Brian Paulson

The Great How Come

2012-02-10T15:46:00.000-06:00

It would be wonderful to have some feedback about the notion I'm posting below. I'm not owning this, but rather "tossing it out there" to see how this fits with the spiritual sensibilities of my friends. Send me a response in an email, some social media or another, or a comment. Thanks!

* * *

The great “How Come” of life is found in Jesus Christ.

Throughout the centuries, believers have considered the cross of Christ and discovered a peace that passes understanding. Our search for meaning in life will pass through suffering and one day we all confront our mortality. So when a believer cries out, “how come?” it is in the "folly of the cross" that we find the wisdom of God.

How has God come into the world? Humbly. Within both the essence and action of God in Jesus Christ there rests a meaning that speaks to our deepest questions about life.

How shall we come before God and others in this life? Humbly. Jesus humbly washed the feet of his disciples and instructed them to do the same out of love for one another. Indeed, only through his way, his truth, and his life shall we come into the gift of eternal life.

In Jesus Christ, God speaks to our deep “how come?”
"In Jesus Christ" is the how God has come into the world.
In humility Jesus us taught us how to come into the presence of God and the people we encounter every day.

© Brian R. Paulson, 2012

Love in the Beloved Community Articulated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

2012-01-14T23:28:00.002-06:00

Quotes from Dr. King -

This love might well be the salvation of our civilization.... Not through violence; not through hate; no, not even through boycotts; but through love. It is true that as we struggle for freedom in America we will have to boycott at times. But we must remember as we boycott that a boycott is not an end within itself; it is merely a means to awaken a sense of shame within the oppressor and challenge his false sense of superiority. But the end is reconciliation; the end is redemption; the end is the creation of the beloved community. It is this type of spirit and this type of love that can transform opposers into friends. It is this type of understanding good will that will transform the deep gloom of the old age into the exuberant gladness of the new age. It is this love which will bring about miracles in the hearts of men.

As we move in this transition from the old age into the new we will have to rise up in protest. We will have to boycott at times, but let us always remember that boycotts are not ends within themselves. A boycott is just a means to an end. A boycott is merely a means to say, `I don't like it.' It is merely a means to awaken a sense of shame within the oppressor but the end is reconciliation. The end is the creation of a beloved community. The end is the creation of a society where men will live together as brothers. An end is not retaliation but redemption. That is the end we are trying to reach. That we would bring these creative forces together we would be able to live in this new age which is destined to come. The old order is dying and the new order is being born .

I must still believe that there is something within them that can cause them one day to come to themselves (That's right, Yes) and rise up walk back up the dusty road to the father's house. (Yes) And we stand there with outstretched arms. That's the meaning of the Christian faith.... I believe that the Ku Klux Klan can be transformed into a clan for God's kingdom. (Yes) I believe that the White Citizens Council can be transformed into a Right Citizens Council. (Yes) I believe that. That's the essence of the Gospel.

"The word segregation represents a system that is prohibitive," he told a Nashville, Tennessee, church conference in 1962; it deprives the Negro of equal access to schools, parks, restaurants, libraries and the like. Desegregation is eliminative and negative, for it simply removes these legal and social prohibitions. Integration is creative, and is therefore more profound and far-reaching than desegregation. Integration is the positive acceptance of desegregation and the welcomed participation of Negroes into the total range of human activities. Integration is genuine intergroup, interpersonal doing. Desegregation then, rightly, is only a short-range goal. Integration is the ultimate goal of our national community. What was at stake, King said, was the hope for civil community itself. "At the heart of all that civilization has meant and developed," he argued, is 'community'-the mutually cooperative and voluntary venture of man to assume a semblance of responsibility for his brother. What began as the closest answer to a desperate need for survival from the beast of prey and the danger of the jungle was the basis of present day cities and nations. Man could not have survived without the impulse which makes him the societal creature he is."

Thoughts on Equipping Leaders for the Church in a Changing World.

