Author: Wick

There are some who attend churches worldwide, who hesitate to become “members” of that church or denomination.

The word “Member”, often carries its own connotations of exclusiveness. About being “in”, and others being “out”. We grow up knowing about various types of clubs and organizations. About the perks of becoming a “member”. About the down side to “not taking advantage of this offer”, etc.

In regards to churches, there’s also some confusion between becoming a “member” of the church, and becoming a “member” of the body of Christ. We know these are not the same thing.

Just recently, the Free Methodist denomination made a decent step in a direction of grace/community. “Language isn’t that important” – some might say. “That’s not why I haven’t become a member yet…that’s a trivial issue.” Maybe to some. But to others, it communicates quite a bit.

A resolution recently adopted that hasn’t gotten a whole lot of play, says that:

“in some settings the terms member and membership are unhelpful and can create confusion. In such situations we encourage churches to use the terms partner/partnership as alternatives.”

This is not only helpful for those who have hesitated to take on the title of “member”. This also offers a new understanding of who we are within the denomination also. We are not just members of an organization that offers us special rights and privileges. We are partners in the important and eternal work of the Kingdom of God. We come along-side each other, and alongside God in what God is already accomplishing…for all creation.

We, as partners with the same Christ-centered things in mind, commit to each other and to God in a covenant partnership that goes beyond what any denomination “allows or doesn’t allow”. But within that covenant partnership, we offer a denominational partnership of understanding and following that covenant together. Not for our sake, but for the sake of what God is already doing and desiring to be involved in it.

A few years back, I accidentally read a girly book. It talked about time travel, etc…and was very well written to the point that I was hooked, even through the girly scenes.

And just a second to justify myself. I say “girly”, because it’s not often you see a guy willingly pick up a “romance book”. But I wouldn’t consider this a “romance” story like so many you often see.

There is more than romance here. There is love. The Love of a husband and a wife. A Love that is built on, and lived in, years and years of foundation. A relationship that is forced to go well beyond the “eros” love that you find in so many romances these days. To deal with suffering, to be forced to talk in ways that stretch each other, and situations that cut straight to the heart of the relationship.

How would you respond, if somehow uncontrollably, you were transported to a scene with your spouse as a 7 year old child? You love that person an incredible amount, but don’t want to freak out this young child. What do you say? How do you communicate love?

How would life become intricately connected through that relationship if you were simultaneously building a relationship with that new spouse, and with them as a child at the same time; scene after scene?

It’s a very creative idea for a story. The movie is rated PG-13, and I recommend it. The book is very well written also, and explains a lot more (and more importantly – gives more time to respond to the significant emotions present throughout the story); but has some more inappropriate scenes.

As a married person leaving the movie with your spouse, you will be very thankful for the opportunity we have daily to be fully “present” with each other. May we be thankful for each moment we have together, and breathe more slowly the breaths we’re able to take.

So I’ve been reading the section of “The Brothers Karamazov” famously known as the “Grand Inquisitor”. I’d often heard of this book, and this section, but had never read it. Until last year, I read “Crime and Punishment“, and realized it was the same author, which made me want to give it a shot.

The book itself is a pretty good, although slow/full read. You know how through an entire day you have a TON of thoughts that actually go through your mind? Well, Dostoyevsky is pretty good at actually fabricating every one of those thoughts for an entire range of characters, and delivering them well. Once you figure out that for some reason, every character is referred to by more than one name…which is a bit confusing at first. 🙂

In “The Grand Inquisitor”, it’s a poem written by a Karamazov where Jesus has returned around 1500 AD just to check things out. It’s during the Spanish Inquisition. He was captured, and ends up being locked up and questioned by a Cardinal of the Catholic church. The conversation goes all over, but focuses on Jesus’ interaction in the wilderness and the three temptations….and what actually occurs when Jesus rebukes satan in each instance, as opposed to accepting the offer.

It turns out to be incredibly appropriate fodder for the thinking Caputo’s book has been allowing me to chew on. In particular, focusing on Jesus not as powerful Lord over a New Creation Kingdom that somehow “trumps” what is currently….but rather subverts many of the things we try and latch onto it. In response to all of the accusations of the Cardinal, Jesus gives the response of a simple kiss. No defense. No argument to make sense of it all. No miraculous proof of how it’s all justified, etc.

I know people spend a ridiculous amount of time reading/thinking/writing about all of this. So I won’t summarize/say much more than I have. As it stands I’ve probably already offended someone who thinks I’ve completely butchered it all. But word. I have enjoyed/will continue to enjoy finishing the book. Good stuff.