BirdSong

Red Jacket’s view of Christianity ~ Compelling

@DrJackKing — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:14:13 +0000

These words belong to Red Jacket (early 19th century), but they belong to us, too, because they continue to ring so true. Pay attention and look upon them with an open heart (some emphasis added). Then ask yourself what YOU need to do.

RED JACKET VS. CHRISTIANITY: THE NATIVE AMERICAN AS RATIONALIST

Editorial note by T.C. McLuhan: Sa-go-ye-wat-ha, or Red Jacket, Seneca chief, and great orator of the Six Nations, was born near the present site of Geneva, New York, in 1750. In 1805, a young missionary named Cram was sent into the country of the Iroquois by the Evangelical Missonary Society of Massachusetts to “spread the Word.” A council was held at Buffalo, New York, and Red Jacket made the following reply telling Cram why he did not wish to have the missionary stay with them. N.B. Wood, in Lives of Famous Indian Chiefs, recounts that after making his statement Red Jacket moved to shake hands with the missionary; Cram refused saying, “There was no fellowship between the religion of God and the Devil.” According to Wood, the Indians smiled and retired peacefully.

Brothers, our seats were once large, and yours were small. You have now become a great people, and we have scarcely a place left to spread our blankets. You have got our country, but are not satisfied; you want to force your religion upon us.

Brother, continue to listen. You say that you are sent to instruct us how to worship the Great Spirit agreeable to his mind; and if we do not take hold of the religion which you white people teach, we shall be unhappy hereafter. You say that you are right, and we are lost. How do we know this to be true? We understand that your religion is written in a book. If it was intended for us as well as you, why has not the Great Spirit given to us — and not only to us, but to our forefathers — the knowledge of that book, with the means of understanding it rightly? We only know what you tell us about it. How shall we know when to believe, being so often deceived by the white people?

Brother, you say there is but one way to worship and serve the Great Spirit. If there is but one religion, why do you white people differ so much about it? Why not all agree, as you can all read the book?

Brother, we do not understand these things. We are told that your religion was given to your forefathers, and has been handed down from father to son. We also, have a religion which was given to our forefathers, and has been handed down to us, their children. We worship in that way. It teaches us to be thankful for all favors we receive; to love each other, and be united. We never quarrel about religion, because it is a matter which concerns each man and the Great Spirit.

Brother, we do not wish to destroy your religion or take it from you; we only want to enjoy our own.

Brother, we have been told that you have been preaching to the white people in this place. These people are our neighbors: We are acquainted with them. We will wait a little while and see what effect your preaching has upon them. If we find it does them good, makes them honest and less disposed to cheat Indians, we will consider again of what you have said.

Editorial note by T.C. McLuhan: Red Jacket’s hostility toward Christianity erupted on every occasion. Referring to the unwise missionary Cram, he once said: “The White people were not content with the wrongs they had done his people, but wanted to cram their doctrines down their throats.” When asked by a gentleman in 1824, why he was so opposed to missionaries, he replied:

They do us no good. If they are not useful to the white people and do them no good, why do they send them among the Indians? If they are useful to the white people and do them good, why do they not keep them at home? They [the white men] are surely bad enough to need the labor of everyone who can make them better. These men [the missionaries] know we do not understand their religion. We cannot read their book — they tell us different stories about what it contains, and we believe they make the book talk to suit themselves. If we had no money, no land and no country to be cheated out of these black coats would not trouble themselves about our good hereafter. The Great Spirit will not punish us for what we do not know. He will do justice to his red children. These black coats talk to the Great Spirit, and ask for light that we may see as they do, when they are blind themselves and quarrel about the light that guides them. These things we do not understand, and the light which they give us makes the straight and plain path trod by our fathers, dark and dreary. The black coats tell us to work and raise corn; they do nothing themselves and would starve to death if someone did not feed them. All they do is to pray to the Great Spirit; but that will not make corn and potatoes grow; if it will why do they beg from us and from the white people. The red men knew nothing of trouble until it came from the white men; as soon as they crossed the great waters they wanted our country, and in return have always been ready to teach us to quarrel about their religion. Red Jacket can never be the friend of such men. If they [the Indians] were raised among white people, and learned to work and read as they do, it would only make their situation worse…. We are few and weak, but may for a long time be happy if we hold fast to our country, and the religion of our fathers.

________________________________________

SOURCE: McLuhan, T.C. Touch the Earth: A Self-Portrait of Indian Existence (New York: Promontory Press, 1971), pp. 60, 61, 63. Primary sources:

Hodge, F.W., ed. Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico, Bulletin 30, Bulletin of American Ethnology, 1907, vol. 2, pp. 360-363.