2011-10-04T09:56:00.000-05:00

This morning I was stimulated by a post by Cynthia Holder Rich on equipping leaders. What follows is largely my response to her thoughts. (Several years ago, I wrote a short thought about the life of our seminaries called A Developing Vision of the Seminary. I am beginning to see how far my thinking has developed!)

In an interesting way I found myself pondering two books. One that I read a long time ago - Ed Farley's "Theologia: The Fragmentation and Unity of Theological Education" and another book that I have been reading recently by Chris Scharen and Aana Marie Vigen entitled, "Ethnography as Christian Theology and Ethics". In both books, there is a sense of what my pastoral theology professor, Charlie Brown, called "the Prego principle" - after the popular spaghetti sauce. The concept is that God blesses and enriches each person with insight and imagination sufficient to strengthen the witness of the church and the work of ministry. The challenge for leaders in the church is to have developed skill in "teasing out" that which already exists within each Christian and place those gifts within a framework for faithful witness that aligns with the calling of the Church. Farley approaches the question from a theologians point of view. Scharen and Vigen draw their insights from an effective method we rarely teach in a structured way to people entering the ministry - ethnography.

I have been richly blessed by exposure to the global church and international theological education. Even more, in particular while serving in Arizona, I learned much from the immigrant communities with whom we worked as new communities emerged. Yet what I have learned is that every place has a local language that is influenced by a wide range of forces that bring change to the doorstep of every Christian at a dizzying pace.

Thus, the gift of ministry and deep spiritual reflection is now, more than ever, a requirement for all dedicated disciples. Those who will be blessed by graduate training for ministry, and the academy that provides that training, must be equipped with sufficient skills to assess the wide and various contexts in which the Gospel is proclaimed - so that the message is intelligibly received in the local language. Even more, that depth level of theological training should equip future leaders with powerful skill at listening to the lives of those they serve so each localized manifestation of witness can be nurtured and offered to God's symphony of praise in every language.

Indeed I realize that the world is now demonstrating a more diverse and rich cultural and spiritual fabric that most of us have recognized in the past. This diversity of expression in the language of faith does not necessarily mean a fracturing of the unity of the Gospel and its witness in the Church. What it does portend is the requirement that Christians will need to be as culturally multilingual in matters of faith as they are having to be in the global village that keeps getting smaller by the day.

Seeking a Spiritual Center for the Church

2011-09-03T11:43:00.024-05:00

My friend, Michael Kinnamon, recently quoted John Cobb and Joseph Hough who wrote, "The expectations for leadership in society as a whole have increasingly been adopted as normative for church leadership as well. Following the general pattern of bureaucratization, the churches, too, have focused on routinized problem solving in the organization and maintenance of their institutions as the chief locus of leader effectiveness." There was a definite ring of truth in this assesment for me.

The truth of this assesment was driven home as I recently observed a highly motivated group of people gathered as "The Fellowship of Presbyterians" in Minneapolis. To their credit each plenary included prayer, reading of scripture, and proclamation. Moreover, they sustained an effort to speak in a positive way about what God might be doing in the Church - in particular the Presbyterian tradition.

However, as the introductory address was offered by Jim Singleton of Colorado, the language used to redefine the nature and shape of the church (ecclesiology) drew heavily from the insight of leadership guru Ronald Heifetz. Now, I actually liked the use of Heifetz's "adaptive change" paradigm as a leadership tool for a world filled with change. Yet what was missing to my mind was a healthy appeal to the nature of the Body of Christ and its consequences for our lives together.

This is to say that the answer to our bureaucratic woes in denominations is not a newer and better approach to corporate leadership that has been adapted to the non-profit religious environment. This would be just a newer, shinier tool in the corporate leadership toolchest.

It seems to me that the Christian Church would benefit from leadership that engages in deep and committed prayer and conversation about the best way to embody the living presence of Jesus Christ in the world. Now, I realize that my colleagues who draw upon the latest leadership resources would probably claim to have a similar aim. However, I'd prefer to start a conversation about change with the wisdom of scripture and a testimony of lives changed and the world transformed.

