Relationships and Doctrine

Today we were told that "relationship trumps doctrine," and that "it [the Gospel] is all about relationships." The problem of course, is that neither of those are correct. More correctly, they are both less than complete. I understand that when giving a class, it is often difficult to tie the topic up in a bow in one session, relying on subsequent sessions to clarify and bound the initial "hook."

Unfortunately, our speaker only had today to launch into this discussion. When you are confronted with that challenge, a speaker should figure out a way to bound his statements or pick a topic that is more restrictive and more easily explained. It isn't as though our speaker was rushed for time, he had plenty of opportunity to clarify his statements so that they would represent the whole of Scripture rather than this tiny bit. He simply didn't.

A moment's reflection will reveal that relationship does not in fact trump doctrine in an absolute sense. If it were true, we wouldn't need Jesus; we could do just fine with Facebook. I'm pretty sure the speaker didn't mean that we could overlook doctrine entirely in deference to relationship, but he never said that. He repeatedly stated his premise that relationship is the end all of the Christian life. Quite simply, it isn't.

The Gospel isn't all about relationship. Relationships play a part in the Gospel sure enough. There is our relationship with God, and then our relationships with each other both of which are informed by the Gospel. Jesus makes no bones about people who will not be with him, some of which are going to end up apparently in a pretty bad fix if they don't shape up. Apparently to Jesus, there is something more to Gospel than "relationship."

That something is our transformation fully into the likeness in which we are made. That likeness is described variously by both Jesus and his disciples as character, as being able to put the interests of others in front of yours - even if you don't know them personally. That's the point of the Samaritan story. The Samaritan didn't know the almost dead man, and yet cared for him. No relationship existed prior to their encounter, and it isn't necessary that one existed when the Samaritan came back to pay the bill.

We read of this character in places like Micah 6 and Galatians 5. The character of God, the image of God into which we are to be transformed is one that objectively loves other people because they are other people regardless of whether we have a relationship with them or not, or whether we will ever have one. This is why Jesus castigates the Jewish leaders - they were more interested in themselves than in the down-trodden. They were more interested in their own privilege than in relieving the oppression that they themselves perpetuated. Jesus does not condemn them because they don't have relationships; they had plenty of them. The problem, as we are told, is that their hearts were not aligned with God's.

One further implication from the idea that "it's all about relationships," arises when we consider the reason God made people. If relationship is what it's all about, then do we mean to imply that God was lonely? That somehow the creation of people is about God satisfying his own need for companionship? Clearly this is not the case. A better understanding of God's having made people is that he wanted them to enjoy life. He put them on a planet, not running around Heaven with him. Our creation itself is a blessing and while living we are called to become that image in which we are made.

Let me visit the idea that relationship trumps doctrine one last time, because it might from time to time if we have confused our doctrine. What actually is at play in times when we think relationship trumps doctrine is the correct discernment of doctrine. Within doctrine there are understandings of just what aspects are more important than others. As Jesus said, the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Or again, which one of you wouldn't pull your donkey out of a pit on the Sabbath? This does not mean that stuck donkeys trump doctrine but rather that a mature disciple will know how to apply doctrine in the moment.

We are urged to come to understand what the will of God is through practice and experience. When it comes down to it, doctrine shapes relationships as one aspect of its correct application. Those relationships do not trump the very doctrine which shapes them.

Relationships do play a part in the work of God. Yes we are called back to the Father; yes we are placed in a community - a people - of like calling and faith. And yes, we grow and learn in this community. But relationship isn't what it's all about, and relationship doesn't trump doctrine.

Lent 2012

Last night I was exploring the web and came across what appears to be the Christian version of The Onion. The website offers a Word of God for Today and yesterday’s was taken from Isaiah 1.15a: “No matter how much you pray, I won’t listen….” (CEV). So you get the idea of the website.

When I mentioned this Word of God to a few friends, the immediate responses included appeals to God's eventual relenting, his compassion, and other soft and warm concepts about God and our relationship to him. This is common among Christians, emphasizing the goodness and graciousness of God rather than his wrath (with some notable exceptions in the popular media). God is good, and patient, and compassionate no doubt. However, the God in Isaiah is the same God in John.

