Deutsch ist gut, aber ich wohl nicht bin

It's that time again to pray for Jackson who is taking yet another test in yet another language that he will yet again forget in a depressingly short amount of time. If you are joining us late, the language is German and the test is tomorrow morning at 9:45. The text we are translating is an historical text about an early church father consisting of about 25-30 lines. We will have a dictionary and we are allotted an hour and a half to complete it. If I pass this test, I will have successfully completed the language requirements of my program, which was (to me) the most daunting aspect of the PhD program.

Heading into this month, I was extremely intimidated by German. The only thing that I had ever heard about it is that it is completely foreign to any language (including English) with which one might have some experience. French, as an example, is part of the family of romance languages and as such is very similar to Spanish and more similar to English. In other words, one could conceivably pass a French test without a good grasp of the grammar. German is not the same. I knew a guy in seminary who dropped out of German even after he had paid for it because it was so hard. (Lee Harper, you are still my hero and not just because your name is opposite of one of the greatest American writers to have lived.)

The first few weeks of the class were overwhelming as they always are. Just when you think that you understand something, another point or exception comes along that fouls the whole thing up. We were learning 30 vocabulary words a day so one day off and you were incredibly behind. And most of the words look not a thing like English words. Eventually, though, you get into a rhythm. You realize that not every vocabulary word has to be memorized to succeed. You start to apply your knowledge of other languages. For instance, my deep studies of the Greek language helped a lot in understanding some of the peculiar aspects of the German sentence, crazy word order in particular.

Thankfully my supportive wife has again walked with me through it, has absorbed my inordinate amount of complaints and times of self doubt (which is par for the course). She has been a constant source of encouragement and I want to publicly thank her. Julie I love you.

Please be praying. I will report tomorrow or the next day with, hopefully, good results.

Let's Leave THEM Behind

Reader, pardon the following rant.

While perusing the aisles of our local Barnes and Noble, I paused at the embarrassingly massive display of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins' not so critically acclaimed Left Behind series. The series is comprised of twelve volumes chronicling the lives of four people as they make their way through the dreaded seven years of post rapture tribulation somehow managing to survive (though everyone around them dies) and, furthermore, conversing in the most unrealistic dialogue to find its way to paper since the Dick and Jane series. The twelfth novel climaxes in the second coming of Christ who, I've been told, annihilates people through lasers emanating from his eyes (which is problematic on a number of different fronts).

To my shock and utter dismay, I discovered that the pair has released a thirteenth edition of the series. Apparently, it follows the same characters through their millennial reign with Christ on earth. One wonders if the paradise of the millennial kingdom will have any affect on the reality or intelligence of the dialogue. My guess is no. This promises to be the final chapter of the story, which, of course, we have all heard before. I think that it was originally supposed to be seven volumes (one for each year of the supposed tribulation ), but then it moved to twelve when it was such a hit. Apparently some of the middle volumes took 500 pages to narrate the action of two weeks time. And in addition to the thirteen volume series, there is also a Left Behind series for kids (get um young like the credit card companies) and a three volume "pre-quil" (presumptuous at best - the last thing I care about is how Rayford Steele became a pilot or how Cameron Williams - ironically played by Kirk Cameron in the equally distasteful movies - got his annoying nickname Buck.) I mean this isn't Starwars and Rayford Steele is a poor man's Lando at best.