For example, here are passages worth considering. "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? ... Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it." (1 Cor. 6:9, 12:27) The church has been given a holy calling that is always about fundamental adaptive change - we are not our own, we belong to God - this is a biblical word that calls us to constantly remember and adapt.

In my experience, the church is genuinely a living organism that draws in new vitality and perspective with each new soul joining our witness. This sometimes causes controversy because the scriptures are not always read in a uniform manner on issues of deep significance. We are given a challenge of the kind presented in Jesus' parable in Matthew 13:24-30 where the Master instructs us, to let both good wheat and invasive weeds "grow together until the harvest" (v.30).

I have found this biblically articulated reality of post-modern life in the Church to be a helpful challenge. When confronted by believers who read scripture and its application in a differnt way than I read, I am forced to reflect anew on the core of our faith and our calling in the world.

It is interesting that "differentiation" was a term in frequent use during the Minneapolis gathering. I don't believe that differentiation requires separation. Indeed, I believe Jesus constantly gave his disciples the challenge of hospitality and holiness at the same time. We are to be good wheat growing alongside the weeds working out our own salvation dilligently (Phil. 2:12-13) and trusting in the good judgement of God.

Here is my challenge for leaders of the Church in a world of constant change - seek the spiritual center of our life. Return to the witness of scripture. Hear the voice of other believers. Act with sincerity and humility. And never forget that we belong, body and soul, in life and in death – to our faithful savior Jesus Christ.

Psalm 23 - A Perspective on Stewardship

2011-04-04T17:39:00.004-05:00

The LORD is my shepherd;

We are stewards of Christian life.

I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:

We are stewards of “just enough” for contentment.

he leadeth me beside the still waters. He restoreth my soul:

We are stewards of our souls.

he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.

We are stewards of a witness.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil:

We are stewards of faith.

for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

We are stewards of spiritual companionship.

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:

We are stewards in remembrance of the Lord’s Supper.

thou anointest my head with oil;

We are stewards of purpose.

my cup runneth over. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life:

We are stewards of gratitude.

and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever (all the days of my life).

We are stewards of commitment.

© Brian R. Paulson, 2011

The Circle is Wider and God is Greater: A word amidst the current PCUSA restructuring debate

2011-04-03T20:58:00.006-05:00

God is greater than every vessel we construct to represent the Body of Christ. Also the circle of faith, hope, and love inaugurated by Jesus Christ is wider than every circumference we establish to clarify our belonging. It seems to me that our conversation about Presbyterian witness should bear in mind these comparative spiritual metrics as we fashion our future.

It is my hope that competing voices leading the current conversation about our future witness would demonstrate greater forbearance and an appreciation both for one another and also for the place we hold within the broader course of Christian witness. While perceived pejorative hooks being used in conversation may become scattered salt for old wounds, I think the notion of a non-geographic governing body need not be rejected out of hand.

Yet since the Body of Christ is a greater reality than our denominational boundaries, I believe some humility in our line drawing would demonstrate a measure of deepening faith. It serves no lasting benefit for Presbyterians to be drawing lines finer and finer to ensure a uniformity of cause and commitment. While the Reformed tradition was begun as an attempt to reform and revitalize the Body of Christ, its schismatic outcome for the life of the Christian Church was not an intended outcome. Unfortunately, we have spent more of our time throughout the centuries in squabbles with each other than in reforming dialogue with the larger communion of believers. This heritage has not added to our benefit. The circle is wider.

