s difficult to become numb.

4. You’ve probably thought about what you’d want your own funeral to look and sound like. Can you tell us about that?

Caleb: About two years ago, I started taking one minute video clips of myself, so that by the time I’m 70, I should have a montage of age progression videos that can be used for my funeral.

I’ve also talked about recording a message from myself to my family and friends that could be shown at my funeral as the eulogy.  But, by the time I’m ready to die, I figure they’ll have holographic projections, so I’ll wait for that tech until I record my final goodbye.

5. The saddest funeral I ever went to was for a 13 year old boy who took his own life. What have you learned about people during the time of more tragic circumstances that you’ve been a part of?

Caleb: Funerals/death are a perfect storm: you have death, the inheritance money, high emotions and family you might not like too much who are around you all the time.

Funerals intensify people’s real character.  You see the best in people and you see the worst.  The bad people will do horrendous things at funerals, like start fights, curse out their family members over money.  And you can see Jesus in the good ones.

6. Do you find your work mostly depressing, hopeful, profound, mundane, etc.? Would you recommend this vantage point to others?

Caleb: It’s a tough ministry that has little boundaries.  Many funeral homes are also generational, so many of us work with our dads, grandfathers, uncles and cousins, which can make this at-need work that much more difficult to set up healthy boundaries.

Similar to any ministry, I think there should be a passion for death work … a calling of sorts, whereby you know this is what you’re supposed to do.  And being a “calling”, few have witnessed this vantage point.

It’s unique.

7. Do you want to stay in the family business? Why or why not?

Caleb: Next question : )

8. Tell us a bit about how you view suffering, pain, and death from your unique perspective…which probably has a lot to do with the message in your book.

Caleb: I’ve built my understanding of God around suffering, pain and death.  It’s a local theology.  And my understanding of God, suffering, pain and death in light of my faith is the content of my upcoming book, “Confessions of a Funeral Director.”  Hopefully, it will be out in less than a year.  You can get an idea of how death has affected my view of God at my blog, www.calebwilde.com.  My book, though, will contain much more narrative than my blog.

9. What’s your best idea for a Smart Phone app.?

Caleb: I live near Lancaster County (PA), home of the Amish and Mennonites, so there’s a lot of intermarrying in these parts.  Not to mention, most of the towns in the rural areas of Pennsylvania have families that have lived there for centuries, so many of them are related.

I have an idea to partner with Ancestry.com and create an app the lets you bump smart phones with another person and it will tell you how you’re related to them.  My theory is that this will greatly help the evolution of humans by creating a purer gene pool.   The apps name is “Bump it before you Hump it”.

THANK YOU, Caleb, and best wishes on your book. I’m really excited to get a copy.

The working title for Caleb’s book is Confessions of Funeral Director. A bit more on that here.

So, my reader friends, what are you curious about? Ask Caleb your deep, dark, or even silly questions!

Transcending gendered language. Capacitarianism… is, & is not…

As I move toward a more formed definition of how gender issues can be transcended in the Kingdom of God, I’m hitting some ~~roadblocks~~ obstacles. Very expectedly, too.

This “Capacitarian” proposal, if you will indulge this term, is not all cut and dry…like so many abstract things, that must come to fruition by enactment. I continue to solicit your thoughts, and input. No, I won’t give the pretense of having a fully-formed argument. “In-process” is the operative word for this excursion. Yet, I bother to bring it up, in the first place, because I see some glaring shortcomings in our current models.

If you see some, too. I hope you’ll mention them.

(And yes, I made up the word for this proposal: “Capacitarian” Pronounced: <CAP-pass-it-Tarry-ann>)

Why does the term “egalitarian” fail us?
A few have (rightly, I might add) asked, something like, “If you want men and women to be treated and appreciated with equal worth, why don’t you just say, or use the term “egalitarian”?”

