Final Ukraine Post

I’ve been back from the mission trip to Ukraine and thought through some highlights and observations from the trip. I’ll work through them in turn and as briefly as possible.

1. Vibrant Spirituality- at least in the churches I visited, I found the spirituality of the Ukrainian people to be vibrant and passionate. They sing some of the same songs that we do, but I didn’t get the impression that they were as critical about “singing too many new songs, long songs, old songs, etc..” Whenever worship started, there was a buzz around the congregation, and eagerness to see Jesus worshipped.

2. Hopeful- the Ukrainian people have experienced hardships in their past, but there remains hope that God will do amazing things in their country. I received a coffee mug and plate with the Ukrainian flag on it from one of the churches I preached at. The colors and look of the flag traditionally symbolize the fertile soils in their fields and the bright sky above them. The Christians, however, see the flag as God’s opened heavens above them and the ripe harvest around them. They are a people with profound hope.

3. Women- Women have a lively an active role within their congregations. One gets the sense that the Christian movement would fall apart IF NOT for the women in their midst. Differences of opinion on women’s active role in ministry aside, it must be celebrated how women’s value is lifted and honored in this country’s church culture.

4. Family- After every church service, our team had the opportunity to pray with many people. In Ukraine, it is normal to pray for every person in the congregation when the pastor invites people forward for prayer. The requests were diverse, but many of them were prayers for the salvation of their family members. In many cases, only 1 person in the family was Christian, but they were believing that God would rescue the rest by His mercy and grace.

5. Mobile- every church we participated in rented their space. Some in former shopping malls, others were formally drug houses. Many circumstances place these churches in rented facilities, but it does not deter them from pressing on. One church that we visited had holes in the floor and chalk-like paint on the walls. I was struck by the sheer simplicity of these spaces. The spaces reminded me of the incarnation, God becoming flesh in the body of a Nazarene. We in the West could learn much from the Ukrainian simplicity.

6. Communal- The Ukrainian culture has an impulse for community. Instead of complaining about not having it and blaming the church for failing at creating it, Ukrainians go make it on their own. There were many nights where the Pastor whom we stayed with had friends over to drink tea and play Skip Bo. One night, I was playing Skip Bo with four Ukrainians and listening to the same worship song in Russian (on repeat) for nearly 2 hours. Even though we communicated mainly through actions and broken English and Russian (all along listening to the same worship song), I could not help but think, “This is a window into the Kingdom of God.”

Ukraine is a wonderful place, filled with wonderful people. There could be many things celebrated about such a place, but space is limited here. Every time I look at my clock I imagine a place and people 8 hours ahead of me whom God loves and where God is mightily present.

Ukraine Update 3

We are spending the last couple of days in Kyiv before returning home. The team is upbeat, but sad to leave. I think that we are all experiencing the shadow of short term missions.

We discovered that we were a Ukraine missions team 8 months ago. We met periodically to get to know each other, to pray, and to prepare to come to a country that none of us had been to before, except for Patrick, of course.

Two weeks in this wonderful country is a mere breath against the 8 months of preparation. “Where did the time go,” we ask ourselves continually.

Probably the most challenging thing is to leave behind the local contacts that we have met along the way here. Pastor Sergey called our coordinator Natasha today and said that he cried the moment he returned home to an empty house. Our translators far exceeded their duties and have become dear friends to us. Each family we meet expresses their hope that we will return to see them sometime soon.

How is it possible to have so much respect/care/concern for people that we have been around for a short amount of time?

Perhaps we are experiencing the greatness of the Christian family; with hearts, hands, and minds open towards one another, towards God, and towards others a dynamic fusion takes place deep within us.

Perhaps for a moment, we are beginning to see why God’s heart grieves when his people fight and quarrel among one another; we were not made for that. We were made for each other.

Ukraine Update 2

We were in a remote place and I could not get to a place to check Facebook and blog. Much to say about our trip and about Ukraine, but I’ll share a bit now.

The word that I have decided to describe Ukraine is “resilient”. There are a lot of hardships in Ukraine, but the people are always eager to continue to believe and walk courageously.

I’ve met several people from Ukraine that are amazing. One is Pastor Sergey, whom we were able to stay with in the rural Ukraine part of our trip. He has a ton going on and has fistfuls of hope for that part of the world. He told some amazing stories of God’s power working in and through the churches that he has helped start there.

Pastor Andrei, who leads the church in the town we held camp in, has a full heart. He and his family do not have much, but their home is full of joy. He has two beautiful daughters, he speaks so tenderly about his wife, and had a grateful heart as we did ministry in his town.

After every church service, I was able to pray with people in the congregation. The majority of their requests were for their families to know Jesus. There was winsome belief in what God could do through faithful prayer. The spirituality of these people is inspiring.

