The next six weeks are going to be pretty stressful for me. I am putting the final touches on my dissertation and have begun to start looking for a new job with a little more focus. Because of this I think that it would be a good time for me to take a little bit of a break from this blog so that I can put all the attention I need to into finalizing the paper while still keeping up with my other responsibilities. It is also a good time for me to ask why I am blogging in the first place. There are a couple of reasons that I need to take this self inventory. The first is that I was reluctant to blog in the first place because I consider (notice the present tense) blogging more than a little self-indulgent. Who am I to feel that what I have to say is worth reading? I chose to blog because I wanted an avenue to say things that I feel I need to say without worrying about how many people see it or worrying about how people take it. I could publicly say what I wanted to say and then not have to think about it anymore. Secondly, it is good for me to take the self-inventory so that I am sure I am doing it for the first reason. It is easy to start something like a blog and then just keep doing it for the sake of doing it rather than because of the reason you started it. So over the next few weeks I will take a break while I get a few things finished up and to see if this whole thing is still relevant to me.
Additionally, I worry that my general tone in this blog, my facebook account, and one-on-one conversations is being misinterpreted as being not just anti-church (which it isn’t intended to be), but anti-everything. As I continue down this path that I have come to travel I have also come to realize that people will consider me cynical, jaded, and bitter; that I am arrogantly and ignorantly judging the masses. I have come to accept that in this journey I will likely lose friends and the respect of others. And I have come to see that I will often feel like an outsider. I only regret this because it is so completely untrue. However, I feel that I am finding my voice for the first time. That being stated, because I realize that I am walking a fine line between objective criticism and jaded cynicism I need to honestly consider the words I write and the way I interact with the world.
As I stated earlier, I chose a blogging format specifically because I didn’t want to be shaped by others expectations or criticisms. I wanted to be able to write freely hoping that in some way the journey I have traveled is similar to others who are encouraged by my experiences and reflections. BUT, it is also beneficial to occasionally allow yourself to seek the opinion of others regarding what you do. So if you have any input into the value of this blog I would greatly appreciate it.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
FEAR NOT- Part 2
Getting back to Star Wars, the hero’s journey is complete with new challenges that reveal new potentials and a deeper sense of true identity. Not that I have an illusion of being on a hero’s journey, but the idea of an odyssey really resonates with me right now. Over the past year I have been seeking out some sense of deeper purpose (beyond writing annual reports). I miss the culture of the church, even if I am not sure if I belong there. As I prepare to defend my dissertation I have asked myself what is next, and please let there be something next. I pray for a ministry that is an expression of my own faith development rather than just a use of my gifts. Over the past three years, since leaving the church, I have HAD to deal with some very real fears, but as I stand on the fringe of something new I have to deal with a whole new set of fears. I want something new, exciting, and purposeful, but I am not sure how that fits with who I am now after leaving the church. My modern theology uses Isaiah 41 to embolden me. The nationalism embedded in my modern theology calls me to a battle cry with Isaiah 41 saying, “Don’t fear anything because your God can kick their god’s ass.” The West Texan theology in me calls me to pick myself up deal with it. But none of these deal with the fear that is core: Can I trust God?
When I first read Isaiah 41 it appears that the modernist interpretation is dead on and perhaps it was intended that way for the original readers. But in all the times that I have read this or heard a sermon on it there has been an oversight of the first line, “Be silent before me, you islands!” In commentaries this line is interpreted to mean, “Listen up!” But I think there is more.
In short, Isaiah 41 is about two different ways to deal with the unknown. I say “the unknown” instead of “the acts of God” because from a cultural anthropology perspective, god was an idea to explain the unexplainable. Each region had its own god depending on unique needs and questions. It truly was a time in which the god who was stronger was better. Isaiah calls the Israelites the ones that God has called and the others as the ones that their god has called. According to the first few verses, everyone is experiencing the same events that cause fear. What is unique is how the tribes respond to the fear. The “others” cling to human encouragement and understanding while they nail down their feeble idols. But Israel simply finds reassurance in the promise of God. He calls them to humility and obedience, not action and understanding. The response to fear (the unknown) is not to be stronger, but to be weaker. Be silent before God and seek him. When we do this we gain wisdom and knowledge (Proverbs 1:7; Proverbs 9:10). Then God demonstrates His power.
