I am currently reading the story of C.S Lewis in a book titled 'The man behind Narnia', which I took from the youth section of our city library. I like books from the youth section, especially biographies, since it has large prints and it's much readable. It's not that I have eye sight issues, it's just the ease in reading large prints.
I have admired C.S Lewis in a great respect as a scholarly writer and Christian apologist. His genius and intellect is highly commendable. But what surprised me in this book was the other side of the story - his struggles as a young child, early death of his father and mother, the fear, confusion and loneliness he endured as a young adult, the eccentricity he showed while being a Professor in Oxford and Cambridge, his late marriage with an American woman who held anti-american views, her suffering with cancer etc. Many of his early writings were rejected by publishers. It also surprised me the little things such a wardrobe and the ordinary people such as a gardener who have influenced him to write many of his books later in his life.
In this book, there is a chapter called 'Friends, Gods, and Devils' where the author discusses about the friend circle and the community Lewis was part of, while living and teaching in Oxford. He says,
They [Lewis and his friends] met on Thursday evenings, with no formal agenda or minutes of officers, but a common determination to share their writing and thoughts.
"Is there any pleasure on earth as great as a circle of Christian friends by a fire?" wrote Lewis. "The next best thing to being wise oneself is to live in a circle of those who are".
They usually met in Lewis's rooms, with food such as ham and cheese on the table and always a pot of very strong tea brewed by Warnie (Lewis's brother).
The chapter later says, they also met before lunch at the beginning of the week in an Oxford Pub called The Eagle and Child. It says, there was outpouring of wit, nonsense, whimsy, dialectical swordplay.
Lewis once said:
Friendship is the greatest of worldly goods. Certainly to me it is the chief happiness of life. If I had to give a piece of advice to a young man about a place to live, I think I should say, "sacrifice almost everything to live where you can be near your friends." I know I am fortunate in that respect. - The letters of C.S Lewis to Arthur Greeves
I get excited by reading about this kind of communities where people meet with no formal agenda or minutes of officers. Wow! What a great way of having fellowship with like minded believers? I agree with Lewis, "Is there any pleasure on earth as great as a circle of Christian friends by a fire?"
Somewhere along the line we lost it. We introduced agendas, minutes and officers and focused on it/them rather than focusing on the people and what what God is doing in their lives. We lost the sweetness of friendships, the casual encounters with people, the warmth of hospitality, the exchange of real issues with real people. We reduced such great fellowships to the unauthentic pulpit-pew system where there is no room for any exchange. We isolated ourselves from others in order to earn and achieve our selfish dreams and we said goodbye to the biblical model of casual but authentic assembling of believers and embraced the element of anonymity in mega churches.
I am wondering if there are still those endangered breeds of Christians who are willing to meet with others without the pressure of agendas, minutes and officers? And probably come together as they are and exchange their hearts in love?
Showing posts with label fellowship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fellowship. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Friday, March 7, 2008
Grace and 'Grace community'
There is this dilution and exaggeration of the word ‘Grace’ today. Almost all religions believe in some sort of ‘Grace’. It’s not too hard to believe that there is something called a ‘general grace’ (or common grace).
Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, said, "Your Father in heaven gives the sunshine and the rain to the just and the unjust alike." Unbelieving farmers get rain for their crops just as much as believing farmers do.
Christian denominations have a great love for the word ‘Grace’ and there is nothing wrong in it as long we understand grace is not bigger than God (It’s giver). When we say it is by Grace through faith we are saved, we should be meaning that it is God who saves, not grace or faith. It has become a fashion among Christians to insert ‘grace’ in almost all conversations, sermons etc.
May be it’s time to take a step back and wonder if we made grace bigger than its giver. It shouldn’t be the ‘grace theology’ what drives us, but it has to be the love of Jesus, the originator of grace.
Indoctrinated philosophy can have a very strong, but negative impact. As an example I would take ‘communism’. I am little familiar with that ‘ism’ and I personally know that there are people willing to even die for that philosophy. The question is, are they motivated by love? Not at all. They are not even motivated by the founder of communism. But they have been indoctrinated and brain washed to believe that is the way of life and the more people they get to believe it, the more successful (and secured) they are as a group (or sect). Their security is in their community.