There are so many areas that deserve reflection and criticism. In the first place, the series exhibits horrible theology. A few points to mention here: 1) The rapture (the premise on which the entire series is based) is a relatively recent theological idea, developed in the 1830s. None of the church Fathers or reputable theologians today believed in such an event. The Scriptural grounding for it is dubious and is often taken out of context. Additionally, it assumes a position toward suffering that contradicts the entirety of the New Testament. It assumes that God will spare his church of the final tribulation - God never promises we will be spared of any suffering! In fact, he promises that we will have suffering. Why should we assume that we will be spared of the great suffering? 2) The books are extremely critical of the Catholic Church as a whole. In fact, most (if not all) Catholics are left behind in the first volume. This includes the Pope and the Cardinals. The Pope than quickly becomes a corrupt leader of a one world faith that is basically Unitarian. This view of the Catholic Church is ignorant and presumptuous. It assumes that all Catholics have no understanding of Christ, salvation, and the like and that all evangelicals (or whatever tradition the books are endorsing) do. What an incredibly arrogant stance! Also, it shows a lack of understanding of the tenants of the Catholic Church, first and foremost of which would be the unique position of Christ as the way to the Father - if any denomination today is going to stand against a growing tide of inclusivism and diminishing of the role of Christ, I believe it would be the Catholic Church. 3) Any number of concerns could be further added, including a horrendous eschatology, which assumes a unique place for Israel (Galatians 3:28 aside) and the rebuilding of the temple in paradise. Apparently LaHaye and Jenkins never read the book of Hebrews. But these are issues for another blog, as they are too big to dispute and tackle here.

In addition to poor theology, I question LaHaye and Jenkin's motives in writing the series. Certainly it began well intentioned, but why the ridiculous proliferation of books? Why continue to write these novels and stretch them into such a long, expensive series? I hope that I am wrong, but it seems that much of the motivation was profit, which in my mind is untenable. But for some reason, Christians continue to make these best sellers! It saddens me that this is the kind of material that is so widely popular amongst Christians today, while names like Henri Nouwen, Thomas Merton, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the like are absent from most Christian bookstores.

Finally, I am disturbed by the low level of literature (if it can be called that) that is present in the books. As I said above, the dialogue is unrealistic. Moreover, the characters are paper thin, and the predicaments that they get into are often solved by unrealistic means. Why must we excuse this poor writing? As Christians, we should demand the best in everything, but so often we settle for something much less simply because it is, or purports to be, Christian.

To end my short rant in this vein (I thank the reader for his or her indulgence), I'd like to appropriate and alter a bit a line from the show King of the Hill: "Mr. LaHaye and Mr. Jenkins, you're not making Christianity better, you're making literature worse."

New Look

As the reader will have noticed, The Communion of Saints has received a little overhaul in its presentation. I added a few elements that I would like to explain. In addition to past posts, I have added to the side column a list of the Fathers, Theologians, and Blogs that I enjoy reading. I do not do this to puff myself up; rather, in keeping with theme of the Blog as a conversing communion, I decided to share with you some of the people with whom I am in conversation. In the Blog section, each name is linked to his or her particular blog and I would encourage the reader to check each of them out. Some of them are former teachers of mine, one of them is a pastor, and some of them are friends of mine. All of them are worth a read. The Fathers and Theologians are linked to a short bio and publications list that will provide the reader with books that are also well worth reading.

Finally, I have posted my list of labels on the side. I have labeled every blog entry I have written according to category. The reader can click on any category that interests him or her and every entry I have written under that category will appear. This will also allow some of you who are not so interested in my theological musings, but care a good deal about the progress of my program, to check periodically and click on that category alone to see what I have shared. I hope you find the new layout engaging and easy to navigate.

The quality of my blogs will not be affected by the new layout. This could be a good thing or a bad thing.

An Answer Remembered

As Christians, we are part of a long tradition of people who are intent on remembering their story, of remembering the points in our history where God has decisively and definitely acted on our behalf. This rich tradition, of course, began with the ancient Israelites who rehearsed their salvation story - the story where the Angel of Death "passed over" the Jewish firstborns killing the Egyptian firstborns, which ultimately led to their exodus from slavery - once a year at the Feast of the Passover. This was actually a law that the Lord God required of them, in order that they not forget the wonderful acts of their God.

Christians continue this tradition with the celebration of the Eucharist, which I would argue, is the central act of the church. Every time we celebrate the Eucharist, we remember the sacrifice of Christ - his broken body and his shed blood. We remember the story and we make it present once again for us. Christ also prescribed such an action when he proclaimed to his disciples: "Do this in remembrance of me."

One of the reasons that God has demanded such constant acts of remembrance is because we are forgetful people. We need to remember because it is so easy for us to forget - when we feel that God has not answered our prayers or that he has not been present to us for awhile, we quickly jump to the conclusion that he has never been there.