It seems to me that some thoughtful leaders of our congregations are seeking to find a way to keep communion within our denomination while allowing room for a distinction of voice. As a local pastor I appreciate the need for each shepherd to teach and lead a congregation in a manner that generates greater faith and charity within the unique context of each setting. If circles need to have sub-circles with dotted lines and permeability, I believe that a generous spirit within our body can allow for that. Yet it would be both refreshing and faithful if greater energy were applied to the challenge of growing together than spending our energy in currents that deplete and separate our witness. Throughout history, I believe the separations of Christian communions have not served to strengthen the witness of Christ for the world. Indeed, such divisions have made our witness smaller in spirit and manner.

Presbyterians would acknowledge that God is greater than all human conception. So also, we surely acknowledge our apprehension of the Body of Christ is only partial. Each generation seeks to fashion a faithful vessel by which the eternal God can be praised. The shape of our belonging in Christ can surely flex and adapt while remaining true to God.

We need not disdain others who propose alternate patterns for our witness and communion. Indeed, the character and concerns of the Church are often framed by the attitudes of each age. As a confessional church, we believe that not only the community of believers in the ancient church but even also the faithful of the 19th
century church speak – indeed every era of faith informs our witness. Yet while the witness of prior generations guides our current confession, former structures need not be a prison of the past. Our calling is to demonstrate faith today.

Our knowledge of God’s sovereignty ought to generate greater patience and humility in our conversations than I currently see amongst my colleagues. We can do better, and certainly, God is greater.

Brian R. Paulson, D. Min.
Pastor, First Presbyterian Church of Libertyville, Illinois
March 28, 2011

References:

A Shorter Version of Commentary on PCUSA Restructuring Conversations

2011-04-03T20:52:00.002-05:00

God is greater than every vessel we construct to represent the Body of Christ. Also the God’s circle of faith, hope, and love is wider than every circumference we establish. I believe our conversation about Presbyterian witness should bear in mind these comparative spiritual metrics as we fashion our future.

We need not disdain others who propose alternate patterns. Non-geographic boundaries are imaginable.

Yet our conversation should demonstrate greater forbearance and an appreciation both for one another and for the place we hold within the broader course of Christian witness. Every age must grapple to witness faithfully. No single era of church can make exclusive claim to God’s design for Church.

We do not strengthen our witness by making more and smaller circles of faith. Holiness is a gift more powerful expressed as invitation than exclusion. Surely we can elevate our witness. The circle is wider and God is greater.

Invitation to conversation about the meaning of baptism

2010-07-19T08:33:00.003-05:00

I'm not sure this softened tone suggested to the church by the General Assembly of the PCUSA will generate greater discipleship:

The 219th General Assembly (2010) of the PCUSA approved the following:

1. That the approach to the Lord’s Table always be gracious and invitational, not scrutinizing membership credentials, but extending Christ’s welcome to the people of God.

2. That the invitation to the Lord’s Supper be gracious and hospitable, remembering that “access to the Table is not a right conferred upon the worthy, but a privilege given to the undeserving who come in faith, repentance, and love” (W-2.4011).

3. That congregations renew the practice of the invitation to discipleship—a call to baptism and to the reaffirmation of baptismal commitment—particularly after the proclamation of the Word.

4. That not yet baptized persons who present themselves at the Lord’s Table be warmly received and promptly invited into conversation on the significance of the sacraments, in order that their hunger for spiritual nourishment might be met by a gracious invitation to Christ and to Christian life through baptismal discipleship.

The American Context of American Christianity - Complete

2009-11-06T22:59:00.004-06:00

I made some significant revisions to the document since the draft listed in the last post. You can review the document that became 4000 words long at my website: www.worshiplife.net . Just click on the word NEW on the homepage and it will take you to The Context of American Christianity.

Alternatively, you can just choose this link to get you directly to the .pdf - http://bit.ly/420v9x .

As always, I welcome your comments.

Trends in North American churches

2009-10-01T11:09:00.008-05:00

Today I am polishing a draft for my working group in Faith and Order. We are wanting a common language for a conciliar response the WCC's Nature and Mission of the Church.

Here are the areas in which I am writing about North American churches through the following lenses of legacy and trends -

Our structured legacy: Ancient born churches; Reformation born churches; Anabaptist born churches; Native born churches.