This makes me wonder, how can we be called to “Fear Not” and abide in our fear at the same time? Isaiah 41 seems like a paradox. This paradox has been compounded under modern philosophy which calls us to victory. The church often takes this to mean that as soon as we have our first thought of fear that we should claim strength in Christ and that the fear is gone. But that type of thinking is exactly what “the others” do. Isaiah 41 doesn’t all us out of fear, but calls us into fear trusting God through it. It is on the other side of the fear that we experience victory, not during the fear. The difference in language is subtle, but significant. It is not instead of experiencing fear, but as experiencing fear, fear not. As I experience the fears associated with the unknown I anchor (Hebrews 6:19) in Christ in faith that he will strengthen me. Verses 18 clarifies this point, “I will make rivers flow on barren heights, and springs within the valley. I will turn the desert into pools of water, and the parched ground into springs.” Verse 13 is even more clear, “For I am the Lord, your God, who takes hold of your right hand and says to you; Do not fear; I will help you.”
Fear has a purpose. We have for too long thought of it as purely an emotional response that we need removed. But it is also a place to grow and experience new life. It is something that reveals a place within us that needs restoration. We are called into our fear by a God who promises to walk with us through it. And that is the mystery of faith: that we can experience victory not in the victory, but in the promise of victory from the one we trust.
When I first read Isaiah 41 it appears that the modernist interpretation is dead on and perhaps it was intended that way for the original readers. But in all the times that I have read this or heard a sermon on it there has been an oversight of the first line, “Be silent before me, you islands!” In commentaries this line is interpreted to mean, “Listen up!” But I think there is more.
In short, Isaiah 41 is about two different ways to deal with the unknown. I say “the unknown” instead of “the acts of God” because from a cultural anthropology perspective, god was an idea to explain the unexplainable. Each region had its own god depending on unique needs and questions. It truly was a time in which the god who was stronger was better. Isaiah calls the Israelites the ones that God has called and the others as the ones that their god has called. According to the first few verses, everyone is experiencing the same events that cause fear. What is unique is how the tribes respond to the fear. The “others” cling to human encouragement and understanding while they nail down their feeble idols. But Israel simply finds reassurance in the promise of God. He calls them to humility and obedience, not action and understanding. The response to fear (the unknown) is not to be stronger, but to be weaker. Be silent before God and seek him. When we do this we gain wisdom and knowledge (Proverbs 1:7; Proverbs 9:10). Then God demonstrates His power.
This makes me wonder, how can we be called to “Fear Not” and abide in our fear at the same time? Isaiah 41 seems like a paradox. This paradox has been compounded under modern philosophy which calls us to victory. The church often takes this to mean that as soon as we have our first thought of fear that we should claim strength in Christ and that the fear is gone. But that type of thinking is exactly what “the others” do. Isaiah 41 doesn’t all us out of fear, but calls us into fear trusting God through it. It is on the other side of the fear that we experience victory, not during the fear. The difference in language is subtle, but significant. It is not instead of experiencing fear, but as experiencing fear, fear not. As I experience the fears associated with the unknown I anchor (Hebrews 6:19) in Christ in faith that he will strengthen me. Verses 18 clarifies this point, “I will make rivers flow on barren heights, and springs within the valley. I will turn the desert into pools of water, and the parched ground into springs.” Verse 13 is even more clear, “For I am the Lord, your God, who takes hold of your right hand and says to you; Do not fear; I will help you.”
Fear has a purpose. We have for too long thought of it as purely an emotional response that we need removed. But it is also a place to grow and experience new life. It is something that reveals a place within us that needs restoration. We are called into our fear by a God who promises to walk with us through it. And that is the mystery of faith: that we can experience victory not in the victory, but in the promise of victory from the one we trust.
