Nov 26, 2008
But I do it [running a church] in the same spirit that I, along with my wife, run our house. There are many essential things we routinely do, often (but not always) with joy. But running a house is not what we do. What we do is build a home, develop in marriage, raise children, practice hospitality, pursue lives of work and play. It is reducing pastoral work to institutional duties that I object to, not the duties themselves, which I galdly share with others in the church.
(p.59)
Eugene Peterson, The Gift — Reflections on Christian Ministry, p.59
Nov 26, 2008
Just how do you fight spam at work?
Every morning, I have to delete a sea of junk before reading something that is really address to me.
It is hard to own a private domain name these days. Even harder if you have to manage two!
Nov 21, 2008
My use of language in the community of faith was a mirror image of the culture: a lot of information, a lot of publicity, not much intimacy. My ministry was voiced almost entirely in the language of description and of persuasion — telling what was there, urging what could be. I was a great explainer. I was a pretty good exhorter. I was duplicating in the church that I had learned in my thoroughly secularized schools and sales-saturated society, but I wasn’t giving people much help in developing and using the language that was basic to both their humanity and their faith, the language of love and prayer.
But this is my basic work: on the one hand to proclaim the word of God that is personal — God addressing us in love, inviting us into a life of trust in him; on the other hand to guide and encourage an answering word that is likewise personal — to speak in the first person to the second person, I to Thous, and avoid third-person commentary as much as possible. This is my essential educational task: to develop and draw out into articulateness this personal word, to teach people to pray. Prayer is Language I*. It is not language about God or the faith; it is not language in the service of God and the faith; it is language to and with God in faith.
Eugene Peterson, The Gift — Reflections on Christian Ministry, p.92-93
* Peterson described Language I as the language of intimacy (like those between parent and infant). Language II is informational (news), whereas Language III motivates (e.g. advertisement).
Nov 20, 2008
昨天晚上的擘餅聚會，提到全球的經濟問題。一位弟兄提醒我們：從資料數據顯示，年青（我想是指40歲以下）信徒的消費模式和理財的方式，基本上是與同年齡的非信徒無異。於是面對公司的裁員或其他的突發事故時，在沒有其他「靠山」下，恐懼與徬惶就成了dominant 的情況。因為我們，從沒有認真地（而不是麻木地喊口號）問過自己：「甚麼是我可以失去的？甚麼是不能失去的？」
若我們不能從信仰的角度，尋找並堅持這問題的答案，我們最終，只會淪為這問題的一部份。
Domine, miserere nobis.
Nov 20, 2008
BW3 talks about why Calvinists are so infrequently come across as negative and arrogant. And I think he speaks the mind of many other Christians (like myself) in terms of their reluctance to believe in a relatively closed theological system such as Calvinism:
Please understand that I am not suggesting that we should not think logically and coherently about our faith, and do our best to connect the dots. Nevertheless, we should be placing our faith in God, not in a particular theological system. There is a difference. In the former case the faith is largely placed in whom we know and whom we have encountered. In the latter case the faith can be too often placed in what we believe we know about God and theological truth.
I believe in Jesus. I believe, as the NT so repeatedly attested, that our salvation comes from Him and Him alone. He is the climax of the Covenant between God and His creation. And because of Him, and through Him, we are saved. Any attempt to undermine the importance of Christ in our salvation is therefore heresy. Any attempt to live a Christian life apart from Him is contradictory. This is my bottom line, and I believe different theological systems are good at answering the how-Jesus-is-so-importantly question from various perspectives found in the Bible.
And any attempt to put other things above the One who is above all things, is to me, nonsense.