Our spiritual movements legacy: Puritan; Anabaptist; Revivalist; Fundamentalist; Social Gospel; Cultural and Immigrant; Charismatic; Evangelical; Church Growth; Emergent.

Our cultural legacy: Agricultural; Industrial; Urban; Suburban; Corporate; Literate; Visual; Technological; Socially Networked.

Our current trends: Consumerized; Entrepreneurial; Event Driven; Service Oriented; Collaborative; Decentralized; Viral; Violent; and Secularizing.

I'd rather distill than enlarge at this point. But, what do you think? Post or send me a Tweet @PaulsonBrian.

Power comes from Hope

2009-09-10T22:06:00.003-05:00

Listening to Jurgen Moltmann today has stirred reflection within me about the power of the gospel to announce and demonstrate the reign of God through our lives. Moltmann reminds us that the gospel hope engages matters of life and death. There is no greater power than this: the gift of life that conquers death.

Unfortunately the church reflects the world in countless ways with regard to power. The notion of power in the world is so often associated with authority to control. Yet the power of hope lies in its ability to grow and transform - like yeast in Jesus' parables.

The power of hope lies in its abundance to the creative possibility of God. Each victory of life over death brings newfound possibility. This is hope - a power that no prison of body or spirit can control.

It is remarkable to consider the fascination with death that grips the human imagination. In medieval times, this fascination was on display through countless superstitions. Today, the fascination is clearly seen in countless horror and suspense films and books we engage with our "free time" and money.

Terrorists thought they would gain control over our imagination with the shock, terror, and death of September 11th. As I recall those days. The greater power was found in the faith, hope, and love of all who survived. Jesus Christ brought hope to the fore - victory over death.

Such power need not control. It is the freedom of life to live alert to the goodness of God, abounding in gratitude. It is hope - power in powerlessness that conquers the world.

Moltmann Event 1 - Emergent Theological Conversation

2009-09-09T22:26:00.005-05:00

It is the end of a long day welcoming pilgrims from around the nation and a few from around the globe at our church. Danielle Shroyer was a delight for Moltmann 101 providing a heartfelt overview of his life and work. My body was sore from long weeks of service and prayer of late. Yet, my spirit grew as I overheard her conversation of faith while setting up rooms and fans for the guests as they arrived.

There were a few moves that caught my attention. In the first instance, I was taken by her description of his engagement of suffering. As such, he apparently suggests that rather than ask, "why is God doing this?" we ought always to ask, "where is God in this?" His life experience suggested this was a much more useful and profound answer as he lived through challenge. (More on suffering in a moment.)

This thought connected to the notion of discovering church. Danielle claimed his interest is less in boundary making for church. Rather more he is interested in the way that we discover church as it is lived in grace and faithfulness. She suggested he might offer, "I see church" here or there.

This discussion of church - ecclesiology - as discovered in the movement of the Holy Spirit in a people, matched a conversation I've been having with colleagues in the Faith and Order Commission. We have been interested by the inheritors of the "Stone Campbell movement" who apparently will often offer the expression "I saw church" when discussing God's work amongst the people.

As I listened to this I heard a bridge between Moltmann's treatment of suffering, "Where is God in this?" and his notion of discovering church, "I see church!" I have observed that the conversation based upon description and discovery of God's work amongst the people serves as a more useful bridge for ecumenical dialogue - pulling the church together.

A final word about suffering. It seems that every sector of society is suffering these days. I notice people growing testy at work, at home, and at church. In the midst of suffering, I see people withdraw and break apart. Yet this is not a gospel move.

Apparently Moltmann is embraced by many because his great work on HOPE does not diminish suffering. Yet suffering is placed in a much larger context of God's sovereignty and abundant gifts. Here is the spiritual move for us all, I believe - to cast our eyes toward the light about us. The gospel does not avoid the suffering, but it lives into something much more rich and grand in the goodness of life. ... I hope I can do that each day.