Stone, William L. Life and Times of Sa-Go-Ye-Wat-Ha, or Red Jacket (New York; London: Wiley & Putnam, 1841), pp. 189-193, 334. Wood, Norman B. Lives of Famous Indian Chiefs (Aurora, IL: American Indian Historical Publishing Company, 1906), pp. 254-256.

Look For the Gold

@DrJackKing — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:52:12 +0000

Please take a moment to read the repost from Steve Roesler’s All Things Workplace site. Steve’s mantra is “Teaching smart people practical ways to become extraordinary.” I applaud Steve for his efforts. Steve’s post is entitled, Look for the Gold:

“At one time Andrew Carnegie was the wealthiest man in America.

He came to America from Scotland as a small boy, did a variety of odd jobs, and eventually ended up as the largest steel manufacturer in the United States. At one time he had forty-three millionaires working for him. In those days being a millionaire was rare; conservatively speaking, a million dollars in his day would be equivalent to at least twenty million dollars today.

When a newspaper reporter asked Carnegie how he had hired forty-three millionaires, Carnegie responded that those men weren’t millionaires when they started working for him but had become millionaires as a result.

The reporter’s next question was, “How did you develop these men to become so valuable that you’ve paid them this much money?”

Carnegie replied that people are developed the same way gold is mined. Tons of dirt needs to be moved to find a single ounce of gold. But you don’t go into a mine looking for dirt—you go looking for the gold.

That’s exactly the way we managers need to view our people. Don’t look for the flaws, warts, and blemishes—they’re too easy to find and they’re abundant.

Look for the unique expression of talent that caused you to hire a person in the first place.

It’s a fact: you’ll find exactly what you decide look for.”

So, what do you think? Do you like what it has to teach us? Do you see any connection between Steve’s post and the teachings of the New Testament? If you look carefully many lessons will come to mind. I want to share but one today.

Do we look for the gold in those God brings into our life each day? How about our spouse? Our boss? Those anxious, if not angry, customers? What about the guy who just cut you off only to slow down right in front of you as you are driving down the expressway? See the gold? What about the lady who sings out of key each Sunday morning, or the guy who comes to church with dirty shoes? See the gold? Then there’s the kids’ school teachers and the policeman that pulled you over for traveling faster than the posted speed. See the gold? Now, forget about all the people you see from day to day (of course, we hope you are not making too many friends with people who drive cars with pretty lights on top!). Instead, think about the crowd Jesus hung out with. Yes, we know all about the disciples. That’s not who I want you to consider. Do you see the gold in the prostitute? The homeless man? The town drunk who lost his family and everything he probably still holds dear because of an addiction? What about the deaf lady or the disabled middle-aged man? Do you see the gold in the convicted felon? What about the former inmate who has paid her dues to society? Do you see the gold?

If not, it’s probably because you decided long ago not to look for it. We must help one another do a much better job of removing all of the dirt and grime from those God expects us to love if we are to see the gold. By the way, looked in a mirror lately? Do you see the gold?

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

“Discipleship, Mission, and Church: A Plea to Learn Our History”

@DrJackKing — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:42:35 +0000

Just wanted to encourage you to visit Frank Viola’s blog space, REIMAGINING CHURCH, and take in all the freshness of his post, Discipleship, Mission, and Church: A Plea to Learn Our History.

From Frank’s blog: “Discipleship” and “missional.” These are the two big buzzwords on the Christian landscape today. Of course, there is also “simple church.” But that’s another discussion for another time. As I speak in conferences throughout the world and meet people who have jumped on the discipleship bandwagon, or the missional bandwagon (or both), I make several observations.

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

Get Out of the [Glass] House and Catch Something!

@DrJackKing — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:45:58 +0000

Congregations—as opposed to “the church”—seem to fashion around themselves extended glass houses (from their personal lives). Rather ironic since these glass houses become their fortress, visited only by a few down-and-outers/outsiders/sinners with the courage to cross the wide expanse of the door’s threshold. The other ironic thing, as I see it, is they do not know the house/building is made of glass. What they are doing—better yet, what they are not doing—is so evident/transparent to the unchurched … to the point I can imagine hordes of the unchurched with their faces pressed against the outer walls, noses a bit smudged, with their hands around their eyes to keep the sun out as they watch “the show.” And for the great majority (inside this fortress), that’s exactly what it is.

It’s sad, actually, to realize so many who proclaim His name don’t know who He is. They put their finest foot forward unaware of how much it needs to accumulate the dust of service to a hurt and dying world so it can be cleaned with the tears and hair of “the least of these.” But, of course, they would never stoop so low as to touch—or be touched—by a sinner who realizes their station in life and their dependency, through faith, on the Son of the Most High. They’re afraid they may catch something.