Monday, May 10, 2010
FEAR NOT- Part 1
“Fear Not, I am with you, I am your God.” (Isaiah 41:10)
If there is anything nerdier than watching a Star Wars marathon it is following it up with a documentary on the Discovery Channel about Star Wars. Well, that is what I did a couple of weeks ago. Like any male between the ages of 30 and 50, I believe Star Wars is the definitive cinematic epic. It isn’t my favorite movie of all time, not even close actually. But no other series is as epic as the journey of Luke Skywalker. However, it wasn’t until I watched the documentary that I realized how epic it actually was. Luke Skywalker, like Odysseus and King Arthur, progresses through a series of greater and greater challenges. Skywalker’s tests are about more than just learning new skills, but about facing deeper fears.
So in the spirit of making things more complicated than they need to be, let me quickly explain what fear is. There are two types of fear: biochemical reactions and emotional responses. The biochemical reactions are how our bodies respond to the trigger. It is typically most evident in increased heart rates and adrenaline levels. The emotional responses are unique to the individual and correspond with individual experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. Fear is an evolutionary process that ensures that the creature experiencing fear survives. As we move up the evolutionary ladder, what constitutes fear also evolves. As humans, our experience with fear is as unique as the individual and so is what the person does with it.
Fear can be completely illogical. For example, I have a fear of frogs. I can’t tell you why, but frogs freak me out. I am good with snakes and spiders, but frogs will trigger the “flight” response from me every time. And mice don’t bother me, until they start squeaking. That sound is evil. Typically, the things that cause fear in people are possibly just as irrational as my fear of frogs, but completely understandable when considering personal experiences. We all develop personal narratives embedded with layers of fear. Most people have created their narratives in such a way that those things that cause fear don’t interfere with their daily functionality. Personally, I apply some cognitive construct rather than acknowledging the fear. In other words, I find something that I can analyze that is disconnected from who I am so I don’t have to engage what actually causes me fear. People create ways to avoid those things that cause fear subconsciously, they use defense mechanisms to respond to things that they can control, and they find ways to push through the situation without ever really encountering what causes them fear. There are a few that are able to address fear and grow from the experiences, but I would say that those people are rare.
I have created a narrative that is packed with fears. The most significant is a fear of being exposed as a fraud. Adolescent insecurities followed by adult “success” created a false sense of arrogance. Even though I tend to believe that people think of me as incompetent I attempt to outweigh that with a created identity. That works fairly well functionally, but it tends to mean that my self-concept is far too inconsistent, changing with each new situation and often changing depending on what situation I am in and what I have previously established as my role for that situation. But here is my real fear: that in developing a genuine relationship with someone whom I have come to respect and admire that I won’t be able to maintain the act and it is obvious that I don’t know what I am doing or what I am talking about. It isn’t that the other person thinks I am a fraud because I already think that. And it isn’t that I think I am a fraud because, again, I already think that. It’s that it becomes obvious to everyone that I am a fraud: that the gig is up.
If there is anything nerdier than watching a Star Wars marathon it is following it up with a documentary on the Discovery Channel about Star Wars. Well, that is what I did a couple of weeks ago. Like any male between the ages of 30 and 50, I believe Star Wars is the definitive cinematic epic. It isn’t my favorite movie of all time, not even close actually. But no other series is as epic as the journey of Luke Skywalker. However, it wasn’t until I watched the documentary that I realized how epic it actually was. Luke Skywalker, like Odysseus and King Arthur, progresses through a series of greater and greater challenges. Skywalker’s tests are about more than just learning new skills, but about facing deeper fears.
So in the spirit of making things more complicated than they need to be, let me quickly explain what fear is. There are two types of fear: biochemical reactions and emotional responses. The biochemical reactions are how our bodies respond to the trigger. It is typically most evident in increased heart rates and adrenaline levels. The emotional responses are unique to the individual and correspond with individual experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. Fear is an evolutionary process that ensures that the creature experiencing fear survives. As we move up the evolutionary ladder, what constitutes fear also evolves. As humans, our experience with fear is as unique as the individual and so is what the person does with it.
