Class Reflections

Reflecting on the nature of our course topic and the call to engage the Text, I’m continually struck by the way that the varied methods/forms of engagement discussed in class resonate with my desire to find something more meaningful within scripture than what I have most often found within a traditional church setting. I do not feel as if I have discovered something new when I engage the Text in these ways. I feel as if there has been something rediscovered; something that was once fresh, energizing, highly personal and confrontative; something very much alive.
My thoughts return again and again to the monologue explaining the place of a GenXer within the larger Church, a place that is colored by cynicism, skepticism, and in many cases, a lack of hope. Like the monologue expresses, I want to believe, but my language is not their language, my ideals are not their ideals, and I cannot believe in the way that they believe. I have seen too much. If I am to be reached, it must be in another way.
This brings me to a theme that I have observed within the class: the necessity of actively listening. As a GenXer, I desperately want to be heard within the Church because I still hold a great deal of hope for my generation. In the same way, I desperately want the Church to hear the voices of those outside of the sanctuary. I want them to hear the rise in concern for spirituality and to hear the increasing value of human life and the poor and marginalized. I want them to hear the Text in a way that brings these concerns to light and shapes life outside of the church pews. I want them to hear, because this voice is present in scripture.
It would be wrong to write as if these longings reflect only a concern for others. This longing to hear and to be heard within the Church is very personal to me. I have to recognize that I have not been as open as necessary in engaging the Text at a level that impacts my daily life. I, too, have settled for a passive interaction with the Text that ensures my comfort and fulfills my scriptural quota. In many ways, this past class has been a wake-up call within my own spiritual life, forcing me to exercise muscles that were developed within a youth-group culture but have ironically atrophied within an academic setting. Being forced to engage scriptural topics, bring them into real-life application, and form on-the-spot opinions has forced me to be more honest about the degree to which I have become the flea that has learned not to jump out of the jar. I recognize these things, and it makes me desperate for change.
I’ve been mulling over two topics in general throughout the week. First, the need to recognize the ways that “living the text” are described in scripture and exemplified in much of the New Testament. Paul’s engagement of the Athenians has always been something that has struck me as having more depth than simply another example of “preaching the word.” To be honest, I had never really put my finger on what felt so different about the passage and the way I had traditionally heard it explained. To give greater emphasis to Paul’s preparatory interaction with the culture, outside of a tactical framework where Paul’s actions are similar to a debater looking for a weakness to exploit, revolutionized the way I read the text. What if Paul wasn’t merely looking for the greatest point of weakness or a foot in the door? Perhaps the power of this passage is not its value in illustrating a way of engaging culture simply to expose its weakness and then debate it to death. Maybe the real message lies in the chance that Paul took in exposing himself to an authentic engagement with the Greek culture and its people without damaging his belief in Christ as the ultimate answer. I know that this message would cause much more of a stir within my own church. I suspect it would in yours too….
I can understand and empathize with those who are hesitant to engage cultures on their own terms without a wary eye. I am not trying to advocate for an all-encompassing consumption of culture. I simply believe that our understanding of the mission may need to be re-evaluated as we question the degree to which our own understandings of the place of the Text within Christian life is cultural rather than scriptural. Thus, cultural engagement must be purposeful rather than passively admitted.
This brings me to the second element that has monopolized, and at times plagued, my thoughts throughout the week. The absolute necessity of community is given exponential importance when I think about “living the text” as we have discussed in class. With a greater latitude of personal interpretation of the Text, as well as expression of the Texts message, there are bound to be “errors” or readings and resultant beliefs that do not fit within what tradition and the community of believers would see as normative or authoritative. Perhaps by virtue of my generation and professional training, I view these voices with far less fear than others who are concerned with maintaining the Truth. As a clinical psychologist in training, I have been a part of therapy groups (symbolic of communities) that have at many points included a voice and opinion that ran contrary to the direction of the general group and their own perceptions/beliefs. Given sufficient trust (again, community) within the group, voices that ran contrary to the overall direction of the group were typically confronted and corrected without any intervention from the leader. Whereas a direct response from the leader may have felt hostile or overly authoritative, a correction from within the group enabled the individual to feel heard while at the same time confronted by what is likely to be a skewed interpretation. What is more, being confronted with multiple opinions most often enabled group members to raise their own questions and defend their overall course more effectively than if they had taken on the role of passive recipients of information. In light of these experiences, I am less concerned by the potential that “wrong” conclusions will be formed and more concerned by the need to address the relational problems present within the Church Body. If I am in any way a good example of other believers, my ability to correct and be corrected rests firmly on my relationship with another individual. If this relationship is frail, then my ability to engage in a living of the Text will be similarly feeble. Consequently, as I think about what it would mean for the Body to engage in physical exercise far an above what it is used to, I must also think about what the Physician tells me about the general health of the Body. To function properly, some behaviors might have to change. I might also have to come to grips with the reality that this change might be painful.
In many ways, I feel as if I have woken from a deep spiritual slumber, and similarly I feel as if my first steps forward as a lay person within my church are awkward and unorganized. I have yet to decide how I will respond in terms of a larger course of action, but the mere questioning of my place of engagement within my church and community is something that, until recently, was rarely ever considered. I find that I am making reference to opportunities to engage the community when I speak to other members of my church, and I am considering the ways in which my daily life activities are in line with what the Text is now telling me. I am learning to turn the auditory muscles that I have developed professionally toward an application within the Body, and in doing so, I am finding that opportunities to minister to the Body and the community abound. Methods and means will have to be addressed at some point, but for now, I’m reveling in the feeling of being truly awake.