Paul's Passing Thoughts

The Bible never states how much love fulfills the whole law. I think this is deliberate because only law asks, “How much?” The classic law mindset doesn’t rejoice in every act of love, but drags every act of love into the Protestant court of “The righteous demands of the law.”

— Paul M. Dohse (@PaulMDohse) February 9, 2018

The key to good relationships, especially marriage, is love-thinking rather than law-thinking. Law-thinking saturates Western culture; both secular and religious. Love-thinking has several key elements, but this post primarily addresses patience.

Patience and perseverance are closely related, but not exactly the same. Perseverance is a process that finds victory through the middle. In other words, perseverance does not run away from a problem, but finds a solution that rectifies the problem. Nor does perseverance find a shortcut for purposes of a temporary solution. Perseverance is what we do in order to endure a trial of some sort. This is how we are strengthened by trials; because trials increase our wisdom and make us more efficient in living. This is because trials force us to be solution oriented which makes us better at living life overall.

Patience is a reserved, or even loving response to something that is personally annoying. It is an immense power that every believer possesses, but the irreligious are not lacking in this capability either. Patience is always a choice.

Christians have a long way to go in teaching themselves love-thinking because we have been conditioned from generation to generation to see reality from a law prism. Remember, law is good, but the application of law determines whether it is law or love. That is, the law of sin, condemnation, and death, or the love application. Hence, every challenge or problem of life should be used to evaluate law-thinking versus love-thinking. Something to keep in mind: love-thinking always possesses hope. Anything among the living that logically calls for a hopeless conclusion isn’t true.

As I have mentioned before, I am a task oriented person who has a laser focus on the task at hand. When I wake up in the morning, my mental faculties are focused on the big agenda for that day whatever it might be. With Susan, not so much. Susan is a big-picture thinker unlimited by time and world population. While I am focused on the big task of the day, Susan may want to discuss the details of a vacation we are going on two years from now as one of several other discussions on her mind.

Of course I am exaggerating to clarify the point, but this drives me absolutely bonkers. However, this is also indicative of how two companions compliment each other with different gifts and different personality traits. This could be the first point in where we fail to have patience. The focus is the interference with an agenda rather than acknowledging that the other person should be free to be who they are, and the virtues thereof. What is good about who they are isn’t the focus, the distraction from the passion is the focus. The other person is then condemned for being annoying. And, the annoyed one is in-turn condemned for being unloving and indifferent. Let the downward cycle of condemnation begin. All too often, the suggested cure is more condemnation, or if you will, more law.

Secondly, being annoyed is the trumpet call for patience, and this takes faith. Patience is a powerful force made possible by love, and we have a choice as to whether we exercise that gift or not. We never “lose patience,” we simply choose not to find it. If we believe that, and choose not to believe a lie, we will have patience in that situation. Of course, we are weak and will often choose to be annoyed, but it is nevertheless a choice. This will mean we will be quick to listen and slow to speak, and enter conversationally into the other person’s agenda when possible.

Thirdly, patience acknowledges that the other person may never change in regard to a particular characteristic, and excepts that without condemning the other person. Love assumes that the other born-again loving person is always pondering ways of change, and doesn’t need us to be judge, jury, and executioner. Love assumes that the other person is always self-judging and doesn’t need us to pile on. Most change comes from people deciding to follow a certain example. Think about this for a moment: do married couples have a tendency to adapt each other’s mannerisms for better or worse? Yes, so remember, this dynamic is already at work for our advantage.

Another thing that paves the way for patience is preparing our minds for action, as the apostle Peter stated it. You would think that after seven years of marriage, I would go to bed at night saying to myself, “Now, when I wakeup in the morning I am going to be focused on cutting trees down in the backyard, but Susan is probably going to be starting conversations about grandchildren etc., you know, things that can’t cut down trees. I need to put aside trees for an hour and enter into her good desires. That’s love. Patience is a powerful force that doesn’t need planning, but in our weakness it helps us to  implement it. Nevertheless, remember, impatience is condemnation and when impatience is assumed to be indifference, or disrespect, that can become a condemnation free-for-all.