Here are a few reasons:

• Egalitarianism (proper) is too closely associated with politics and economic interests. It always has been. This has a consequential, and incongruent for our purposes, legal component, too. It is an interference, not a boon, to Kingdom life and the enactment of the gospel.

• Egalitarianism, as in “Christian Egalitarianism”, is most often understood as “the idea that men and women can and should function as equals in the church,” even if (or though) the true meaning is broader. The word means something beyond gender, like, rich and poor should function as equals…able-bodied and disabled…you get the idea. The prevailing connotation has undermined the term, making it less helpful. Simply put: “Egalitarianism,” the term, is not accurate enough. It shortchanges the bigger idea of what God is up to.

• God’s economy never really jives with our own. The actual working out of egalitarianism proves this, as well. It’s not enough to say, “We’re equal, let’s act that way.” Remember something called the Jim Crow laws from 9th grade history class? (Or, even better, maybe you recall them from experience. Separate but equal is ruse, whether intentionally or not.)

The difference is that a worldview change is in order, not just a mode or method of equalizing the parties involved.

• So, I propose we let go of using human economic terms which will move the conversation forward.

Likewise, if we use words for this issue that connote or speak in terms of power, (be it: social, political, gender, economic, racial, etc) we commence at the same starting point as we’ve had before. A secular starting point.

• This faulty starting point inherently undercuts the ironically nonpolitical (apolitical) quality of Kingdom life. My idea is to get away from human-centric thinking, not co-opt with it. There is a reversal of power in God’s economy, but not an antithetical reversal. So, we’re speaking of a whole new model where one cannot simply speak of things in reverse to properly apprehend it, or put it to rights.

• Equal opportunity of the members in the Body isn’t determined primarily by sentiments that “We are all of equal worth in the eyes of God.” True as this is, it is better sourced in the nature of God as person (a.k.a. “personhood”) *See note below. God’s Story is the starting point.

Capacitarianism
• It is in the very nature of God to forgo favoritism based on things humans would see as advantageous. We may give equal opportunity because we think that it is right or just. But this worldview is not about righting wrongs, or getting it right as (humanly speaking) its fundamental application point. Rather, it’s a new way of seeing and living in this world…Kingdom Come. [Theo-centric worldview]

So, moving forward we adopt that characteristic of God for our ways of relating too. Well, more than adopt. We absorb, and live and breath it. (It is the basis of our relating.)

• It is in the overarching plans of God (as seen in the whole of Scripture) that each one of us is “set free”. We reach our full potential as this occurs. We transcend, not just overcome our cultural bondage, et.al.. (See this Lukian passage, and the prophet Isaiah)

• Thus, restrictions based on finite qualities (nationality, gender, physical ability, financial prosperity, etc.) have nothing to do with God’s nature, and his vantage point. All those restrictions are eschewed. Being “set free” is the telos of creation.

• Harmonious/loving relationship, not (primarily) equality, is main aim of children of God…Kingdom citizens, in this proposal.

Paul advises this, speaking often of and encouraging unity in the Body.
Tri-unity (Trinity) is the essence of God. God: Communion and Love reciprocated ad infinitum.

• Hierarchy, then, for our purposes, is a non issue (off the table), in any typical way we would be able to apprehend it, from a human understanding or from our experience. So, I contend that we cannot do well to draw on our flawed applications of so-called hierarchy if we are to move forward on this issue.

One more consideration on the particulars:
I propose that the idea of “the last will be first” is not a speaking of reversal of fortune, or class/status, but a full dismantling of human interaction, economy, epistemology, and eschatology as we have known it. That is to say: we don’t have a good way to gauge who is last or first, as we normally perceive life. I should also say that this means we will be very surprised who may or may not be “first”…whatever that means to God. It will likely mean something different to God, in itself, than to our understanding. God is speaking in terms, and will actualize terms in God’s way. It won’t look like what we imagine it will. I’m not sure his ways ever really have. The whole manner of the Messiah thing/Incarnation came as quite a shock, for instance.