Mark 1:40ff: a leper came to Him and BEGGED of Him, “If you are willing, you can make me clean.” He touched the man. That’s the lesson! That the man was cleansed and spread the word to those around him is secondary. THE LESSON IS JESUS TOUCHED HIM. And, so it is, we are to tear down the glass houses, go into some of the most distressing communities of the world (perhaps right around the corner from your home), and touch those around us. Even if it means we might “catch” something.

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

A Lesson In Grace/Building a Legacy of Grace (repost by Ron Edmondson)

@DrJackKing — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:14:56 +0000

Let me encourage you to visit Ron’s site, Graced Again! Your heart will thank you for it!

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

Now, enjoy “A Lesson in Grace!“

Posted: 26 Jul 2009 05:21 AM PDT

Bear with me through a little Bible pilgrimage to illustrate a point about grace.

A man named Boaz displayed grace as the kinsman redeemer of a widow named Ruth.
So Boaz took Ruth and she became his wife. Then he went to her, and the Lord enabled her to conceive, and she gave birth to a son. (Ruth 4:13)

Boaz became the great-grandfather of a man named David.
Salmon the father of Boaz, Boaz the father of Obed, Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of David. (Ruth 4:21-22)

David displayed grace to a man named Mephibosheth.
David asked, “Is there anyone still left of the house of Saul to whom I can show kindness for Jonathan’s sake?” (2 Samuel 9:1)

Of course, the lineage continued to Jesus, the author of grace.
(Matthew 1:1-17)

I wonder if all those human examples of grace started here:
Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab (Matthew 1:5)

Do you remember Rahab?
Then Joshua son of Nun secretly sent two spies from Shittim. “Go, look over the land,” he said, “especially Jericho.” So they went and entered the house of a prostitute named Rahab and stayed there. (Joshua 2:1)

Here is my conclusion:
Rahab, the prostitute, received grace from the Israelites. Boaz was raised in grace because he had a mother who knew it firsthand. David was a man of grace, because it was in his heritage.

Here is my challenge to me:
I have been given much grace in my life, from God and others. If I pass it on to others will I establish a legacy of grace in the generations to follow me?

Here is my challenge to you:
What legacy of grace will you leave?

Do you stand guilty as charged?

@DrJackKing — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:27:38 +0000

Chuck Colson was the Special Counsel for President Richard Nixon from 1969-1973. He spent time in prison for obstruction of justice (though not related to Watergate). Colson’s later life has been spent working with his non-profit organization devoted to prison ministry, called “Prison Fellowship.”

Someone else we know also served time. The difference is that the second prisoner, Jesus, was wrongly accused; He was innocent. Chuck tells His story often (Do we?). Chuck sets the stage thusly:

The prisoner said nothing as people shouted charges against him. He had been roughly pushed from cell to cell and questioned throughout the long night. His body ached, but he stood straight before his accusers.

After describing the mock trial, the cries for justice (albeit ill-informed), the washed hands of those who judged Him, the long dusty road, the agony on the cross, and His death, Chuck points out this prisoner, a prisoner who died for each of us, is no longer dead. He lives!

Chuck then tells the rest of the story:

Do you think Christ can be found only in beautiful churches? History shows us that he walked on dusty roads; he laughed with his friends; he knew pain and sorrow. He wasn’t a member of the high society. He owned nothing. He was born in a borrowed manger, rode a borrowed donkey, was buried in a borrowed tomb.

Most of his friends were losers—prostitutes, loudmouths, poor fishermen, and criminals. He touched the eyes of blind men, and they saw; he spoke to the crippled, and they threw away their crutches. He lived among the poor, and he comforted the oppressed. He saw through the political games and phony lives of the religious people of his day. [Shamefully, it exists today.]

In the end, these so-called religious people did him in because he cared for the poor, the downtrodden, the prisoners—and they didn’t. He exposed them as fakes. They did not want to see the ugly sores in society. They did not want to hear the heartbreaking cries of the hurting. They did not want to face the rejects and outcasts. They killed him because he wouldn’t let them claim to love God and forget human need. But Jesus’ love was real. His love was tough enough to give everything. He died as a prisoner in order to overcome death for the rest of us. He became just like us so that we could become just like him—righteous before God.

Let me ask you, who are YOUR friends? Is YOUR love real? Real enough to give up everything? Are you willing to sacrifice? Are you willing to die for a brother? Where does your faith stand? Where does your hope rest? Are you, too, a prisoner … of this world? He can set you free; you need only ask.