Fear can be completely illogical. For example, I have a fear of frogs. I can’t tell you why, but frogs freak me out. I am good with snakes and spiders, but frogs will trigger the “flight” response from me every time. And mice don’t bother me, until they start squeaking. That sound is evil. Typically, the things that cause fear in people are possibly just as irrational as my fear of frogs, but completely understandable when considering personal experiences. We all develop personal narratives embedded with layers of fear. Most people have created their narratives in such a way that those things that cause fear don’t interfere with their daily functionality. Personally, I apply some cognitive construct rather than acknowledging the fear. In other words, I find something that I can analyze that is disconnected from who I am so I don’t have to engage what actually causes me fear. People create ways to avoid those things that cause fear subconsciously, they use defense mechanisms to respond to things that they can control, and they find ways to push through the situation without ever really encountering what causes them fear. There are a few that are able to address fear and grow from the experiences, but I would say that those people are rare.
I have created a narrative that is packed with fears. The most significant is a fear of being exposed as a fraud. Adolescent insecurities followed by adult “success” created a false sense of arrogance. Even though I tend to believe that people think of me as incompetent I attempt to outweigh that with a created identity. That works fairly well functionally, but it tends to mean that my self-concept is far too inconsistent, changing with each new situation and often changing depending on what situation I am in and what I have previously established as my role for that situation. But here is my real fear: that in developing a genuine relationship with someone whom I have come to respect and admire that I won’t be able to maintain the act and it is obvious that I don’t know what I am doing or what I am talking about. It isn’t that the other person thinks I am a fraud because I already think that. And it isn’t that I think I am a fraud because, again, I already think that. It’s that it becomes obvious to everyone that I am a fraud: that the gig is up.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
IT’S HARD TO PRAY- Part 2
I have three developmental theorists that I think are the most beneficial in understanding human development in relation to faith development:
· Erik Erikson proposed that we ideally move through eight stages throughout our lives dealing with various tensions. We begin with Trust vs. Mistrust for the first couple of years, then attempt to resolve Autonomy vs. Shame, then Initiative vs. Guilt, then Industry vs. Inferiority, then Identity vs. Role Confusion, then Intimacy vs. Isolation, then Generativity vs. Stagnation, finally Integrity vs. Despair. Erikson believed that individuals must go through these stages in sequence, but that resolution wasn’t essential to move to the next stage. Meaning that individuals can move on to later stages but have unresolved issues from previous stages.
· Lawrence Kohlberg was focused on moral development. Kohlberg had three primary stages, but the real value is found in the six secondary stages. They are: Heteronomous Morality, Instrumental, Mutual Interpersonal Relationships, Social Systems and Conscious, Social Contract, and finally Universal Ethical Principles.
· James Fowler (the theorist I discussed in my last post) studied faith development categorizing his findings into seven stages: Primal or Undifferentiated, then Intuitive-Projective, then Mystic-Literal, then Synthetic-Conventional , then Individuative-Reflective, then Conjective, and finally Universal. Like Erikson and Kohlberg, these stages are sequential but don’t require mastery before moving to later stages.
During adolescents there are significant changes for each of these groups. For Erikson the teen begins with Identity vs. Role Confusion, for Kohlberg the teen’s ethical reasoning is at the Mutual Interpersonal Relationships stage, and for Fowler, teens are at the Synthetic Convential level. Which in short means that the typical, well adjusted teen is focused primarily on understanding his or her identity or place in this world while applying that identity into abstract concepts? The teen is also developing a social ethic based primarily on peer and family group expectations and beginning to extend his or her understanding about faith beyond his or her immediate family group. Most teens get to these levels fairly successfully. It is after these stages, when teens begin to move into the next stage, that many face problems. Some teens never adequately develop a true sense of identity meaning that they move into the stage regarding intimate relationships, understanding social systems, and defining new truths with no true sense of who they are.