What Capacitarian cannot be:
With regard to studying the marginalized, and in particular the disabled, it is critical to note that “capacity” in human intellectual, ability, or physical terms is not the pivot point for Capacitarian thinking. The capacity denoted has to do with the Holy Spirit giving us capacity for his good work. And, “work” he what God determines it is…which may just be lying there, vegetative, and soaking in Divine love.

A case in point: A severely mentally disabled child is given great grace and capacity by God. A simple, pure, and powerful faith and enjoyment of God which may not be attained by her “normal” peers or her church family in the same capacity. She may revel in worship music, with her whole soul (being); given capacity to be aware of and experience God’s holy love in that very moment.

Likewise, others historically on the margins of society may be afforded capacity in gifting, and understanding, and the Body of Christ utilizes each one in their unique way. (This may not appear to be equal in application, or role, but it is not gender-based either.)

• Suffering, or experiencing trials, it seems increases the opportunities for said capacity. (See James 1)

Each member of the body is given full honor. Each has a gift to give to the Body.

To be continued, next week!

Your thoughts are welcome during this process. Leave your comments.

* Note that person and personality is not exclusive to humanity (human persons), but rather refers to a being, individuality, or creatureliness, plus relational capacity. A being is a person, even a divine being is, in the case that this being is accessible (imminent). Basic Theology asserts God is both transcendent and imminent. God is a Person, Three-in-one.

Next post! The promised interview with Caleb Wilde, Funeral Director and author of the upcoming book, Confessions of a Funeral Director: Working Between This World and the Next.

You are Starting to Make Me Angry

Nothing is more vexing than being confronted with reality.

A string of truths or accurate revelations can be one of the more upsetting circumstances in life. Have you been there?

We’re hoping we have it all, or mostly, together. At times we are certain we do. Hello, red flag, there you are!

In times of spiritual obedience, I start to pat myself on the back. It’s ironic, yes.

In times of a broken and willing spirit, I like to revel in my desperation. “I come to you with nothing, Lord. Nothing.”

This may slide over to, something like, “Lord, thank you for not making me like other men…or…you know… “those people”. (See Luke 18:11)

The line is more fine than you realize…then I realize. It is a theological misconstruction to feel grandiose, at all.

It stops worship.

O, God, that we might realize our sinfulness.

A word for reflection, today:

Had you but once entered into perfect communion with Jesus or tasted a little of His ardent love, you would care nothing at all for your own comfort or discomfort but would rejoice in the reproach you suffer; for love of Him makes a man despise himself.

A man who is a lover of Jesus and of truth, a truly interior man who is free from uncontrolled affections, can turn to God at will and rise above himself to enjoy spiritual peace.

–Thomas á Kempis, The Imitation of Christ

Mormons, BLOB-God, and Nicholas to Myra

On Rachel Evans blog, she invited readers to pose questions or curiosities to those of the Mormon faith.

I posed this question:

I heard a Mormon say they believe Jesus was a man (not a member of the Trinity). Trinitarian doctrine is a non negotiable focal point of the Christian statement of belief/faith, as the Nicene Creed (325 AD) affirms. My question: For what reasons, do Mormons consider themselves Christians?

In response, Mormon Troy Schoonover, wrote this to me:

First, let me state that I expect most people on this blog to already have strong, deeply held beliefs that are not going to change, so that my purpose is simply to foster understanding of LDS beliefs, not convert anyone. I will do my best not attack your beliefs (Latter-day Saints are very tolerant of the beliefs of others–attend LDS worship services for a year and I promise you will never hear a bad word uttered about another church or its beliefs). I will do my best to explain what Mormons believe and answer your questions. That may mean I have to agree to disagree much of the time with your beliefs, and I ask for the same consideration of my beliefs.