More tomorrow - I hope!

How far away from Jesus?

2009-04-16T15:51:00.005-05:00

After visiting the Crystal Cathedral in California, he said, "it's a long way from a Jew in Palestine." Will Willimon was reflecting with me over a cup of coffee during a visit to Duke University some years ago. I told Will that the cathedral where he worked was also a long way from Palestine.

Now, years later, I find myself on a national commission reflecting on the Nature and Mission of the Church. I've also been asked to write a document for a group of Presbyterian leaders on the way I think about the church in light of Christian faith and tradition.

My association with the Waldensian Christians of Italy over the years has shaped some of my thinking about the church. In particular I find myself struggling to frame the call of God with the accretion of structures we've inherited over the centuries. I've recently been reading a book called "The Ruin of the Roman Empire". Here are some excerpts:

".. before Constantine .. Christianities were everywhere, but a force to be reckoned with nowhere. I use the surprising plural "Christianities" to speak of this religious movement .. Yet, by 395 .. Theodosius 1 left behind .. an empire-wide leadership of Christian bishops and their wealthy supporters and associates. Christianity flourished, was privileged, and did its business. In cities all over the empire, bishops and wealthy Christians took decisive control."

I can remember hearing a Waldensian friend named Franco Giampiccoli quoting French philosopher Paul Ricoeur as he spoke to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Turin about the dangers Christians in the use of power in the world. (Italian Bishops had just instructed the faithful not to vote in a recent election.)

It seems to me that the church has been afflicted time and again by the temptations to power. As a Presbyterian in the United States I must confess this as vigorously as any other Christian in power. I've been fascinated to read about how long and deep this assertion of unwieldly power has hindered our witness and distanced ourselve from the wandering Galilean.

Peter, Primacy, Commitment and Communion

2009-03-03T08:42:00.002-06:00

Shortly I will be at the funeral mass of a friend whose Father has died and gone ahead to the church triumphant. Over time, he and have talked about the way that believers put "fences" around the Lord's table. So at this pastoral moment, all of those conversations will converge in a very personal way.

At the same time, I am reading the remarks (as it turns out, some of the last public remarks he offered) of Avery Cardinal Dulle, S.J. that were offered in June, 2007 at the 50th anniversary conference of the Faith and Order Commission at Oberlin, Ohio. It was both a retrospective and prospective conversation about Christian unity. I don't have time here to cover all that interests me about the paper, but there is conversation about the role of primacy (important especially for Roman Catholics and other communions that cherish the role of bishops). I am praying my way through (as a Presbyterian) the way that primacy is a gift to the church.

At the same time, I concluded a mens' small group bible study this morning examining texts surrounding Peter. We began with the text in which Peter names Jesus as Messiah, proclaiming a commitment that had not previously been voiced. It is at this point that Jesus says, "Peter you are rock" and on rock I shall build the church. It is my reading that the rock in question is not the particular person, Peter, but rather the commitment (the leap) that Peter made. Upon commitment such as that, the church is built and depends.

We say that the Lord's Supper is a foretaste of the great banquet to come. Who presides at the table? (I recently returned from Rome where I viewed the supposed tomb of Peter under the altar at the center of St. Peter's in the Vatican.) What is the rock upon which the table is placed? Is it not a shame that we all must wait for the church triumphant until we finally feast together in unity?

I long for that day.

Expanding the conversations

2009-02-28T18:39:00.004-06:00

Today I had an interesting meeting with planners for The Emergent Theological Conversation who are considering holding a fall gathering at our church. I'm starting to understand the way in which there can be a convergence between the faith conversations I hold at home, church, in Presbytery, on WorshipLife.net, in the Faith and Order Commission, and in my relationships with Waldensians around the world. Life usually moves a little too fast for these conversations to be recorded via keyboard. However, I'm going to make an effort and discover how the conversations will grow. Peace to all, friends!