What does this tangent have to do with the difficulties of prayer? I spent a number of years in youth and college ministry. So many of the young people that I worked with were frustrated by their spiritual life. They wanted so much more out of it that they were constantly discouraged. Many of these young people, while simultaneously wanting to grow spiritually, were reckless and irresponsible in other areas of their lives giving into ridiculous peer pressures, silly arguments, and petty dramas. Despite their zeal for spiritual maturity they simply lacked human maturity. Not all, but many. As they would strive to grow in their spiritual maturity (often beyond what God may actually want for them) they would rely heavily on two distinct means of grace to grow: spiritual experiences and spiritual disciplines. For the typical youth group teen, spiritual experiences include big worship times, large fellowships, and camp altar calls while spiritual disciplines include bible studies, small groups, and mission trips and outreaches. These two areas are great and critical for healthy development, but when activities that students participate in define their identity it can work against the primary goals of their developmental stage. Spiritual experiences may develop spirituality and spiritual disciples may produce discipleship, but neither can be equated with identity development. When teens attempt to move into later developmental stages (even faith developmental stages) without resolving previous tensions then maturity will be negatively affected. Maturity comes through growth and resolving inner struggles. The healthiest sign of maturity at this age is identity. These experiences and disciplines are fine, but not when they hinder the need to struggle with identity formation.
Here is where cultural anthropology and human psychology intersect. When the church promotes identity development through the modern lends of experiences always being positive and discipleship as always being successful rather than threw he postmodern lens of understanding how those experiences shape the individual then the two work against each other. This complexity is amplified by philosophically culture issues such as post-structuralism which in part encourages everyone, but adolescents in particular, to define themselves through superficialities rather than core identity.
When the adult tries to pray based on everything they have been taught in a system that measures maturity by positive experiences and successful discipleship and not identity development, intimacy with the Lord has little foundation. This is not to say that involvement is bad. Not at all! I believe involvement and engagement are two of the most important elements in a young Christian’s development. But when those two things alone, meaning not being used as a resource for greater connection, are the basis for growth, then despite whatever commitment the adult has toward knowing God more intimately, there is little identity to relate to God with. At that point prayer is a constant reminder of their inability to connect with the Lord. But the church is still measuring maturity with involvement and engagement. So the young adult, who is already frustrated because developing intimacy with God is so difficult because there is little identity in Christ to relate to God with, tries even harder to practice spirituality and the disciplines to know God. But maturity at this point is about intimacy, not involvement. So an even greater divide occurs because they are using involvement and experiences, not intimacy. But how could they use intimacy when there is little identity resolution to base intimacy on? By now, things are getting a little confusing and much more frustrating.
So I think what is happening is that most people are developing along a fairly consistent path in many areas of their human development. But spiritually they are still stuck at the Identity versus Role Confusion stage. Prayer, for many, is a problem of wanting deeper intimacy and clearer sense of purpose, but because we have always measured our faith development along the path of levels of success and not on how God is actively engaging us where we are, we stay frustrated by it. Prayer is as wonderful and essential as any of the quotes I began this blog with and there are many reasons that might contribute to why it is so hard, but at the end of the day all I can say is that prayer is hard and frustrating for millions and that okay because it isn’t about how good we are at it or even how hard we try to get good at it, but that God is still present and understands.
· Erik Erikson proposed that we ideally move through eight stages throughout our lives dealing with various tensions. We begin with Trust vs. Mistrust for the first couple of years, then attempt to resolve Autonomy vs. Shame, then Initiative vs. Guilt, then Industry vs. Inferiority, then Identity vs. Role Confusion, then Intimacy vs. Isolation, then Generativity vs. Stagnation, finally Integrity vs. Despair. Erikson believed that individuals must go through these stages in sequence, but that resolution wasn’t essential to move to the next stage. Meaning that individuals can move on to later stages but have unresolved issues from previous stages.
· Lawrence Kohlberg was focused on moral development. Kohlberg had three primary stages, but the real value is found in the six secondary stages. They are: Heteronomous Morality, Instrumental, Mutual Interpersonal Relationships, Social Systems and Conscious, Social Contract, and finally Universal Ethical Principles.
· James Fowler (the theorist I discussed in my last post) studied faith development categorizing his findings into seven stages: Primal or Undifferentiated, then Intuitive-Projective, then Mystic-Literal, then Synthetic-Conventional , then Individuative-Reflective, then Conjective, and finally Universal. Like Erikson and Kohlberg, these stages are sequential but don’t require mastery before moving to later stages.