I can shed even more light on this, since I feel several people have unintentionally misstated our doctrine a little bit in the comments here, and I want to more fully explain the reasons why we consider ourselves Christians. We believe in God the Eternal Father (Elohim), and in His Son (who, before he was born of Mary, was Jehovah), and in the Holy Ghost. The Father and the Son have a (glorified, perfected) body as tangible as man’s, but the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit. We believe in a ‘pre-mortal’ life where we all lived as spirit children of our Father in Heaven. Jesus Christ, or Jehovah, as he was then, was the Firstborn of the spirit children of God. We are all brothers and sisters as a result, and Latter-day Saints call each other that at Church for this reason. We believe that Jesus was NOT just a man. He was and is God the Son–divine. The idea that Jehovah came and dwelt with us as Jesus Christ makes perfect sense to a Latter-day Saint, and we do not have to believe that God the Father and God the Son are one in the same essence to do so.
As to the Nicene Creed, I might also add, “Which one?” Orthodox Christianity uses and has used many, many, many variations of the Creed starting from ancient times. That the essence of the Creed points to a Trinitarian, rather than a Godhead version of Christianity, I am not disputing, just pointing out that it is not as set in stone as Joseph Smith’s simple testimony: “I saw two Personages, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name, and said, pointing to the other, ‘This is my Beloved Son. Hear Him!” When Jesus Christ prayed in marvelous fashion in John 17: “O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” he was literally praying to his Father–and our Father, too. Latter-day Saints have a ‘three-separate-but-one-in-purpose view of the Godhead, whereas Trinitarian Christianity sees God as having three personas. John 17 again illustrates beautifully the Mormon doctrine of the Godhead being “one”, as in purpose: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.”

The fact remains, also, when Mormons say that Jesus died for our sins, they’re testifying of the same divine Savior–who was Jehovah in the Old Testament and we read about as Jesus Christ in the New Testament–as other Christians. The persona on which Jesus took after his ascension into Heaven is where Latter-day Saints begin to veer away from other Christians. We absolutely do not want to be Orthodox Christians–in fact an Apostle of our Church said in a conference address several years ago that we should qualify ourselves as ‘Christian, but different,’ because we do not want to be lumped in with Trinitarian Christianity. It is an important, fundamental distinction that we do not shy away from, and one that impels us to call ourselves Christians. The Atonement of Jesus Christ is central to our doctrine, and though I’m surrounded by loving protestants here in Pensacola, FL, who tell me that my Church is works-based, I will testify to you right now that no Mormon believes they can work themselves into Heaven on their own merits. The Book of Mormon is filled with verses that clearly state our need for a Savior, and that we must retain a remission of our sins. The best way I can describe it is that Latter-day Saints view repentance as a life-time pursuit, and that while the first time you exercise faith in Jesus Christ, repent, accept the gift of His Atoning sacrifice, and become a new creature in Christ, that is the beginning, not the end. We must endure to the end in faith, and continue to repent of our sins. We enter a covenant at that point–one that is set by Jesus Christ–that even though we may struggle our entire lives with sin, the point is that we continue to struggle–we endure, “relying wholly upon the merits of Him who is mighty to save” as it says in the Book of Mormon. No amount of ‘being good’ or ‘good works’ is going to earn anyone salvation, but a whole lot of repenting is required. Jesus Christ died for sins I haven’t even committed yet, but I cannot repent of sins I haven’t committed yet. I must ‘die daily’, as Paul said, knowing that the covenant with Jesus Christ under which I live my life is one that is personal and that no one else can judge my heart on that fateful Judgement Day as to whether or not my repentance was sincere. If you ask a Latter-day Saint if they’ve been saved you’ll get one of two responses: A blank stare (if they’re from out West and they’re not as used to being asked that question), or a firm “Yes” if they’re from the East (especially the South where I live where we’re used to being asked that by our friends). The point is that Latter-day Saints view salvation as a partnership with Jesus Christ where he did all of the work, and where we are supposed to accept that work throughout our lives through exercising faith in Him enough to repent of our sins. Any other covenants we make after baptism (such as those in LDS Temples) are secondary and only serve to reinforce this fundamental relationship with Jesus Christ.