Look out for our propensity to be Protestants in these situations with all of the church talking points following: “You need to change in regard to this problem.” “We need to hold each other accountable.” “We need to…”

…excuse me, do we not have enough to do already? We need to evaluate, not legislate. How did law-thinking get us here? What is more legislation going to do? It is going to further restrain our time to love and try to fix condemnation with more condemnation while subtracting from love. Love assumes the other person cares and no legislation is needed; maybe some good ideas, but not more law.

Faults are interconnected. Focusing on faults only leads to revelations about more faults until the person is totally disparaged in the eyes of others. Fault-finding assumes the other person is not motivated by love. Granted, if ill motives are involved, law may be needed, but love assumes that the other person is motivated by love overall.

In my first marriage, I owned a construction company and our forte was not really tree cutting. But times were slow, and in an endeavor to sufficiently support my family, I decided to take a job that involved cutting down three medium sized trees on a flat terrain. For the price, it looked like a no-brainer. However, I forget what kind of trees they were, but the limbs are tightly interwoven within each other and as you cut the trees apart, they unfold into more and more limbs. In other words, each tree was easily five times the work they appeared to be. Well, I was unmercifully condemned by my first wife for making a “foolish business decision.” See, this is what law does; my motive for love wasn’t even on the radar screen of her mind. Moreover, every business decision I made after that was called into question accordingly (which robs one of confidence, an essential element of success). This is what law does; and this is why the Bible calls it “the law of sin and death.” In this worldview, you either sin, or you don’t break “the law” which also includes laws dictated by the sinful desires of others to control you because that’s what sin does to begin with.

Jesus died to buy our freedom from the law, and enslave us to love.

Always continue to set the example of love for others you are in relationships with, and assume that their motive is love. People change when they want to, and how they want to, and you are not going to change that. Keep setting the right example, and learn from their examples, and share ideas about using the law for love applications, not law applications, and most of all, use the patience granted to you by the new birth.

For we are under grace and not law.

paul

By all indications, if you search for the information, “house churches” are growing in number. In fact, words like “exploding” are being used to describe the rate of growth. Church leadership remains coy in responding to the movement because the movement doesn’t represent a significant threat to the institutional church. Addressing a belief or a movement only empowers it and gives it credibility as an argument having enough validity to be addressed.

Besides, most house churches are just that; church, along with the same orthodoxy,  in a house. Most mega-churches hold mid-week “services” in the private homes of members anyway. Furthermore, many of these house churches are looking to “grow” into having their own purpose builds as well. Unfortunately, this probably makes up the bulk of the movement and poses no threat whatsoever to the institutional church. Hence, the issue is barely on the radar screen.

Then you have home fellowships that focus on practical method, or a model that’s not a “business model.” And, the doctrine being implemented within that model is anyone’s guess. In the vast majority of cases leftover from everyday church in a house, it’s mysticism.

How are we different? Our method of meeting together flows from doctrine. Meeting in a home is a statement about our gospel. We function as a body, and our membership is fellowship.

We meet in homes because families meet in homes, and we are a “household of faith.” This is a statement in regard to the new birth which justifies us. We function as a body with Christ as the head. We are guided by the “mind of Christ” and our unity is determined by agreement on that one mind. Agreement comes through persuasion, not authority.

Members make up the body, and the members are defined by gifts granted by the Spirit in the new birth. To the degree that each member functions according to gifts, the body is healthy. The like-minded members who fellowship with the body are the members by virtue of their participation, not some legal contract. Like the human body, we function according to a cooperative effort towards the same goal, and again, not authority.

We don’t meet in homes because it’s an anti-business model or the best model for other practical reasons which are, in fact, many, we meet in homes because of the doctrine of new birth justification. We also meet in homes because all of life is worship, not just when we assemble together. We don’t “Enter to Worship, and Leave to Serve” as posted above many “sanctuary” doors, we enter to serve each other so we can better worship when we leave.

paul

via Satire: New Calvinists Start 12-Step Program for Righteous Christians

Newsflash: nurse aides can be abused. Newsflash: nurse aides are abused often. Newsflash: in every case where nurse aides still bother to submit a statement reporting the abuse whether from a resident or run of the mill workplace harassment, the nurse aide (the victim) is blamed. Trust me, a #Me Too for nurse aides would be mocked hysterically out of hand. Being groped and verbally abused is practically part of the job description.