This seems like it may be a problem with us Christians from time to time. We get comfortable living our lives, secure in the idea that either God doesn’t notice or that we’re doing what we’re supposed to be doing. We go to church, we tithe, we even give extra money and time to other causes. We staff mission trips, teach Bible classes, and maybe even attend Christian schools. We don’t cheat on our taxes or our spouses, we don’t actively hate others, and we don’t carouse on the weekends. We are in fact, pretty good people, secure in the notion that God is with us and he likes us. A pretty comfortable life, actually.

Lament is not something us moderns like to do and sober self-reflection of our imperfections is often avoided at almost any cost. We dismiss the moment by encouraging ourselves with comforting phrases that speak of acceptance and coverings. What is it about us that we seem not able to sit with our failings? Is it possible for Christians today to spend time acknowledging and accepting the fact and behaviors of our “bad selves?”

There is a psychological principle that asserts that mature people can incorporate the negative side of themselves and their experiences into their whole being. In fact, in many cases it is our running from those negative thoughts and beliefs that cause psychological pain and dysfunctional behaviors. Psychologists and therapists help their clients examine, re-evaluate, and accept the shadow aspects of their lives.

Read God’s Word again. Can you see yourself as the one addressed in this verse? Can you acknowledge that your own attitudes and behaviors have been below par? Can you hold that reality longer than a few seconds? While holding that thought, can you review your attitudes and behaviors, identifying habits and views that are not God like? Can you do this without succumbing to the temptation to compare yourself with others or defend yourself because someone else did something to you? Can you pause in this moment while being aware of your own imperfections and open your heart and mind to God? Can you offer him your imperfections one by one – out loud – and then sit and listen for his response?

In about a month we will enter the Lenten season, a period of reflection prior to Easter. Our Lenten reflection is supposed to be a personal examination of our part in the tragedy of Good Friday. The Word of God for Today with which I began this essay seems a good entre into this reflection. Mankind’s and God’s People’s behaviors and attitudes reached such a depth of disgrace that God was prompted to turn his ear from them – from us.

The period of Lent is forty days, a long time for this sort of self examination. The purpose is not to belittle, humiliate, or beat up ourselves. Rather, it is a space – acknowledged by those around us – in which we and they can participate in checking the direction of our lives without giving in to the immediate desire to dismiss our misdirections in favor of more positive thoughts and feelings.

God’s more harsh treatment of his people serves a purpose and that purpose is to have them stop, think, and return to him and the people they are made to be. He says as much on more than one occasion, wondering out loud it seems why his people missed all the signs he sent to them. Even in this God’s Word for Today, the same purpose is ultimately served. Even in his not hearing, he encourages his people to wake up, to return to him, to accept his character as their character. That will never happen though if they don’t slow down and examine how they have missed the mark of being his people.

Let’s take this God’s Word for Today and prepare to enter Lent ready for some sustained self-reflection, accepting our shortcomings; accepting our part in the death on Friday afternoon. An honest, sober, and sustained period of self-cleansing, openness to the working of God, and being shaped will set our hearts more ready for the coming of Easter.

Don't Sweat the Small Stuff

God loves you, he knows you are human, and he knows you are imperfect. He can live with that because he wants you to be transformed into his likeness. God knows that being transformed is a process that occurs over time.

If God wants a people who live in his image; in the way they are made (and he does), then he is able in his patience to wait for you and to cover you with grace while you make mistakes. Scripture in fact tells us just that. God is patient not just with his people, but with the world. Just as God wants you to be transformed, he also wants all people to come to him. His patience and covering grace is part and parcel of the process he is willing to allow for you to grow more perfectly into his likeness.

The implications of this are huge. Primarily this means that you aren’t damned just because you aren’t perfect. You aren’t automatically lost if you sin. Just the opposite in fact – your imperfection is the result of training and shaping. Your failure in any given instance is part of the plan.

Now, does this mean that you can run out and do whatever you want because “it’s part of the plan?” Well of course not. This is not a new question though. The epistles of John address this question specifically and that answer is absolutely not. Why? Because the Christian faith says the whole human is made in the image of God, and that having Christian faith means we are intentionally moving toward transformation and a fuller image of God. If our lives are aimed toward that transformation, we will not routinely live opposite to it.

Training failures are expected and accepted. Wholesale abandonment of being transformed is another question all together.

Living in the presence of God – as though God is here, now – with an intent toward his image is what God expects. Not perfection. Not sinlessness. Not complete knowledge. Intent, movement, and when required, correction back toward the right path is what he expects.