Ukraine Thoughts 1

We are here in Ukraine. It is 4:36am here. I have been up since 2:30am. I’m sharing a room with Patrick and we’ve been sharing thoughts about God for sometime now… don’t think that I can get back to sleep. So, I’m going to blog a bit.

We haven’t had much interaction with Ukraine, yet. We arrived in Kiev and boarded a bus together with our contact and then have been at a house of an American pastor who leads a large church in Kiev.

We have met several Ukrainian people. They are very sweet and kind. The food that we have had so far has been amazing. We get to eat at McDonald’s which is supposed to be better in Ukraine than in the US. As a McDonald’s enthusiast, I cannot wait.

My team is amazing; good people who are eager to see what God will do in the next 10-12 days.

I’ll keep you updated.

Ging, I am taking more pictures that I ever thought that I would. I’m trying to take as many as possible, Love.

Who is the “You” in your Tweet?

Something that I find humorous and mysterious is when someone on Twitter (or Facebook) will send a Tweet across Twitterverse that appears to be directed at one person, but that person is never mentioned. A “Tweet” is a message that goes out to a place where countless people can see it, but these Tweets are designed for someone to get the message, but that person is not directly addressed.

For instance, I had one come across the week, “I don’t know why I try with you anymore.”

Another, “If I see you again, I’ll punch you in the face.”

And another, “You make me so angry and so happy.”

It would be nice to know if these folks  would give someone a heads up.

It’d be easy, “@joe_skillen, If I see you again, I’ll punch you in the face.” That’d be nice to know.

It’d be interesting if you were to check you Twitter/Facebook timelines how many of these you’d find.

Inevitably, there is a great chance that though these individuals are choosing to use the 2nd person instead of individual’s names, the message is getting across. But, it is still not clear.

What is going on with these Tweets? And with these “Tweeps?”

Perhaps there is a fear of confrontation. Instead of throwing fastballs, these folks are throwing change ups, or a softer version of direct confrontation. This is also seen in the frequent use of “kinda” in common language. Have you ever been in a meeting and someone says, “I think that we should… kinda… use our time… sorta… more productively”? A message/complaint is getting across, but not as confrontational as it could otherwise. My fear, though, is that words are spoken and nothing is being said in the process.

Perhaps these tweets, and others, are a window into the unbridled use of Postmodern tools, such as critique, deconstruction, skepticism, and sarcasm. Skating past a lot that can be said here, the tone of Postmodernism, usually, is to deconstruct and criticize, being skeptical of everything and everyone, who is not like us. For whatever reason it is more common to celebrate cutting humor, parody, and “snarkiness.” There is certainly times/places for these genres of communication. However, overuse creates a cowardly way to communicate, a “playing both sides of the chess board” type of dynamic. We get to say whatever we want and whenever someone gets hurt we say, “I was just kidding.” This shifts blame to the other (because they can’t take a joke) instead of ourselves (and our insensitivity towards others).

Plainly stated, we have a difficult time in relationships in our super-connected world. We’ve created ways to not be direct with others. Perhaps we are afraid that the disagreement will end a friendship. Tim Keller, among others, have expressed how disagreements may actually be a better sign of relationships than passive agreement. We are not in relationship with anyone unless they can contradict and challenge us. We should not be afraid to both receive direct criticism nor give it. These moments of tension test, reinforce, and deepen any relationship.

As we are in relationship, though, it is also important to build and plant, not just to critique, criticize, and challenge. We can’t see through everything, as CS Lewis once said, or else we will not really see… anything. Most things that we get worked up about are not as vital as they first appear. Let’s remember to keep things in proper proportion.

Believing, Behaving, Belonging

For my dissertation, I’m working through Diana Butler Bass’s Christianity After Religion. She is investigating the idea of the North American culture seeking to be “spiritual” without being “religious.”

One of the things she brings to the table that I’ve thought about since reading is the idea of “believing, behaving, and belonging.” These are the three signifiers, traditionally, of religion. (Or of any “thing” people devote time/heart to)

Bass says that Western Christianity has ranked these themes in this order: believing, behaving, belonging. This is the way we frame the hope of personal transformation. Bass contends that the reverse order, belonging, behaving, believing, may be the pattern of Jesus and his disciples.

For instance, Jesus asked his disciples to “follow him” before he ever said, “believe in me.”

Jesus shows them the kingdom life, in many ways, before we hear of a literal confession of faith.

Peter does mutter an orthodox statement of belief, (Matthew 16), but we’d have to agree that a lot of water has passed under the bridge before this moment, and we’d have to admit that Peter doesn’t have it all together at that moment in the story. Peter, like all of us, needed some time to straighten out the believing and the behaving.

But, perhaps the reason Peter hung in there was because he knew that he belonged. He didn’t mind the long pilgrimage of transformation.