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

P.S. You can read Chuck Colson’s blog post at Prison Fellowship’s Break Point.

The Beauty in the Blossom!

@DrJackKing — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:17:00 +0000

Just how many opportunities for outreach are we waiting for? How many have we already missed (for all of the wrong reasons) while we set around looking for that perfect one? Guess what? All of them are perfect ones! Consider excerpts from the … blog, re: Wedding Crashers.

“In most large U.S. cities, 25 percent to 45 percent of all the weddings occur outside the church. And that percentage is rising. According to a 2006 survey by Condé Nast Bridal Media, there was a nine percent decrease in the last year of couples married in a church or synagogue.”

Do you see opportunities? Now do you see the missed ones? Here’s the punch line: “While an increasing number of ceremonies are held in parks, banquet halls, museums, hotels, and private homes, the vast majority of those couples still say they want some spiritual elements involved in their ceremonies. However, many pastors refuse to serve these couples on one of the most important days of their lives. Here are some of the reasons they give:

They don’t attend my church.
They’re already living together.
They’ve been previously married.
They’re not interested in premarital counseling.”

What are we thinking? We—and our preachers—REFUSE to serve them. Yeah, that’s certain to draw that couple closer to God. Now, why did we refuse them again? Oh, because the couples are not perfect, merely human. I see. It’s the country club mentality is still alive and well—you’re either in or you’re out. And we get to make that determination do we? As I recall, my Bible tells me the journey matters. And our work is clearly delineated: keep those couples (and every other Pilgrim) going in the right direction!

And until we are sin-free, I’d suggest keeping the judgmental stones to ourselves. Just a thought.

So, instead of making excuses, let’s get out there and make our gardens beautiful for Him. And be sure to sow a few seeds where others fear to tread; one day, everyone will see the beauty that can only be found in the blossom of a man and/or woman of faith who knows what it’s like to be separated from their Father.

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

Five Changes I Would Make (repost, Thom Rainer)

@DrJackKing — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:41:35 +0000

I ran across a blog post entitled, Five Things I Would Change If Were a Pastor Again (Thom Rainer) … wanted to share it with you. An excerpt (i.e., the crux) follows. How does it shake out with respect to your experiences? Is there something you would add?

Five Changes I Would Make

The list is not comprehensive. My mistakes in ministry comprise a much longer list than a brief blog can contain. In fact, I would need a long book to write all the dumb things I did. Actually it would need to be a multi-volume series. Anyway, here are five of the biggest changes I would make.

1. I would spend more time in prayer. It’s cliché, but a pastor’s work is never done. Sometimes I was just too busy to pray. Not that really sounds dumb. I was too busy to spend time with God, my Creator, and the One who sent His Son to die for me. I so desperately needed His power, but I shamefully neglected time with Him.

2. I would spend more time in the Word. Too many times my sermons were void of power because of my busyness in matters of lesser importance. I needed to be more like the Twelve, who refused to let the demands of the church take them away from the prayer and the ministry of the Word (Acts 6:4).

3. I would spend more time loving my critics than worrying about their criticisms. I am too thin-skinned. I often let critics bother me too much. Certainly there are times when criticisms against me are valid; there were many of those times when I served as pastor. But most of the time someone was dealing with an issue, and I was the most convenient target. They needed more love; I often gave them greater neglect. I just wanted to avoid them.

4. I would spend more time with the people of the church. I love to watch those pastors who have mastered the art of “hanging out.” They love the people they serve. They want to spend time with them. They are truly like shepherds in their concern and love. Being with the members of the church is not a burden to them; it is a joy. I needed to be more like those pastors.

5. I would spend more time with the unchurched. My most effective evangelistic times as a pastor were not the result of a new program, as helpful as that program may have been. I was most evangelistic when I had friends and acquaintances who were unchurched. I needed to get outside the walls of my Christian cocoon and get more into the culture of those who don’t know Jesus.

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

A lukewarm Jesus is not an option

@DrJackKing — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:38:45 +0000

As you may recall, I hold to the preterist view. Some would say the judgment remains; if so what does John mean when he writes (9:39), “And Jesus said, For judgment came I into this world …”? Is there a “second” judgment just like so many believe there is a “second, third, or fourth” coming?

When we think of these things in human terms we are left unfilled and require a source for our hope; when we think of these things in a spiritual sense, we want nothing less than a triumphant Jesus and the acknowledgment we live … today … in His kingdom. Can’t have it both ways as I see it … the prophecies have not been partially fulfilled … seems to me they either have been fulfilled or not … a lukewarm Jesus is not an option.

I remain convinced EVERYTHING Jesus set out to do for His Father has been done. Yet I suppose I can be persuaded … it just won’t be easy!