God has not left us alone with this transformation. The Spirit serves as our promise that we have God, the Spirit helps us express ourselves to God, and the Spirit assists us to shed our covering of pride and defensiveness, and prompt us toward that intentional transformation.

Brother Lawrence sets us an example of acknowledging our short comings, giving them to God, and moving on with living the Life. In the book which records his letters and teachings, we find him giving his imperfection to God to handle without further worry or doubt on his part.

Don’t sweat the small stuff. Give it to God and rejoice.

Who Are You?

So, who are you? Who does God think you are and who does he want you to be? In the last post I suggested that people are made in the image of God – that they are the image of God. Having been made in that image, we are not crafted in perfect likeness of God but with an imprint of his character. That imprint drives our desires and values if we live in it.

God sees you as his creation, as his child. He loves you and wants you to grow in his image so that you can live a life most satisfying and sublime. We know he loves you because John tells us that the sending of Jesus was due to God’s love for you. Even while we were sinners, we are told, Christ died for us. In both the Old Testament and the New we are told that God’s intent is to gather all nations to himself. This statement tells us that God indeed loves the world and wants all people to live with him.

God sees in you himself; his own image being perfected and shaped through your life on this planet. God is not in a hurry nor will his patience run out. Rather than making you have compassion, God allows it to develop within you. Compassion develops as you experience situations that call for it. At first you will not be compassionate due to your own pride and defensiveness against those who seem to invade your comfort and space. God is aware that you are imperfect and that you will miss some situations. Learn this: that is OK; it’s expected; it is not damning. Over time you will encounter other situations calling for compassion and you will begin to learn that extending it does cost time, resources, and space. But you also come to learn that by giving yourself to them, you become more free and less constrained. You learn not only that compassion is right, but that it connects with that image buried inside you which confirms this, and living a life of compassion opens the world to you. You slowly come to see the world as God sees it.

In short, you eventually come to identify so much with God that it is no longer you who lives but God lives in and through you. Slowly the over-stated selfishness, defensiveness, and pride we have come to practice give way to patience, goodness, acceptance, and compassion for others.

While we are walking this path of being transformed. As we surrender to the promptings of the Spirit and in accordance with who we come to know as God, we live as God’s people have always been meant to live. We live individually and communally as God’s people who embody his image in each of us and in our communities. While neither is perfect and both remain on the path of transformation, God wants us to be his economy and his example in the world. When people see us – individually and communally – they are given the opportunity to see God. As they see God in us, they are either attracted to God or repulsed. Those who are attracted move toward and are accepted by the people of God in their imperfections just as we were. Those who reject God are blessed by God’s people because they too are made by God and bear his image. We exercise God’s grace and patience with them just as God did with us and has throughout history.

Who are you? You are both the treasure of God, blessed by him with knowledge of him and his presence. At the same time you are his image in this world. You are in fact, God in this world. The blessing is not insignificant and the call to presence in the world as God is the greatest call you can have.

God loves you. Let him show you how you were made to live.

God's Purposes

God created Man to live on the Earth, in the image of God. Since we know God is spirit rather than physical, that image cannot be our form and it must be something else. Since Adam and Eve were barred from eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, I suspect our intellect isn’t what constitutes that image. 

I prefer the conclusion that the image in which we were and are made is the character of God. Man is made with his most innate desires and values matching those of God. Throughout Scripture we are called to become like Christ, we are pointed toward the fruit of the Spirit, we are told to imitate God. I believe we are urged in this direction not because it is so foreign to us, but because they actually describe how we are made to live. If we raise our children in our image or likeness, it isn’t that we have two feet or that we can work logic questions. Most importantly, raising our kids in our image has more to do with the way we see the world, other people, and life values. This makes most sense to me and fits with the larger story in Scripture.

But in our creation we were not formed totally given over to those values. This I believe is because God doesn’t want people who are hardwired to do only what he wants. Rather, God wants people who are compassionate because they want to be compassionate. In fact, compulsory compassion isn’t compassion. We can only learn patience by being in situations that require patience and being given the choice about whether to be patient or not. We are here to learn and to live like God among others also made to do the same.