I think, therefore, that it is entirely helpful, and entirely biblical for that matter, to work at remembering the times in your life when God has clearly answered prayer. Such an act can increase your faith and inspire you to more prayer, though you may feel that no one is listening. In light of that, I would like to rehearse for you one of the times in my life when God most clearly and most lovingly answered my prayer.

March of 2006, Julie and I were in Kentucky, unsure of our next steps. I had been accepted to Marquette for doctoral work, but we had no provisions for tuition money. My last chance was the John Wesley Fellowship, but for various reasons, that looked very doubtful. I was scheduled to fly to Houston for an interview one Friday. At the same time, Julie was driving to Milwaukee to interview for a position. She left on Thursday morning and I had the evening to myself. With so much at stake, I decided that I had a lot of praying to do.

Around 9:00 in the evening, I headed to Asbury Seminary, about a mile from our house. I wanted to pray in a special place, which for me was Asbury's chapel, Estes Chapel. At 9:00 in the evening, I figured the place would be deserted and I would be alone with the Lord and my prayers. To my dismay however, as I approached Estes, I saw that all lights were blazing and there was some extremely loud, and rather poor, organ music emanating from the place. Disappointed and dejected, I considered turning around and heading home. Instead, I found a little prayer chapel just to the side of Estes, which I always knew was there, but in which I had never spent much time.

With the lights off, I kneeled at the small altar and began praying about all of the things that were heavy on my heart. I prayed for my wife and for her interview, for her calling in ministry and for our marriage. I prayed for my interview and my calling and for the challenges that a PhD program entailed. Finally I began to pray for the means to pay for the tuition. Knowing that the John Wesley Fellowship was unlikely, I simply began praying that the Lord's will be done. It became a refrain in my prayer: "Lord that you would provide the means to pay for this: your will be done." I remember simply repeating that phrase again and again. At one point in the prayer I looked up and caught my breath at the words engraved above the altar where I knelt:

"Thy will be done."

As most of you know, Julie got the job she interviewed for and I was fortunate enough to receive the John Wesley Fellowship, which has helped us so much this year. We often wonder how we could have done this without the Fellowship. However, I do not think that earning the Fellowship was God's answer to my prayer that night in March 2006. I believe that it was rather his words to me: "Thy will be done." Seeing those words were like God's arms around me, assuring me that he was with me in this walk. That he would not leave me. And though there have been times this year when I have forgotten - more times than I care to relate - I know that this truth remains. God is with me. God is with us.

We simply need to remember.

What should a Christian look like?

Throughout the years, Christians have spent a good deal of time and energy concerned with what a Christian should look like. That would be perfectly appropriate if I were talking about the inside, how a Christian should act, think, serve others, and the like. Unfortunately, history has shown us that Christians often seem more concerned with what a Christian looks like physically. Thus it is that we get such horror stories as white European missionaries making all Native American children cut their hair, and the horrendous and preposterous belief that African Americans are the cursed descendants of Ham (Gen 9:22-27) simply because their skin is dark.

This also comes through in many modern portrayals of Jesus. Many drawings of Jesus from the twentieth century portray Jesus as a white European. A more recent picture of Christ is more reminiscent of Michael W. Smith than a Palestinian Jew (my friend Jen always called it the "Brad Pitt Jesus"). I also remember an uproar over a picture of Mary on the cover of Time Magazine a few years ago because she looked "too dark." My friends, these were Jews who lived in the desert! Their skin was likely very dark. Jesus walked around in the desert and slept on the ground. If he wasn't dark from the sun, he was probably dark from the dirt. My guess is that he might look like someone whom many would turn away from if they saw him walking down the street; the same people who would do a double take if such a person walked into their church. The only reason? He doesn't look like us.