Now, having said all of that, which is more than I intended to say but, perhaps, necessary to drive home the point of how and why we view ourselves as Christians (of the Godhead variety, if you will), I will say that I respect the view of the Trinity of other Christians, and understand why they would still claim that to be a Christian you have to have a proper understanding and belief of who he is first to be able to call yourself a Christian. Fine. Mormons are just as adamant about “know[ing] thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent,” but when we talk about that verse from John 17, it is not just about knowing the nature of God and Jesus Christ, but really ‘knowing’ God and developing a relationship with Jesus Christ through one’s daily Christian walk.

I found this to be one of the best explanations I’ve heard from a Mormon on their beliefs in God. Clearly there are many similarities between Mormonism and traditional Christianity; and yet some areas of large divergencies. (The Trinity doctrine, is but one example of this. We aren’t even getting into women being saved through marriage, having dominion over your own planet, and the archangel Moroni (which, strangely has NOTHING to do with pasta), among other things.)

But, this got me to thinking: Trinitarian ideas of God are tough sledding. They always have been.

In fact, the doctrine of the Trinity can be so mysterious and perplexing, that we can mentally switch into a mere abstraction. But, God is not a “thing”, of course. God is not merely a “Divine Essence” which contains manifestations of Father, Son, and Spirit, but rather God is a relational Being who functions as a Three-in-One Godhead.

So, to begin a dialogue on this, I submit to you a response from a friend, and reader, “Nicholas” of the blog Nicholas to Myra. Nicholas has weighed in with some insights of the nature of God. I invite you to submit your own thoughts, or responses as well.

From Nic:

God is not a Blob

The Trinity in not a mere Divine Essence, or blob-god. In fact, that view was condemned as heretical by the Christian Church in ancient times under the label of Sabellianism/Modalism.

Here’s the main reason why: The foundation of who God is does not lie in an abstract Essence. Rather, the Persons of God are the foundation of God’s being, these Persons possessing a common Essence rather than being generated by it. This distinction prevents “blob-god” concept from rearing its ugly head, and assures that your relationship with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not a mere illusion or facade. Where, then, you might ask, is the source of the Godhead itself? All you’ve got to do is read the Gospel of John: It’s the Father.

Once you reject the blob-god, relationship with the real Trinity becomes accessible. Then, you take a new look at what St. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 13:14: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” In the early church, the Father was often referred to simply as “God”, with the understanding that God always existed with His Word and Spirit; being God’s own Word and Spirit, they were obviously not composed of a different Essence than He was or beneath Him in honor. Thus the unity of the Godhead is preserved.

The Judeo-Christian question is this: How do you get to God? The answer: Through His Word and in His Spirit. God has revealed Himself, the Father, through and in His Word and Spirit; Persons He actually is, not mere manifestations of an Essence. How much grander, therefore, is the statement of faith: “One of the Trinity suffered in the flesh”* when it is understood to mean that Jesus Christ, the Word, the subsistent Person of God Himself, truly suffered in the flesh for us.

I’ve found that everything in the Gospel means far more once one renounces blob-god… Try it! Let us all take comfort and be enlightened by that ancient doxology, in which the incomprehensible Mystery of God is declared:

“Glory to the Father through the Son and in the Holy Spirit, both now an ever and to the ages of ages, Amen.”

*The “Theopaschite” formula affirmed at the 5th Ecumenical Council.

So, my dear readers, comment on something you just read. Thanks!

First Cause and 3 views of Reality (video Ravi Zacharias)

Ravi Zacharias speaks to Yale students in this video. It’s really worth a look!

Great stuff + profound & humorous.

– “God” proposed as Personal, Moral, Infinite, Intelligent, and First Cause
– Worldviews

Leave any comments or thoughts you have, okay, friends?