Draft

Dan Stokes thumbed the sweat from his beer glass as he waited for a man in a pinstripe suit. He sat alone at a corner table with a good view of the place, scanning the room while trying to appear as if he weren't. He wore a generic gray suit, deeply creased from hours of travel, and a wine-colored tie busy enough to hide food stains. Even his starched white shirt looked yellowed and muted in the hazy lounge. Tucked in an unlit corner of a crowed bar blanketed with smoke, Stokes was the least conspicuous face in the room, Nonetheless, he felt at this moment as open to general observation as if he'd been the only man standing at center court.

Time Out of Joint

Billed as Philip K. Dick’s “brilliant novel of reality displacement,” Time Out of Joint is a thoroughly postmodern story of paranoia, conspiracy and simulacra. With a 1959 copyright, the book represents SF’s struggle to press beyond “zap-gun” stories and political commentary into a fully mature literature asking questions about the basic nature of things. Here Dick wonders if we can be sure of what’s true and suggests that a right action is one that operates on the basis of intuition in the face of uncertainty. Or as the cover blurb puts it, “Dick dares to ask ‘What is a sane response to an insane world?’”

Dick’s command of language is less than masterful, but what he lacks in style he makes up for in narrative control. He skillfully uses anomaly (as opposed to action or mystery proper) to hook the reader. Things are just off enough to make you want to find out why. It ain’t pretty prose, but he pulls your eye down the page. Just know that the journey satisfies more than the destination.

Brevity in review prevents spoilers for a novel that teases you along like this one, but here are a few sights to look for along the way: shades of the coming sexual revolution, a nod to emerging hippie culture, and seeds of inspiration for the Wachowski brothers.

Mark 4:1-34

In chapter 3 of his Gospel, Mark, the consummated storyteller, uses a variety of groups as foils to get at what it means to have a right relationship with Jesus. Great crowds come from the farthest reaches of the Davidic kingdom to come see the guy working miracles by the Sea of Galilee (3:7-12). Contrast this group of spectacle-seekers with the twelve whom Jesus chooses, takes to himself to a quiet place and reaffirms with them his covenant relationship (3:13-19). The intimacy Jesus has with his disciples is contrasted with the way his own family considers him – “out of his mind” (3:20-21). Compare, then, Jesus’ family to the Pharisees who pronounce their final and utter rejection of him by accusing him, the Son of the most holy God, of colluding with Satan (3:22-30). Finally, Jesus’ biological relations enter the scene again, and Jesus openly declares what constitutes his true relations: those who are really in Jesus’ family are those who do the will of God (3:31-35).

Mark follows this declaration with a teaching section, as the context would imply, that those who belong to him might know God’s will and do it. In chapter 4:1-34 Mark records a series of parables, one concerning the Word (pictured as a seed sown in different types of soil), one about a hidden lamp made visible, and two describing the kingdom.

Thankfully we have an inspired interpretation of the first parable (4:1-20). Yet, we must still ask what we are to learn from it. Most obviously, the parable teaches us that not everyone who hears the call of the Gospel will respond with persevering faith. And of course, those who have “ears to hear” will hear the parable and desire to be good soil for the Word.

In many theological circles, when this passage is preached, the application point comes in the form of this question, “Which soil are you?” That question seems to reach beyond Jesus’ intention for the parable, and I consider it a pernicious question. I understand that zealous preachers ask it to strengthen a commitment, but all too often it presses tender hearts towards anxiety. If I’m honest about my own frailties, I must admit that I my heart is more likely to be rocky or thorny than fertile. If the parable directs me to examine my own heart, then it leads me to despair.

Instead, if my ears have heard the parable rightly, with humility and contrition, then I am stirred with a desire to be good soil. And if the parable has stirred that desire in me, then I ought not fret over the question “Which soil am I?” Rather, knowing that it is the Lord who brings the fruit, I ought to pray that he will cultivate the soil of my heart, tearing out the rocks and thorns, and increasing the yield in his time. Then, having prayed, I ought to trust him – boldly.

But this is only one lesson drawn from the parable, and not the primary one intended, I would suggest. For that lesson takes the parable on its own, and Jesus gives it together with three others.

Let’s skip briefly to the kingdom parables (4:26-32). The first pictures a farmer going about his daily business, scattering his seed, ignorant of the natural processes that grow the seed into grain. Nonetheless, he faithfully goes about his work, day in and day out, until the mature fruit is ready for harvest. The second of the pair likens the kingdom to a mustard seed that, though insignificant to the eye, when mature becomes a haven for the birds of air.

I offer this interpretation. If the mature mustard plant is the kingdom, then the birds of the air are the nations finding rest and refreshment in its branches. And how does the plant (the kingdom) grow? Primarily, according to mysterious processes, namely God’s providence. But together with God’s providence, is the work of the farmer, God’s people. As the servant of God goes about his daily business, the Lord himself grows the kingdom through the servant’s work.

Now we come to the second parable, the hidden lamp made visible. What does the hidden lamp figure? I would suggest that it figures Jesus. Four times already in Mark’s Gospel Jesus has instructed that his identity is to be kept secret (1:25, 34, 44; 3:12). Nothing is kept secret, however, but that it should eventually come to light (4:22). And Jesus’ identity will, of course, come to light; first in the transfiguration, then in the resurrection.