Jesus warned against this very thing in a parable: "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, 'God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.' But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted." (Luke 18:10-14)

A slightly more contemporary story also captures the point: A few years ago a popular Christian singer/songwriter came to Asbury College to give a concert. Asbury College and Asbury Seminary both have ethos statements requiring their students to promise that they will not "drink, smoke or chew or run with the girls that do." (This comes from the Holiness tradition out of which the schools stem.) Although it is not the intent of the statements, they are often misinterpreted to be claiming that Christians never smoke and never have a drink and never consort with "those types of people."

It is said that that same week, a strange man was frequently seen around the campus of the seminary. He stood out because he had long hair, dirty clothes and he was always barefoot. He especially stood out when he smoked his cigarettes. Few put it together, however, that this strange man was the Christian artist himself. His name was Rich Mullins, one of the most Christlike figures of the twentieth century.

The Good News is that Christ came into the world to save all people of all cultures of all classes. Therefore, there can be no official "way" that a Christian should physically look. Because any possible way a person can look on this earth is a possible way for a Christian to look. That is the beauty of God's creation and will be the beauty of his kingdom.

Irenaen Wisdom

Irenaeus has, in my mind, the greatest understanding of the incarnation of all of the early Fathers. I am prepared to argue for that. For the time being, I just wanted to give you a snippet of the kind of thing that makes this man's theology imminently beautiful and at the same time practical:

"So He (Jesus) united man with God and wrought a communion of God and man, we being unable to have any participation in incorruptibility if it were not for His coming to us, for incorruptibility whilst being invisible, benefitted us nothing: so He became visible, that we might, in all ways, obtain a participation in incorruptibility." -Irenaeus

That, my friends (with all apologies to Dorothy Parker), is true poetry.

And now for something totally different . . .

Here is a poem from one of my favorite poets. There is no hidden meaning or message - I just kind of like it.

A Very Short Song

"Once, when I was young and true ,
Someone left me sad---
Broke my brittle heart in two;
And that is very bad.

Love is for unlucky folk,
Love is but a curse.
Once there was a heart I broke;
And that, I think, is worse.

-Dorothy Parker

Mein Kampf

Perhaps it is in bad taste to label a post with the infamous title of Hitler's manifesto. However, I find that the title aptly catches the nature of my month of June. The phrase means, simply, "My Struggle." My struggle for the month of June is the German language itself. That's right - it is not enough that we need to know Greek, Latin and French, but now they thrust upon me this most difficult of languages, a language that requires a gutteral spit every third word, a language that sounds best when spoken while pounding a table with a fist. There is nothing mystical about the language, as there was for me with Greek. There is nothing divine or classical about the language, as there was for me with Latin (or what I now refer to as our Lord's language). There is not even anything elegant or beautiful about the language, as there was for me with French. Its just a confusing, angry language where the verbs are, for some unknown reason, split up and most of them come at the end of the sentence! My apologies to German speakers. Ich bin traurig.

To top it all off, we are given only a month to learn enough to pass an efficiency exam. That means an hour and a half of class a day, four days a week, followed by a good five or six hours more of study a night. And even then one feels continuously behind. Mein Gott! Deutsch ist nicht gut! The situation is what my cousin Mark Farrell calls "the firehose experience." In other words, open your mouth wide because the water is coming at you full blast!

Some while back, a famous American writer catalogued his struggles with this peculiar language. Anyone who has tried to learn this language will be able to relate. The following is a great quote from "The Awful German Language" by Mark Twain:

"Surely there is not another language that is so slipshod and systemless, and so slippery and elusive to the grasp. One is washed about in it, hither and thither, in the most helpless way; and when at last he thinks he has captured a rule which offers firm ground to take a rest on amid the general rage and turmoil of the ten parts of speech, he turns over the page and reads, "Let the pupil make careful note of the following exceptions." He runs his eye down and finds that there are more exceptions to the rule than instances of it. So overboard he goes again, to hunt for another Ararat and find another quicksand. Such has been, and continues to be, my experience. Every time I think I have got one of these four confusing "cases" where I am master of it, a seemingly insignificant preposition intrudes itself into my sentence, clothed with an awful and unsuspected power, and crumbles the ground from under me."

Of course, he wrote the thing in German.