Humbled, as always, by His mighty hand,

BirdSong

Can Your Church Handle the Truth? (repost from Christianity Today)

@DrJackKing — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:47:16 +0000

Recovery ministries demand a level of honesty many congregations aren’t used to.
Matt Russell with Angie Ward
Monday, July 13, 2009

I am afraid that in many American churches, we are not telling the truth—at least not the whole truth.

In many churches we assume that once you accept Jesus as your Savior, you get involved in church and your life gets better. This is the standard story repeated in “testimony time” on Sundays, and the unspoken assumption regarding discipleship.

This “narrative of ascendency” has become the dominant American narrative of the gospel, rooted in American optimism and confidence. It is beautiful, compelling, and powerful. But is it the whole truth?

The church in America has struggled to embrace an equally true “narrative of descendency,” the part of the gospel that is grounded in the One who descended into the depths of human darkness, and who calls us to face our particular and ongoing struggle with our own darkness.

We avoid this part of the story. We want a new life without a death. We want to ascend to Heaven before we descend into hell.

But the gospel includes both descendency and ascendency. The very process of recovery is understanding that there is a death, and there is a resurrection. They are inseparable, and it’s a process that continues throughout our lives. The story of Mercy Street is a story of a community of faith in Christ that sees the gospel in both of those narratives.

My snowball interviews

Thirteen years ago, I had finished seminary and was trying to figure out what to do with my life. I called Jim Jackson, a friend who was the senior pastor at Chapelwood United Methodist Church in Houston, to ask him to help me think through some of the decisions I had to make. He asked me to work with him for a few years and get some ministry experience under my belt.

When I got to Chapelwood, Jim asked me, “What do you want to do?” I told him that I wanted to find a way to connect people who were outside the church, who saw no relevance in the way the church interacts with culture, with the gospel. Jim said, “Go for it. What do you need?”

I said I needed a laptop and a cell phone and told him I wouldn’t be at the church a lot.

I asked Jim if he would give me the names of a couple of people who had left the church because they had bad experiences. Then I found a coffee shop in the Montrose area of Houston and cold-called the people on his list.

“My intention is not to invite you back to church,” I said. “I want to hear what happened, how you felt, and what you wish was different. Will you just come and tell me your story?”

I didn’t realize it at the time, but I ended up doing what is known as “snowball interviewing.” After those first few interviews, I asked, “Is there anyone else you know who feels the same way about church? If I made the same promise to them, would you give me their name and number?” And they did. So for nine months, every day, Monday through Friday, I sat at Dietrich’s Coffee Shop and interviewed people. I’d ask questions about their perceptions, their experiences, and their thoughts about church. What I heard broke my heart and changed my life.

Through these interviews, I came to see a distinct pattern. Most people left church not because they had a deep theological problem with something like the virgin birth or the resurrection of Christ. They left because people in church have the tendency to be small and mean and couldn’t deal honestly with their own sin or the sin of others.

…

A place that can handle the truth

During dinner I asked, “What if we became the answer to these problems? What if we formed a community that’s honest, that welcomes those who feel disconnected and spiritually homeless?” These people responded that they wanted to be part of creating a church that would welcome those in recovery, where they could be vulnerable with each other as a way of growing spiritually.

In the past, these individuals had to step away from honest vulnerability in order to fit acceptability standards in the church. Some did it for a while, until they could no longer keep the masks in place and their addictive processes at bay. These people had been in the church for a long time but felt like they could never get honest when they talked with their pastor or small group leader. With Mercy Street, we wanted to change that paradigm.

Spirituality is social in nature. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said that Christ exists in community. The first problem that has to be overcome in Genesis is isolation, not sin. That has deep implications for how we preach the gospel. Our believing is conditioned at its source by our belonging. Spiritual growth is stunted without honesty in community. But our Christian language of victory can become so dominant that we no longer are being honest about our sinful impulses and behaviors.

We can hide behind spiritual language and discuss someone else’s sin, so we don’t have to confess our own.

…

Churches are filled with people who have made a rational assent to Jesus as Savior but who resist the presence of the Spirit in their lives. They say, “I’m not forgiving her.” Or “I’m not going to fight my pornography addiction, but I believe in Jesus, my personal Lord and Savior.”

They want a spiritual experience without having to do the hard work of recovery and discipleship. But the hard work of facing the wreckage of the past and surrendering yourself to Christ in the mess is the very pathway of faith.

…

Please read the rest of the story at Christianity Today, http://www.christianitytoday.com/global/printer.html?/le/communitylife/discipleship/canyourchurchhandle.html