During adolescents there are significant changes for each of these groups. For Erikson the teen begins with Identity vs. Role Confusion, for Kohlberg the teen’s ethical reasoning is at the Mutual Interpersonal Relationships stage, and for Fowler, teens are at the Synthetic Convential level. Which in short means that the typical, well adjusted teen is focused primarily on understanding his or her identity or place in this world while applying that identity into abstract concepts? The teen is also developing a social ethic based primarily on peer and family group expectations and beginning to extend his or her understanding about faith beyond his or her immediate family group. Most teens get to these levels fairly successfully. It is after these stages, when teens begin to move into the next stage, that many face problems. Some teens never adequately develop a true sense of identity meaning that they move into the stage regarding intimate relationships, understanding social systems, and defining new truths with no true sense of who they are.
What does this tangent have to do with the difficulties of prayer? I spent a number of years in youth and college ministry. So many of the young people that I worked with were frustrated by their spiritual life. They wanted so much more out of it that they were constantly discouraged. Many of these young people, while simultaneously wanting to grow spiritually, were reckless and irresponsible in other areas of their lives giving into ridiculous peer pressures, silly arguments, and petty dramas. Despite their zeal for spiritual maturity they simply lacked human maturity. Not all, but many. As they would strive to grow in their spiritual maturity (often beyond what God may actually want for them) they would rely heavily on two distinct means of grace to grow: spiritual experiences and spiritual disciplines. For the typical youth group teen, spiritual experiences include big worship times, large fellowships, and camp altar calls while spiritual disciplines include bible studies, small groups, and mission trips and outreaches. These two areas are great and critical for healthy development, but when activities that students participate in define their identity it can work against the primary goals of their developmental stage. Spiritual experiences may develop spirituality and spiritual disciples may produce discipleship, but neither can be equated with identity development. When teens attempt to move into later developmental stages (even faith developmental stages) without resolving previous tensions then maturity will be negatively affected. Maturity comes through growth and resolving inner struggles. The healthiest sign of maturity at this age is identity. These experiences and disciplines are fine, but not when they hinder the need to struggle with identity formation.
Here is where cultural anthropology and human psychology intersect. When the church promotes identity development through the modern lends of experiences always being positive and discipleship as always being successful rather than threw he postmodern lens of understanding how those experiences shape the individual then the two work against each other. This complexity is amplified by philosophically culture issues such as post-structuralism which in part encourages everyone, but adolescents in particular, to define themselves through superficialities rather than core identity.
When the adult tries to pray based on everything they have been taught in a system that measures maturity by positive experiences and successful discipleship and not identity development, intimacy with the Lord has little foundation. This is not to say that involvement is bad. Not at all! I believe involvement and engagement are two of the most important elements in a young Christian’s development. But when those two things alone, meaning not being used as a resource for greater connection, are the basis for growth, then despite whatever commitment the adult has toward knowing God more intimately, there is little identity to relate to God with. At that point prayer is a constant reminder of their inability to connect with the Lord. But the church is still measuring maturity with involvement and engagement. So the young adult, who is already frustrated because developing intimacy with God is so difficult because there is little identity in Christ to relate to God with, tries even harder to practice spirituality and the disciplines to know God. But maturity at this point is about intimacy, not involvement. So an even greater divide occurs because they are using involvement and experiences, not intimacy. But how could they use intimacy when there is little identity resolution to base intimacy on? By now, things are getting a little confusing and much more frustrating.
So I think what is happening is that most people are developing along a fairly consistent path in many areas of their human development. But spiritually they are still stuck at the Identity versus Role Confusion stage. Prayer, for many, is a problem of wanting deeper intimacy and clearer sense of purpose, but because we have always measured our faith development along the path of levels of success and not on how God is actively engaging us where we are, we stay frustrated by it. Prayer is as wonderful and essential as any of the quotes I began this blog with and there are many reasons that might contribute to why it is so hard, but at the end of the day all I can say is that prayer is hard and frustrating for millions and that okay because it isn’t about how good we are at it or even how hard we try to get good at it, but that God is still present and understands.