In the Old Testament we see this process evidenced. God routinely reminds Israel that he has chosen them but not because they are anything special, but in order to demonstrate the graciousness of God. He chooses Israel not to be a great kingdom but to his presence in the world – a nation what would live his image among the nations. Israel’s job was to introduce others to God and to be an example of God’s care and interest in the world. When Israel is condemned, it is for one of two reasons. Either they have decided to follow other gods, or they have failed to live in the character of God. Interestingly, when God condemns other nations he doesn’t do so primarily because they follow other gods, but rather for their behavior arising from arrogance and meanness. When any country is condemned in Scripture there is some aspect of having not lived in the image in which they were made. 

It’s important to note that even though God chose Israel, that did not keep him from wiping them out, from sending them away from him, and killing them. Staying with God is not something God makes or hardwires Israel to do even though he wants a nation of his people. This is in keeping with our premise that God wants a nation of people who actually want to be his people rather than people who have to because he makes them. He is on record promising to recall them back to him eventually. God does bring Israel back to him on a number of occasions. His final promise though is to call all nations to himself, not just Israel.

This promise to bring all people to himself brings us full circle from the Creation. Man – all people – are made in God’s image and were made to live in that image. This final promise of God to bring all people to himself, rather than just one nation, ushers in a worldwide people living in the image in which they are made to live.

When God says he has chosen Israel, it isn’t because God is only interested in Israel. Rather, Israel’s purpose is to bless the world by ushering them into the presence of God. This purpose because God really does and always has wanted all people to live as he has made them to live. The choosing is not an exclusive choosing but a choice for a specific purpose. That purpose is the rest of the world.

In the New Testament we have the same theme. Jesus’ condemnation of people isn’t so much that they have chosen the wrong god, but that their lives do not reflect the image of God. Additionally, the Jewish leaders are castigated not because they had the wrong God (they clearly had the correct one), but because they failed to internalize the life of God. A simple reading of the Sermon on the Mount and the latter epistles of Paul and John are instructive here. An early heresy seems to have been the Gnostic dualism that threatened to separate body from soul, justifying debauchery for believers. This simply cannot be according to John and Paul if we are to live as though we are the image of God (and we are).

God has sent Jesus for a number of reasons. One of which is to demonstrate God’s love for the entire world – not part of it. We are told that God so loved the world; that Jesus’ coming was so that the world might be saved through him. We are told that whoever believes in Jesus will be accepted by God. This belief isn’t so much an intellectual decision but a recognizing of God and a desire to live in that same way. To believe in Jesus is to identify with Jesus for your own life.

Another reason Jesus came to live among us was to provide for us an object lesson about the life we are called to live. This life is characterized by the fruit of the Spirit; of living as God would if he were in your body. This living though isn’t about being made to; about having to so live because God makes you or will kill you if you don’t. Rather it is living this life because we actually buy into it. We come to own the same values and desires of God for those around us. Life becomes in fact, less about ourselves and more about others.

When we read Scripture, we must understand particular passages in light of the overall story. If our interpretation of a particular passage doesn’t fit with the larger purposes of God, we must have sufficient discipline to review our understanding of those passages.

Women Elders

A major discussion point in my faith community recently has been the concept of female elders. Not the actuality of female elders mind you, just the concept. Given my previous post on the proper roles of men and women, we need to ask what the purpose of elders is. Elders, rightly understood, are not institutional functionaries. This is clear because an institution is not what God is after. They are instead, sages of the People of God; mature, disciplined, faithful followers of God who grasp the faith as it was intended and can pass it along to younger generations.

To do this job, elders form a deliberative and guiding body for the People of God – not a church. As such, elders pray, meditate on Scripture, contemplate what they know of God and His purposes, and provide guidance and correction collectively and individually to the People of God. To pass on the faith – or for the purpose of maturing believers – elders counsel, advise, teach, and preach with an eye toward forming the completed economy of God on earth.

There is nothing in either the character of God (in whose image we are made) or Scripture (which describes the purposes of God) that would prevent a woman from fulfilling this role any more than a similar role in the “secular” world. For believers, there is no such thing as a secular world. Everything they do – including work – is within the economy of God.

We find then that in America, in 2011, and in keeping with the economy of God and His purposes, there is no basis to restrict women’s full participation in the life of the community of faith. Further, Paul’s prohibition on women’s activities is based on cultural considerations rather than any asserted universal desire of God to define gender roles.