When grace becomes a ‘theology’ or a ‘philosophy’, I wonder if it has an effect like communism, ultimately producing some ‘grace Pharisees’. Such proponents would try to inject that philosophy to others to believe in grace and everything about grace and use that word very often, adding a few more people to their community.
Believing in grace is not what saves us or sustains us, but both are done by believing in Jesus and as He lives His life through believers.
I love the word ‘Grace’. It is one of the most important and most beautiful word in the English vocabulary (in the biblical perspective). But, I just don’t want to lose its true meaning by its over-use (if you know what I mean).
I think we shouldn’t even use the term ‘grace’ if we are not motivated by love (love of Jesus). When we use grace to show the badness of law (legalism), are we operating by the love of Christ or the love for the ‘grace community’?
Communists oppose when they are challenged for their beliefs because of their ‘spirit of community’. Catholics oppose when they are challenged for their beliefs because of their ‘spirit of community’. The concept of community itself is built around the idea that everybody need encouragement, mutual edification and some kind of security in it. But when the ‘spirit of community’ (or the love of community) replaces the ‘love of Christ’, could it have a lot of negatives?
I am all for community. But my prayer is, I don’t want community as the source of my security (even if it’s called ‘grace community’). My security has to be in the perfect love of God which drives away any fear (even the fear of not having any community). It is easy to say but hard to live. As I am writing this, apart from the small 'blog community', I have no other community that I am genuinely part of. Sometimes I worry about it. What if something happens to me or my wife or my kids? Where do we look for that human support? I prayed (still praying) hard to bring a handful of people in our way to have fellowship, sharing and encouragement. Why I am praying such a prayer? Yes, it is because of my longing to have fellowship. But deeper than that, what is the root cause of that prayer? It is some kind of fear! It is some kind of inability to 'rest' in the all sufficiency of Christ! It is that fleshly unwillingness to trust Him and Him alone. (That is my confession).
This is what I am thinking today: May be (just may be) God is not answering (or answering?) my prayer for the need of a 'immediate' solution to this, is to take that traits of people-provided security away from my life and to open my eyes to see the important (but sometimes painful) truth that all I need is Him.
Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, said, "Your Father in heaven gives the sunshine and the rain to the just and the unjust alike." Unbelieving farmers get rain for their crops just as much as believing farmers do.
Christian denominations have a great love for the word ‘Grace’ and there is nothing wrong in it as long we understand grace is not bigger than God (It’s giver). When we say it is by Grace through faith we are saved, we should be meaning that it is God who saves, not grace or faith. It has become a fashion among Christians to insert ‘grace’ in almost all conversations, sermons etc.
May be it’s time to take a step back and wonder if we made grace bigger than its giver. It shouldn’t be the ‘grace theology’ what drives us, but it has to be the love of Jesus, the originator of grace.
Indoctrinated philosophy can have a very strong, but negative impact. As an example I would take ‘communism’. I am little familiar with that ‘ism’ and I personally know that there are people willing to even die for that philosophy. The question is, are they motivated by love? Not at all. They are not even motivated by the founder of communism. But they have been indoctrinated and brain washed to believe that is the way of life and the more people they get to believe it, the more successful (and secured) they are as a group (or sect). Their security is in their community.
When grace becomes a ‘theology’ or a ‘philosophy’, I wonder if it has an effect like communism, ultimately producing some ‘grace Pharisees’. Such proponents would try to inject that philosophy to others to believe in grace and everything about grace and use that word very often, adding a few more people to their community.
Believing in grace is not what saves us or sustains us, but both are done by believing in Jesus and as He lives His life through believers.
I love the word ‘Grace’. It is one of the most important and most beautiful word in the English vocabulary (in the biblical perspective). But, I just don’t want to lose its true meaning by its over-use (if you know what I mean).
I think we shouldn’t even use the term ‘grace’ if we are not motivated by love (love of Jesus). When we use grace to show the badness of law (legalism), are we operating by the love of Christ or the love for the ‘grace community’?