Monday, May 3, 2010
IT’S HARD TO PRAY- Part 1
“The tendency nowadays is to worship prayer, stress is put on nights of prayer and the difficulty and cost of prayer. It is not prayer that is strenuous, but the overcoming of our own laziness. If we make the basis of prayer our effort and agony and nights of prayer, we mistake the basis of prayer. The basis of prayer is not what it costs us, but what it costs God to enable us to pray.” (Oswald Chambers)
When I started this post I had the title and that was about it. I think that praying is really hard to do. When I pray the only thing that makes it feel at all spiritual to me, compared to simply just talking to myself, is that I am aware that my focus is wanting to talk with God. This at least gives me comfort and I believe I get at least partial credit for that. However, that is about all the insight that I can offer on how to pray. I realize that there are many amazing Christians and others that have a gift and desire to pray relentlessly and I truly wish I could be like that, but I am not. I do okay with the other disciplines, but prayer has always been difficult for me. My mind wanders. I get bored. I put it off. I wasn’t exactly sure how I was going to expand on this aspect of my spiritual journey so I decided that I would Google “quotes on prayer.” Below are a few of the quotes that came up from authors and theologians and authors that I admire.
There is not in the world a kind of life more sweet and delightful than that of a continual conversation with God. (Brother Lawrence)
If you want that splendid power in prayer, you must remain in loving, living, lasting, conscious, practical, abiding union with the Lord Jesus Christ. (Charles Spurgeon)
A true prayer is an inventory of needs, a catalog of necessities, an exposure of secret wounds, a revelation of hidden poverty. (Charles Spurgeon)
Why is it so important that you are with God and God alone on the mountain top? It's important because it's the place in which you can listen to the voice of the One who calls you the beloved. To pray is to listen to the One who calls you "my beloved daughter," "my beloved son," "my beloved child." To pray is to let that voice speak to the center of your being, to your guts, and let that voice resound in your whole being. (Henri Nouwen)
I have so much to do that I spend several hours in prayer before I am able to do it. (John Wesley)
Prayer continues in the desire of the heart, though the understanding be employed on outward things. (John Wesley)
Is the Son of God praying in me, or am I dictating to Him?....Prayer is not simply getting things from God, that is a most initial form of prayer; prayer is getting into perfect communion with God. If the Son of God is formed in us by regeneration, He will press forward in front of our common sense and change our attitude to the things about which we pray. (Oswald Chambers)
God speaks in the silence of the heart. Listening is the beginning of prayer. (Mother Teresa)
Prayer does not change God, but it changes him who prays. (Søren Kierkegaard)
These people are a few of the most influential authors in my life. They each have incredible wisdom, insight, and spiritual understanding. I highly suggest each of them as a read to anyone is interested in developing a deeper spiritual life. As one who struggles with prayer, I would never attempt to write something with greater insight than Spurgeon, Wesley, or Chambers. But despite how much I can learn about prayer from these people I don’t think any of them reflect the true struggles that come with prayer. Many of these people and others try to give insight into how dynamic prayer is by suggesting that all things are prayer, a submitted life is prayer, or silence is prayer, but for many Christians, as encouraging as that may be, it doesn’t diminish the frustration that we feel when we sit down to have a short time of prayer and all we can think about is that we need to remember to buy more Doritos. Prayer, like any discipline or act of intimacy, is important, takes time to learn, and is ultimately about how God “fills in the gaps” of our inadequacy. But the simple and short reality that I have to offer is that it’s hard to pray.
There are many things that contribute to my difficulty with prayer. But part of what needs to be addressed for me is that my spiritual training in the evangelical churh frustrated this developmental process. The contemporary church has historically approached faith development from the perspective of relationality, but its approach to discipleship continues to be rooted in modern forms of conquest and ritualism. This causes a conflict. But let me back up for a second. From a statistical perspective, faith development could be (but shouldn’t be) written this way: maturity= f(God – [theology, scripture, tradition] – [cultural anthropology, human psychology, individual experiences] - timing). To put in plain English, spiritual maturity is the function of how all these things work together with God being the primary independent influence on that development with the other variables making additional influences. When prayer is approached from a modern perspective with postmodern intentions (to keep in line with the statistical language) the variables becomes invalid making maturity difficult. To explore another component of the formula, developmentally we all go through a number of stages.