Women's Roles, redux

Let’s review what God is up to and how the church fits his purposes. By church, we too often mean an institution even if we consciously make a distinction between organizations and organisms. We are familiar with the Episcopal Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Church of Christ. We have a penchant of arguing over the arguing over the rules for these institutions so that we get “it” right. Unfortunately, this isn’t the point of church. We confuse ourselves by using a Biblical term for a modern manifestation.

When God said He would build His church, He meant something more along the lines of “I will call my people out of the nations.” He wasn’t building a “church,” but crafting a people of His own. This people are intended to be a reflection of the originally intended economy – humans who live in the character of their Creator. This is the big disconnect – we want to build churches but God is after a people.

Our doctrinal arguments arise often from two primary areas – 1) rules for the construct and operation of “the church,” and 2) doctrinal statements of belief that often include concepts we have deduced from Scripture and cannot adequately explain. Very seldom do our disagreements arise from the sorts of people we are to be. And therein lies the rub – God is infinitely more concerned with what sorts of people he has called than the form of polity we choose or the fine details of our theology and church practice.

It is clear in Scripture that church practice arises from the definition and character of the people who align themselves with God. We are defined by his character and we join in his purposes for us and the world. Our character is to mirror His character; our economy to mirror His economy with the understanding that our economy is to be the economy for the world – not a “church.”

The implications of this line of thinking are staggering for ecclesiologists who seek to deduce and ferret out rules for church in Scripture as though church is somehow different and separate from the People of God. Scripturally, church cannot be a subset or a representation of the People of God – the two are the same in Scripture and we miss this to our peril.

The rules for church then arise not from some disciplined research for corporate situational requirements but from the very character and lives of the People of God. If it is right and proper for Christians to behave and conduct their affairs in certain ways in “non-church” settings, then those same behaviors and conduct are appropriate in “church” settings. There is not and cannot be any differences based on setting.

We regularly acknowledge this in various parts of our lives – and correctly so. Christians don’t cheat on their taxes because Christians don’t cheat. A self-aware Christian cannot cheat on their taxes. Unfortunately, we quickly lose sight of this principle when discussing rules for our corporate gatherings. For instance, many people will acknowledge congregational leaders’ responsibility to guide their “church life,” but balk if those same leaders try to interfere with their personal or business lives. The same dualistic thinking appears in many places. Church rules and Christian principles are welcome as long as I’m feeling “churchy” or pious. As soon as we enter some other aspect of our lives, or our personal interests come more directly into play, the rules and principles seem to change.

The current brouhaha in my faith community has to do with the “roles of women.” We show a remarkable ability to separate our church lives from almost every other aspect of life. Women, we are told, are not to teach or have authority over a man. In support of this, many argue that the husband is the head of the wife, and this has been true from “the beginning.”

Unfortunately, in our haste to follow Scripture, we miss the inconsistency and implications of these statements, making them concrete rules for the People of God for all time. In so doing, we further divide “church” from the “People of God.” Regarding the first – that women cannot teach or have authority over men, we miss the simple fact that any married man knows that his wife does from time to time teach him and authoritatively correct him. If any man does not recognize this, or does not recognize that it has ever happened, he approaches being the biggest boor on earth. Secondly, many Christian women are senior to men at work and many Christian men work under the authority of women at work.

If the prohibition has been from the “beginning,” it is not bounded by being “in church” because “church” didn’t exist in the beginning. Rather, the beginning described the economy of God. Any self-respecting Christian woman then, would avoid exercising authority over any man anywhere, and any self-respecting Christian man would not work in a place where women exercised authority over him. To do otherwise would violate this universal and eternal truth. This can be our only conclusion because the Christian life is a call to be transformed in all aspects of your life – not just “church.” Clearly, despite the amount of noise and smoke around this topic, we don’t really believe this universal and eternal prohibition is as universal or eternal as we want to have people believe.

The suggested prohibition on women does not arise from either the character of God as revealed in Scripture or as a natural consequence to development of the fruit of the Spirit. A woman who teaches or exercises authority over a man must do so in Christian character; not lording it over the man or acting arrogantly toward him. Of course, this same consideration applies to men to teach and exercise authority. Any restrictions on behavior arise not from gender but from a mature grasp of Godly character.