Do we create the idea of belonging in our local communities of faith? Wouldn’t be interesting if, under the “About Us” tab on the church’s website, along with the “We Believe” tab there was a convincing argument that people could really belong, even if their behavior and belief wasn’t quite square, yet?

To see or to see

Following Jesus takes a new set of eyes; looking for new things.

Paul, as he was in Athens, sought to share the message of Jesus to those in the marketplace. The marketplace would have been a true city center, a place where so many things happened: commerce, instruction, philosophizing, etc. In Acts 17:22, Paul finally begins to address the crowd. He shares with them, as they stand in the midst of all of their altars of worship,

“I see that in every way you are very religious.”

There is an old axiom about Athens, that one could find a god before finding a person. The Athenians were religious, even having an altar to the “Unknown God”. (in case they left one out, we reckon) Paul’s issue was not to win them over to the idea of religion, but to steer them towards the one true God.

The word “to see” in this passage is not the generic blepo (to look at, to glance upon). The word Paul uses is theoreo which carries the idea of “observing in order to theorize.” Paul was not making simple observations, but was looking underneath everything that he saw; Paul had indeed trained himself to look at the world differently. Paul looks at these Athenians in the face and says, “I see you… no, no. I really see you.”

We live in a world of fast reactions, “like” buttons, retweets, etc. In our political environment, if a politician doesn’t say something outlandish, bold, and over-the-top, we won’t pay attention or listen to them. We say things quickly, with hyperbole, without giving much thorough thought and contemplation.

This is often typical of God’s people, as well. The number 1 complaint from the 18-29 year old demographic towards Evangelical Christianity is that it is “judgmental.” That moniker can mean many things, but at the heart of it appears to be the idea of “making a verdict without surveying all of the evidence… or simply to see but not to theorize.”

The Christian faith has always been in a peculiar place. On the one hand, Jesus came to rescue us from a dark and evil world. On the other, Jesus was raised in a physical body and seeks to bring a kingdom on earth as is in heaven. Jesus came to claim this world, not to condemn it. (John 3:17)

Therefore, the Christian must learn to see things differently, like Paul. Paul’s tone is not the red-faced, sweaty, screaming preacher (making 1 syllable words 3 syllable words, you know what I’m saying?) Instead, Paul enters into the world of the Epicureans on one side and the Stoics on the other, here in Acts 17. He renounces and reclaims the truths within them both. (This idea is from NT Wright’s Simply Christian) The task of the Christian is to move within the world and look for signs of Father, Son, and Spirit wherever we find them, and alongside that, renounce those things that stand in the way of the reality of Jesus being Lord over all of creation.

This, of course, is hard to do when the Christian chooses to observe rather than to see. Observation doesn’t require relationship, just Facebook status updates and Retweets. To see is to move in, to connect, to relate, to cherish, to affirm, and to announce an empty tomb and a new world. The Eastern Orthodox folks say that when Jesus exited the tomb on Easter morning, all of creation came out with it.

We have much more to celebrate than to snarl about. We have much to theorize than to observe and to judge.

3 bodies of Christ

Henri de Lubac, a Roman Catholic theologian, writes about the 3 bodies of Christ in Christian theology.

First, the literal, physical body of Jesus of Nazareth. The bod that was wounded, pierced, buried in a tomb, and resurrected on the 3rd day.

Second, the body of Jesus that is passed and celebrated during worship through the Eucharist. Jesus said, “this is my body… this is my blood.” The body of Christ is shared among one another, thinking back to Christ’s death as we await his appearing, colliding past, present, and future into a single moment in time.

Third, the body of Christ as the Church. Paul, among others, uses different imagery to communicate the Church as Jesus’ body, re-presenting him on the earth through the announcement that the tomb is empty and that Jesus is Lord.

David Fitch has noted that among the 2nd and 3rd bodies of Christ, one will be a “literal” body of Christ and the other will be “invisible” body of Christ. During the Medieval period, the “literal” body of Christ was emphasized in the Eucharist and the “invisible” body of Christ to the Church. This translated into an idea of, “We know Christ is here among us as we worship, but we are not sure where he is at among the dark world around us.”

In my mind, this idea runs parallel to something I’ve mentioned before about the “shadow” of the Reformation description of “church”, where the word is properly preached and sacraments and church discipline are properly administered. Though this was not the Reformation’s intent, it became assumed that all of God’s business happens in the Church. Therefore, Christ is present among us as we worship on Sundays and we are “kinda” on our own throughout the week until we can gather again.

Sounds familiar. Isn’t this a common issue in our church climate today?

One of the worthwhile tasks of the Church today could be to rediscover Christ’s literal presence in God’s world. Where is Jesus? What is he up to? God is a sent God and a sending God (missio dei- John 20:21); we have to believe that God is working in us and in spite of us in his own world.