Why is victim blaming so prevalent in business and church alike? As a nurse aide who has addressed overt workplace harassment, and in both cases was blamed in the face of cut and dry circumstances, I couldn’t help but to see the parallel in regard to incessant victim blaming that takes place in church. Methods employed by the victim blamers vary, but it is still victim blaming. Let’s first look at the different methods, then the cause.

My last experience was a classic. I went to the DON and reported workplace harassment. Her first step in dodging the ball was to suggest it was an isolated incident. When I informed her that it was ongoing, she asked me if I submitted statements. Full stop: as she well knows, aides who work in large nursing facilities rarely submit statements because they know it’s a waste of time. She undoubtedly figured this to be her out. If there was no prior written statements, she could label the present issue as an isolated incident where a few people were merely having a bad day, and gee whiz, we all have bad days from time to time.

When she didn’t have that escape at her disposal, she changed the subject to another issue that I had brought up, insinuated that I lied about that issue, and gee whiz, since I lied about that issue, and I am therefore a person of questionable integrity, it is at least possible that I incited the harassment. She couldn’t say that I lied about the harassment because a nurse witnessed it.  On the other wise, I complained that there was only two working Hoyer lifts in the whole facility (four units with eight halls), but that couldn’t be true because one day she saw two Hoyers on one hall. And since both Hoyers were seen on one hall, it only stands to reason there must be more than two. Alrighty then.

At any rate, for those of us who have spent a lot of our lives in church and have read discernment blogs, does any of this sound familiar? Of course, as I have written before, the basis for victim blaming in the church is carte blanche forgiveness according to church orthodoxy grounded in Luther’s historical-redemptive hermeneutics. We are all sinners saved by grace, so who are we to judge? And, there are no lesser and greater sins. And, you were raped? Well, that’s a shame, but you got less than you deserve, viz, eternity in hell. And, if you don’t forgive the way you were forgiven, you are not saved. So, ya, we can call the police, but is hell worth it? And, could God have prevented this if He wanted to? Well then, since He didn’t, it must be His will…blah, blah, blah.

But, the reason for victim blaming in any venue that involves money is the same: victims disrupt business as usual. In business, defending victims does nothing for the bottom line or paying the bills. In fact, dealing with victims in any business situation is going to cost money in one way or another, or several others.

Victim blaming in church happens in the same way it happens in business because church is a business, and dealing with victims disrupts business as usual. Why does the abuse happen in the first place? In any situation where hierarchy is present and subsequent power over others, the propensity for abuse to fulfill the evil desires of those with authority is always feasible.

In this way, as the Bible states, money can be the root of many evils. Pastors are warned not to be in the ministry for “filthy lucre.” And trust me, messy victim situations can mess with the pastor’s income big time.

Another angle on hierarchy follows: as a former elder I can tell you that any discussion of paying a pastor modest wages is sacrilegious. That is, unless it’s a bi-vocational pastor or lay-pastor. As a longtime elder, I can tell you unequivocally that the church mindset towards the pastorate is a pure business model and corporate mentality. On the other hand, what educated teachers are paid in Christian schools is disgraceful. Those who desire retirement packages etc. are considered lacking in regard to being “ministry minded.”

Bottom line: business is business whether it’s church or otherwise, and victims disrupt business as usual. In contrast, using others as an object to fulfill personal lust because you have control over their income or salvation can be seen as a perk for being important.

In all of this, victims remain in bondage. Why? Because justice places the blame where it belongs. Those under condemnation (the unsaved and those taught with bad theology) have a tendency to feel guilty to begin with. So, it’s easy to blame the victims because the tendency is to blame themselves. Furthermore, in carte blanche forgiveness which is different than repentance, relationships are still broken because carte blanche forgiveness doesn’t rebuild trust needed for valid relationships. The only thing served is business as usual while the victim remains unhealed.

Susan and I have seen this a hundred times; when we tell victims that they are not obligated to forgive their abusers until the abuser repents, you can see the tremendous burden being lifted off their shoulders. In every case, ironically, the victims are trying to forgive everyone but themselves because justice has not declared a truly guilty party.

To deprive a victim of justice because of moral equivalency is just plain evil, and leaves them in bondage to guilt and shame because those in authority don’t want to interrupt business as usual.

paul