Priorities

Recently I stumbled upon a presentation by the organizational leadership training office of a major entertainment corporation. The point of the presentation was essentially how to get all your employees on board with operational priorities and standards. The priorities of the corporation were presented as:

Safety

Courtesy

Show

Efficiency

The presenters went to great lengths to make it clear that these were not a list of values (there’s nothing here about human life, or integrity, or anything similar), but were a decision making tool. 

These are not just a list of random items, but are given in order so that the higher something is on the list, the more inviolable it is. For instance, courtesy is the second on the list and the corporation always wants to be courteous to its customers – unless safety is involved. If someone is in danger of being hurt, it is acceptable to be reasonably discourteous to a customer. Otherwise, courtesy is more important than efficiency in doing one’s job. It is OK, and expected, to take a bit more time with a customer than is otherwise required because that’s the courteous thing to do – even if efficiency suffers a bit in the process.

It isn’t that efficiency isn’t important – it is. But when employees have to make decisions about what to do during a workday, this relative ordering of priorities helps them decide what to do in any given situation.

This made a lot of sense to me and could explain a lot of problems within religious circles and even in Christian living. If we had and if we could pass on a relative ordering of priorities, our people could easily make decisions – and come to simply live – in accordance with Christian relative priorities.

Here are two lists that illustrate the difficulty and confusion that might arise in a body of believers – and in individual lives if they co-existed. List one:

Obedience

Discipline

Self control

List two:

Kindness

Compassion

Patience

In many of our congregations we seem to have a mix of priorities and standards and is it any wonder that we have congregational tension and strife? Some number of people are trying to live by one of these lists and cannot fathom what the other group is trying to do. As a result, we experience congregational turmoil and confusion in our own lives as we listen to the messages from both groups.

This tool of relative priorities could be a great tool for congregational leaders, teachers, and mentors as we seek to shape the lives of those in our congregations. What would your three to five priorities be for your life and your congregation? Remember, the specific items are all important but are in priority order. Those lower on the list can be violated for a short time in order to meet the demands of an item higher on the list. Those higher on the list cannot be violated to accommodate an item lower on the list.

Remember these are not values per se, but form a decision making tool that is useable by individuals and congregations as we together try to live the life we are made to live. Have fun.

Christmas and the Gospel

The Gospel, Matthew tells us is at least in part that Jesus came to save his people from their sins. In most Evangelical circles this is the case and it is interpreted as a legal or juridical saving. Essentially, people have sins and the payment for those sins is Jesus coming.

Pretty short sighted if you ask me.

The context of verse 21 is the promise and directives to Joseph about what God is up to, and Joseph's responsibilities in that working. For some reason we miss the connection between this statement and the prophecy on which it is based. That prophecy, according to Matthew, does not use the name Jesus, but Immanuel. The implication is that Jesus will save his people from their sins by being God With Us. God has decided it was time to live with his people, and in so doing restore (save) them to full community with himself.

Being saved from sins has a number of connotations including the strictly juridical one. While it is true that we are "saved from our sins," the restoration of community with God is much farther reaching than that. In fact, the juridical view is essentially a consequence of having God elect to live with you.

There are others. Jesus tells us that his mission is to proclaim liberty to captives, sight for the blind, and setting at liberty the oppressed (Luke 4). We are saved from the sinful behavior of others; and we are set free from any perception that our flaws may make us something less than fully acceptable to God. To be saved from sins is to have a door open that others attempt to close because we are not "like them."

Jesus makes a few references to trees and fruit; that the fruit of a tree will reflect the quality of the tree. In making these sorts of comparisons, he draws our attention to the sorts of lives we live. For his hearers who considered themselves the people of God, these are challenges to live as though they actually understood their God. The attitude addressed here is the opposite of the Evangelical juridical one. Israel lived as though being the people of God was the entire point and that therefore they had it made. In the juridical sense, they were already selected and nothing could change that.

Jesus' comments about trees, fruit, wells, and water lead us to the conclusion that "saving us from our sins" includes as perhaps the most important point, saving us from a desire to live lives not in keeping with the God we claim to know.

"Saving us from our sins" then has a much more expansive import that includes God living with us, inviting us to live in community with him, a community characterized by mercy and grace among members, and members who want and who come to live lives of giving rather than getting. We are offered, literally, Heaven on Earth if we would just accept it.

The coming of God as human ushers in a worldview often missed by Evangelicals and other denominations. We often remember that we are "saved" by this baby, but we too often miss the invitation this child offers.