CJ, a good friend of mine, mentioned during one of our early Sunday morning caffeinated beverage conversations about the wild idea of corporate worship only being “an appetizer” to the week of God’s people, rather than the main (or only) meal. One of the primary needs for this idea is to stress again the literal body of Christ that is scattered among us, as God’s people scatter between Sundays. I wonder what amazing things God would do if we realized that his business is done everywhere, even in the places the steeple shadow does not touch.

 

Twice a Son of Hell

I’ve been thinking about Jesus’s words to the Pharisees, “You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.” (Mt. 23:15) The image is stunning, isn’t it. Imagine the group of Pharisees going away on mission to find one convert and coming home to tell the story of how they reached one. “It was all worth it,” they might say, “because we reached one. All of those miles, all of that trouble, for one.”

Jesus, in essence says, “It would have been better to leave him/her alone.”

The thread-count involved in unwinding an issue like this is overwhelming. One thing that I can sense as a warning from Jesus to us in our current day from this text would be, “be careful what you brand.”

Branding is in; it is powerful and can move mountains. But it is safe to say, branding makes a person a slave, to the brand. Over time, we de-humanize people for the sake of upholding the brand. Even if you hate the brand, the brand has a hold on you. There was once an attack on a Nike headquarters, a protest towards Nike because of the way workers are treated in overseas factories. However, whenever the news cameras caught footage of the protestors who were leading the protest, they found that even the protestors, ironically, were wearing Nike shoes and thus affirming, through their purchases, the values of the Nike brand.

When Christianity, or streams of Christianity, become brands, things become awkward. It is interesting when we think about how discipleship goes these days. A person chooses to follow Jesus thinking that the Christian life is simple: love God and love others. However, over time, they begin to pick up new vocabulary and terms, causes, lines of argumentation, etc., that they never imagined they’d have to. “Our brand prefers Free-Will over Predestination, etc.” The rest of his/her Christian life, more or less, is about learning the techniques and lines of argumentation to defend my brand of Christianity over and against the rival Christian brand. All along, being distracted towards being on mission.

The culmination of this is an acute form of martyrdom. We think that faithfulness to our brand is a sign that we are the only faithful ones to Jesus. “We are being faithful to the Scripture text because of our Biblical theology of women in office… we are alone in this one,” or my favorite, “I’m going to take one for the team, here.” (i.e. I really don’t want to believe it, but I need to defend my brand)

Branding is another form of consumption, which isn’t the new humanity Jesus is constructing in our world. Branding isn’t Christianity and if a church/ministry is operating on Branding principles, they may be making their converts a twice a son/daughter of hell, and it might be best to have left them alone.

The pattern of the NT church appears to shatter brands and rhythms whenever possible. Read through the book of Acts again and we’ll see that almost every figment of the brand of God’s people is challenged and pushed aside in place of building the Jesus community. The tomb is empty; Jesus can’t be trapped in anyone’s brand. May we not be resurrection phobic.

Tweet Up Ecclesiology

A “Tweet Up” is an opportunity for those who follow one another on Twitter to “meet up” and hang out in a real place and time, to actually share space together, not just virtual space. A Tweet Up is an interesting dynamic and something worth reflecting on considering connection, communion, and the social network framework that we find ourselves in.

Think with me, for a moment, how a Tweet Up can relate to Ecclesiology (the study of Church). Twitter is a place where people can connect wirelessly, viturally, etc. You can get to know a person through simple “following” and “tweeting” back and forth on Twitter.

But do you really know the person who we are following and whom is following us?

In the same way, just because you share worship space with people for 1.5 hours on Sundays, do you really know them?

Marshall McLuhan once said (prophetically) that technology is amputating humanity and substituting it for a device, i.e. a phone is a replacement for mouth and ear.

What if the 1.5 hours per week gathering is amputating community? Ever wander why the most sermons about community are shared from pulpits of churches that struggle to cultivate it. Maybe the next church you and I find that has “community” in its core values should be the next one we avoid, for it is still trying to convince itself that it needs community. We have a way of allowing our implicit and explicit values to contradict one another.

The Reformation, for better or for worse, communicated that a group of people are not a church unless the Word is rightfully preached and where Sacraments and Church Discipline are rightly administered. After a while, it gave us the message that “all of God’s business is done in the building.” Perhaps this definition of church, though initially intended to give clarity in a chaotic situation, has amputated the ekklesia.

A Tweet Up, on the other hand, has an honest confession. It says, “I can’t really experience the fullness of Twitter without sharing literal space/time with others. Twitter is just the beginning, a container for interaction. Relationship emerges when we share space/time.”

Perhaps a healthy church should be measured by other means besides attendance. We wouldn’t say a person is really connected via Twitter because they have a lot of followers. We know this, but we still measure it the same old way. Imagine if a church initiated a “Tweet Up”-like gathering with their followers. Imagine how many would be there. Regardless of the number, one thing is for sure, the ekklesia would all be there.