When I started this post I had the title and that was about it. I think that praying is really hard to do. When I pray the only thing that makes it feel at all spiritual to me, compared to simply just talking to myself, is that I am aware that my focus is wanting to talk with God. This at least gives me comfort and I believe I get at least partial credit for that. However, that is about all the insight that I can offer on how to pray. I realize that there are many amazing Christians and others that have a gift and desire to pray relentlessly and I truly wish I could be like that, but I am not. I do okay with the other disciplines, but prayer has always been difficult for me. My mind wanders. I get bored. I put it off. I wasn’t exactly sure how I was going to expand on this aspect of my spiritual journey so I decided that I would Google “quotes on prayer.” Below are a few of the quotes that came up from authors and theologians and authors that I admire.
There is not in the world a kind of life more sweet and delightful than that of a continual conversation with God. (Brother Lawrence)
If you want that splendid power in prayer, you must remain in loving, living, lasting, conscious, practical, abiding union with the Lord Jesus Christ. (Charles Spurgeon)
A true prayer is an inventory of needs, a catalog of necessities, an exposure of secret wounds, a revelation of hidden poverty. (Charles Spurgeon)
Why is it so important that you are with God and God alone on the mountain top? It's important because it's the place in which you can listen to the voice of the One who calls you the beloved. To pray is to listen to the One who calls you "my beloved daughter," "my beloved son," "my beloved child." To pray is to let that voice speak to the center of your being, to your guts, and let that voice resound in your whole being. (Henri Nouwen)
I have so much to do that I spend several hours in prayer before I am able to do it. (John Wesley)
Prayer continues in the desire of the heart, though the understanding be employed on outward things. (John Wesley)
Is the Son of God praying in me, or am I dictating to Him?....Prayer is not simply getting things from God, that is a most initial form of prayer; prayer is getting into perfect communion with God. If the Son of God is formed in us by regeneration, He will press forward in front of our common sense and change our attitude to the things about which we pray. (Oswald Chambers)
God speaks in the silence of the heart. Listening is the beginning of prayer. (Mother Teresa)
Prayer does not change God, but it changes him who prays. (Søren Kierkegaard)
These people are a few of the most influential authors in my life. They each have incredible wisdom, insight, and spiritual understanding. I highly suggest each of them as a read to anyone is interested in developing a deeper spiritual life. As one who struggles with prayer, I would never attempt to write something with greater insight than Spurgeon, Wesley, or Chambers. But despite how much I can learn about prayer from these people I don’t think any of them reflect the true struggles that come with prayer. Many of these people and others try to give insight into how dynamic prayer is by suggesting that all things are prayer, a submitted life is prayer, or silence is prayer, but for many Christians, as encouraging as that may be, it doesn’t diminish the frustration that we feel when we sit down to have a short time of prayer and all we can think about is that we need to remember to buy more Doritos. Prayer, like any discipline or act of intimacy, is important, takes time to learn, and is ultimately about how God “fills in the gaps” of our inadequacy. But the simple and short reality that I have to offer is that it’s hard to pray.
There are many things that contribute to my difficulty with prayer. But part of what needs to be addressed for me is that my spiritual training in the evangelical churh frustrated this developmental process. The contemporary church has historically approached faith development from the perspective of relationality, but its approach to discipleship continues to be rooted in modern forms of conquest and ritualism. This causes a conflict. But let me back up for a second. From a statistical perspective, faith development could be (but shouldn’t be) written this way: maturity= f(God – [theology, scripture, tradition] – [cultural anthropology, human psychology, individual experiences] - timing). To put in plain English, spiritual maturity is the function of how all these things work together with God being the primary independent influence on that development with the other variables making additional influences. When prayer is approached from a modern perspective with postmodern intentions (to keep in line with the statistical language) the variables becomes invalid making maturity difficult. To explore another component of the formula, developmentally we all go through a number of stages.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)