But what of the warning in verse 24?

The four parables seem to come together this way. God’s Word is sown and bears fruit in the hearts of his people. God’s people go about their daily lives making Jesus (the light, or lamp, of the world, John 9:5) visible to others. As they do, the kingdom grows and the nations of the earth find rest among its branches.

For those with ears to hear, the warning is an exhortation: Make Jesus visible in you as you go about your daily business. Show Christ-likeness to those around you. As you do, God’s Kingdom comes “on earth as it is in heaven.” Even those outside of the kingdom will be blessed by you, for Jesus is the vine and you are the branches (John 15:5). The nations find rest in the shade of the branches. As you bear fruit (love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness and self-control, Gal 5:22-23), you will show Jesus to other people, and they will be blessed by you. Jesus is the Word (John 1:1-14). As you grow in Christ-likeness, you sow the Word, and God, in his providence, will direct it to good soil where it will take root in those with ears to hear, thus beginning the cycle anew.

This is how God's kingdom comes: as you go about your vocation in a Christianly manner and as others under in your sphere of influence see Jesus in you, in word and deed, and come to faith in him. This first means fulfills the Cultural Mandate (Gen 1:28), and the second fulfills the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20).

In short Christian, who is in Jesus’ family? Those who do God’s will (Mark 3:35). And what is God’s will? That those with ears to hear should grow in Christ-likeness and purposely make Jesus visible in their day-to-day lives. Pay attention, then, to what you hear, Christian; for as you follow in God’s will, his kingdom will grow and its leaves will be for the healing of the nations (Rev 22:2).

The Big "O"

Writer and regular contributor to World magazine, Andree Seu typically concentrates her articles on various aspects of Christian living. In this piece she offers rare commentary on politics and culture, specifically on President Obama's South American tour earlier this month, reflecting on the implications of the President's representation of the USA.

I find it particularly interesting for two reasons. First, she references Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Secondly, her commentary (a bit more analytical than the conservative talk show "shouting points") mirrors comments I've heard as I've talked with friends who have spent signifigant time in Russia and other former Soviet Bloc countries.

President Obama has proven himself a master at utilizing the media (a lustily consensual media) to control his public image. In situations like this, when he acts in ways unbecoming of a national leader, he counts on a short news cycle and a short public memory, quickly shifting attention to issues that rate higher in polling data in order to polish his numbers.

Let us exercise discipline in generating long memories. Let us not allow ourselves to be distracted with carrots,but remain focused on the direction we are being led. Only by reading the times, not the headlines, will be able to cast responsible, well-informed ballots in 2010 and 2012.

Read Andree Seu's article "Head-to-head Flirtation" here.

In the Name of Jesus

For twenty years Henri Nouwen lectured on the Christian life and spirituality at Notre Dame and Harvard Divinity School. In 1986 he left academia to live among and care for adults with developmental disabilities. I may have disagreements with him theologically, but I have to admire a man who decides to stop merely talking about theology and spirituality (not to mention giving up the status and privilege of an Ivy League professorship) in order to serve “the least of these” in the name of Jesus.

If you’re familiar with Nouwen you’ll find this thin volume typical of his shoot-from-the-heart style. Reflecting on his transition from celebrated academic and author to live-in caregiver, he sketches out three core principles for Christian leadership, a servant-leadership offerd in a decidedly Christian manner (hence the title).

Using Jesus’ desert temptations as a framework, Nouwen sets Christian leadership apart from its secular doppelganger in that the Christian leader seeks to overcome, rather than embrace, these three temptations of the secular world: the desire to be important to others (to be relevant), the desire to be admired by others (to be "spectacular"), and the desire to have influence over others (to be powerful).

Nouwen is highly accessible in his writing, and his insights in this book are so plain and basic that seasoned Christian leaders may dismiss them as elementary. Such a dismissive response would prove a problem in the reader, however, not the thesis. Far from elementary, Nouwen’s principles are foundational. To ignore them would be to follow the path of secularization that leads away from Christ rather than toward him.

Henri Nouwen writes from a place deep in the heart, with a genuine love of people and an unwavering commitment to show Christ-likeness in his interactions with them. I am indebted to my friend Greg Goebel for passing the book on to me and highly recommend it to anyone interested in the formation of spiritual leadership.

A Decline in Courage . . . (IV)

. . . may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days. The Western world has lost its civil courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, each government, each political party and of course in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling groups and the intellectual elite, causing an impression of loss of courage by the entire society. Of course there are many courageous individuals but they have no determining influence on public life. Political and intellectual bureaucrats show depression, passivity and perplexity in their actions and in their statements and even more so in theoretical reflections to explain how realistic, reasonable as well as intellectually and even morally warranted it is to base state policies on weakness and cowardice. And decline in courage is ironically emphasized by occasional explosions of anger and inflexibility on the part of the same bureaucrats when dealing with weak governments and weak countries, not supported by anyone, or with currents which cannot offer any resistance. But they get tongue-tied and paralyzed when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and international terrorists.

Should one point out that from ancient times decline in courage has been considered the beginning of the end?
_____________________________________________________________________________________

KMB's comments:

In the words of Sen. Phil Gramm (the words that got him dismissed from the McCain campaign), "We're sort of a nation of whiners."

Gao Zhisheng

Click below for an example of how the People's Republic treats its people.

www.freegao.com