Communists oppose when they are challenged for their beliefs because of their ‘spirit of community’. Catholics oppose when they are challenged for their beliefs because of their ‘spirit of community’. The concept of community itself is built around the idea that everybody need encouragement, mutual edification and some kind of security in it. But when the ‘spirit of community’ (or the love of community) replaces the ‘love of Christ’, could it have a lot of negatives?
I am all for community. But my prayer is, I don’t want community as the source of my security (even if it’s called ‘grace community’). My security has to be in the perfect love of God which drives away any fear (even the fear of not having any community). It is easy to say but hard to live. As I am writing this, apart from the small 'blog community', I have no other community that I am genuinely part of. Sometimes I worry about it. What if something happens to me or my wife or my kids? Where do we look for that human support? I prayed (still praying) hard to bring a handful of people in our way to have fellowship, sharing and encouragement. Why I am praying such a prayer? Yes, it is because of my longing to have fellowship. But deeper than that, what is the root cause of that prayer? It is some kind of fear! It is some kind of inability to 'rest' in the all sufficiency of Christ! It is that fleshly unwillingness to trust Him and Him alone. (That is my confession).
This is what I am thinking today: May be (just may be) God is not answering (or answering?) my prayer for the need of a 'immediate' solution to this, is to take that traits of people-provided security away from my life and to open my eyes to see the important (but sometimes painful) truth that all I need is Him.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Rethinking 'Community'
When I wrote Rethinking 'Church' I didn't even have a remote idea to start a 'Rethinking' series itself. But it seems like that is what is happening...
It is my definition of the community is that it is a place where we can genuinely open up and share everything without the fear of condemnation or judgement. A place where we can pour out our heart without any 'processing'. A place to find the much needed encouragement and true fellowship. I mean, being authentic and being just as we are. No definitions, no titles, no hierarchies, no meetings, no schedules or any such things.
I believe that Christian walk is just not about oneself but it is about a community. We can see such great communities all over the Bible. Friendlessness is a hindrance to advance in our Grace walk and to reach many others. Billions out their trapped in the dead works of religion needs the message of freedom in Christ.
Are such communities possible? If yes, will it make any difference? We can see some great communities in the book of acts such as the group of people coming together everyday and sharing everything they have, devoting themselves to the teachings of the Apostles, counting all their possessions ‘in common’.
Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their work:
If one falls down, his friend can help him up.
But pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up!
Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm.
But how can one keep warm alone?
Though one may be overpowered,
two can defend themselves.
A cord of three strands is not quickly broken. - Ecclesiastes 4:9-12
I see the crucial significance of community in this verse - But pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up!
Isolation never have been or never will be a solution to anything. The beautiful picture of the 'body of Christ' underlines the significance of members working together for a common good.
At the same time I do not think such communities are possible only by being a part of an organization. We cannot limit ourself to such possibilities. Instead, such organizations can easily destroy the very purpose of the community itself.
I am grateful to God for giving some great friends right here in this blog world. I think this is a great way of having fellowship. How far should we go about sharing our heart on these public blogs is a question many people struggle with. Though this is a 'face less' media, we could see it as an advantage. Being an introvert by nature I have problem in opening up to a live audience (unless I am so emotional), but here I face no such issues and I think it is great.
I still need to continue learning to be real and authentic. I still need to continue learning to share my struggles. I find lot of encouragement in the Bible itself. Apostle Paul did not hide his struggles as a Christian. Gospel writers did not hide the denying Peter or doubting Thomas. The old testament writers did not hide the shortcomings of many great men of God such as David, Solomon etc. In fact I am quite surprised to see the name of harlot Rahab in Hebrews 11. Why do we mask it if we truly know that we are unconditionally accepted by God for who we are through Christ? By being real and authentic many people out there would be able to relate the struggles in their own life and be encouraged by the fact that they are not alone. Can we use this media not only to share the blessings but the struggles, doubts, questions, sins, confusion etc as well? Can we take up the challenge which James brings up to us to confess our sins to each other and pray for each other so that we may be healed?
It is my definition of the community is that it is a place where we can genuinely open up and share everything without the fear of condemnation or judgement. A place where we can pour out our heart without any 'processing'. A place to find the much needed encouragement and true fellowship. I mean, being authentic and being just as we are. No definitions, no titles, no hierarchies, no meetings, no schedules or any such things.
I believe that Christian walk is just not about oneself but it is about a community. We can see such great communities all over the Bible. Friendlessness is a hindrance to advance in our Grace walk and to reach many others. Billions out their trapped in the dead works of religion needs the message of freedom in Christ.
Are such communities possible? If yes, will it make any difference? We can see some great communities in the book of acts such as the group of people coming together everyday and sharing everything they have, devoting themselves to the teachings of the Apostles, counting all their possessions ‘in common’.
Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their work:
If one falls down, his friend can help him up.
But pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up!
Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm.
But how can one keep warm alone?
Though one may be overpowered,
two can defend themselves.
A cord of three strands is not quickly broken. - Ecclesiastes 4:9-12
I see the crucial significance of community in this verse - But pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up!
Isolation never have been or never will be a solution to anything. The beautiful picture of the 'body of Christ' underlines the significance of members working together for a common good.
At the same time I do not think such communities are possible only by being a part of an organization. We cannot limit ourself to such possibilities. Instead, such organizations can easily destroy the very purpose of the community itself.
I am grateful to God for giving some great friends right here in this blog world. I think this is a great way of having fellowship. How far should we go about sharing our heart on these public blogs is a question many people struggle with. Though this is a 'face less' media, we could see it as an advantage. Being an introvert by nature I have problem in opening up to a live audience (unless I am so emotional), but here I face no such issues and I think it is great.
I still need to continue learning to be real and authentic. I still need to continue learning to share my struggles. I find lot of encouragement in the Bible itself. Apostle Paul did not hide his struggles as a Christian. Gospel writers did not hide the denying Peter or doubting Thomas. The old testament writers did not hide the shortcomings of many great men of God such as David, Solomon etc. In fact I am quite surprised to see the name of harlot Rahab in Hebrews 11. Why do we mask it if we truly know that we are unconditionally accepted by God for who we are through Christ? By being real and authentic many people out there would be able to relate the struggles in their own life and be encouraged by the fact that they are not alone. Can we use this media not only to share the blessings but the struggles, doubts, questions, sins, confusion etc as well? Can we take up the challenge which James brings up to us to confess our sins to each other and pray for each other so that we may be healed?
Thursday, November 15, 2007
A blog about blogging.
While the lost humanity look for love, the 'restored' humanity look for community where they can share the love they have found. This blog sphere is a great community where we can share the love of God with each other and be encouraged.
I can’t tell how much I am blessed by the brothers and sisters who take time to share their thoughts here and also on their own respective blogs.
Though this is a two dimensional media, there are many advantages. People like me who are really introverts can really open up and be an extrovert behind the key board. Others can read/comment at their own convenient time and pace. This is more than practical!
Putting down the religious mask and being ‘real’ is so relieving and refreshing. I do not need to manufacture fake spirituality here. I do not need to invent ‘formulas’ to tap God and fake up encounters.
This is where I learn, this is where I think, this is where I can laugh and even cry.
We come out of the box here, share our deepest struggles; some times a new found wisdom, some times a joke, some times few lyrics of a favorite song. What a way of fellowshipping!
I can’t tell how much I am blessed by the brothers and sisters who take time to share their thoughts here and also on their own respective blogs.
Though this is a two dimensional media, there are many advantages. People like me who are really introverts can really open up and be an extrovert behind the key board. Others can read/comment at their own convenient time and pace. This is more than practical!
Putting down the religious mask and being ‘real’ is so relieving and refreshing. I do not need to manufacture fake spirituality here. I do not need to invent ‘formulas’ to tap God and fake up encounters.
This is where I learn, this is where I think, this is where I can laugh and even cry.
We come out of the box here, share our deepest struggles; some times a new found wisdom, some times a joke, some times few lyrics of a favorite song. What a way of fellowshipping!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)