A small but growing movement of followers of Christ are beginning to form themselves into discipleship relationships known as spiritual fathers and spiritual sons. With these relationships, more mature men agree for some indefinite period of time to personally mentor and instruct less mature men, and even to provide discipline to them, in a loving and private way. These relationships usually exist outside of officially recognized church or denominational structures or organizations.

Those who favor this movement support it by saying:

1. In the New Testament, the apostle Paul (St. Paul) called himself the father of the believers in Corinth and of Timothy. This was in spite of the fact that he apparently had had no natural children.
2. Collections of spiritual fathers and sons demonstrate a picture (symbol) for the world around us: The relationship between God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. Yes, this can never be a perfect symbol. Yet marriage is also cited as being a symbol of the relationship between Jesus Christ and his bride, the Church. The heart-cry of the world around us is: “Show us the Father”. The invisible God cannot be seen. Yet his goodness and graciousness can be seen through spiritual fathers loving their spiritual sons.
3. Only a trusted mentor (spiritual father) can provide loving discipline and spiritual direction to a protege (spiritual son) in a way that a committee or a formal church leader could not.
4. When Jesus said to “call no man father”, he was only speaking of our ultimate progenitor, God the Father.
5. The greatest issues of the world today all come down to one underlying issue: fatherlessness. What better way to address this issue than by having more mature men mentor younger men in groupings of spiritual fathers and spiritual sons.
6. Spiritual fathers with their spiritual sons most closely matches the discipleship pattern of Jesus with his disciples. With Jesus, discipleship was not a class but a way of life. Jesus instructed his disciples gradually through time and circumstances and by living and traveling with them.
7. Spiritual fathers with their spiritual sons is one of the most common patterns in all of human society, across all times and parts of the world.

Those who oppose or who question this movement as being too hierarchical say (and this is not an exhaustive list, by the way):

1. “The ground is level at the foot of the Cross.”
2. The priesthood of all believers. The New Testament only mentions one high priest, Jesus Christ. There is no ordering of leadership for this priesthood except for the headship of Jesus Christ himself.
3. For Protestant Christians: One of the main things we were protesting about Roman Catholicism at the start of the Reformation was its hierarchy. How could we then countenance going back to anything that looks like a hierarchical system?
4. Also for Protestant Christians: Jesus said to call no man father. So how can we have “spiritual fathers” or anything else like that?
5. For Catholic and Orthodox Christians: We already have officially recognized spiritual fathers and they are our priests. Anyone else who calls themselves a spiritual father is clearly outside the teaching of the true Church.
6. God has already designed natural, intact families for this purpose. Natural fathers should, where appropriate, provide spiritual care in their households for their children. After that, formal church structures should provide a measure of spiritual discipline.
7. Spiritual fathers could abuse their positions of spiritual authority over their spiritual sons.
8. God expresses himself through all of his children. How can any one of them be greater than any other?
9. This movement is, on its face, anti-feminine because it only speaks of the male gender: fathers and sons.
10. We need no earthly spiritual father because God the Father can now deal with each of us directly, including as per disciplinary issues.

Is this a movement that is too hierarchical or is it both a natural expression of human communities and of Christian theology?

I invite your comments.

To celebrate the first anniversary of Shadows and Symbols, here is the list of the top 10 posts of this site.

1.  At the Dawn of the Fourth Turning

2.  Identity, Authority, and Purpose: Symbols of the Prodigal Son

3.  Law vs. Love: The Theology of “Bottle It Up”

4.  Russian Patriarch Has Died

5.  The Wandering Kings of Slumdog Millionaire

6.  Something Greater Than Solomon Is Here

7.  70 Sextillion

8.  The Donkey and the Colt

9.  The New Monasticism: The 12 Marks: Mark #2

10.  Arbiter of the Kingdoms of This World?

Recently, shadows and symbols happened to notice a trend at his local workplace in the United States. All of a sudden, as I walk the halls of my office building, everyone seems to be either about 25 years old or, conversely, 55 years old. The large number of young new-hires seem to be gathering around the offices of the senior leaders (the 55-60 year olds) in order to receive inspiration and directions. Additionally, my workplace is organizing a special meeting that is focussed on addressing the concerns of both the younger-adult, twenty-something generation *and* the more senior, 55-65 generation. Another interesting trend is that rising stars in the younger generation seem to be on the fast-track to promotions.

In the midst of this trend, however, there is a problem: There is a generation in between, and as a member of that generation, I’m feeling a little overlooked these days.

Referencing Strauss and Howe’s work on generations in the U.S., which I surveyed in a shadows and symbols post a few months ago (http://www.shadowsandsymbols.org/?p=44), there are now primarily three generations in the American workplace:

1. The oldest is the Boomer generation. According to Strauss and Howe, this idealist generation was born between the years of 1943 and 1960. They are now, as of 2009, between the ages of 49 and 66. They are known as “boomers” because they were born during the great post-World War II “baby boom” in the United States. Their current ages now put them firmly in control of most business management positions, with the very noticeable exception of the White House.

2. The youngest is the Millenial generation. According to Strauss and Howe, this civic-minded generation was born between the years 1982 and 2000. They are known as “millenials” because they were born right before the start of a new millenium. They are now between the ages of 9 and 27, with their older members now filling the junior ranks of American workplaces.

3. The in-between generation is sometimes known as Generation X. According to Strauss and Howe, this “nomadic” or reactive generation was born between the years of 1961 and 1981. They are now between the ages of 28 and 48. Sometimes called the “baby bust” generation, this generation is about 40% smaller than the Boomer generation.

So, is this just an errant Generation X perspective of the workplace that I think that my generation is being overlooked? Perhaps my generation is just too small in size to have an impact. Or perhaps this is just a natural part of the approaching Fourth Turning time of crisis that Strauss and Howe talk about in their books. In such a time of crisis, the civic-minded younger generation is supposed to look to the older idealist generation for wisdom, guidance, and inspiration.

So, I’m inviting comments here. If you think that I’m being too sensitive or complaining, please leave a comment here. If, on the other hand, you’re a member of the so-called Generation X and you agree with me, please leave a comment here, too.

“Lament for racial divisions within the church and our communities combined with the active pursuit of a just reconciliation.”

It started out so well. The apostle Philip, one of the original followers of Jesus, was traveling down a desert road when he came across an Ethiopian of the royal court. The man was reading the passage from the Hebrew Bible that spoke about a lamb being led to the slaughter. Puzzled over the meaning of this passage, he asked Philip to explain it to him. Philip then began to explain to the Ethiopian the good news about Jesus. Eagerly embracing the water of baptism, the Ethiopian came into the body of Christ that very day. This is story in the New Testament book of Acts is one where a white man, one of Jesus’s personal friends, invited a black man into the worldwide communion of Christ-followers at the specific direction of the Spirit of God.

Jesus is for all peoples, and he clearly told his original followers to go to all of the ethnos (people-groups) of the world. But something happened through the centuries since then: The racial and ethnic divisions of the world around crept into the community of Christ-followers.

Yet even with this, as if by some miracle, Jesus was embraced by some of the ones who oppressed by those who claimed the Name of Jesus. Perhaps one of the greatest witnesses for Christ is that he was embraced so eagerly by the slaves of the colonial period in the United States, in spite of the fact that he was also the savior of their masters. Then, they held faithfully to him during their many years of slavery and about 100 years of segregation and discrimination. Surely the goodness of Jesus is seen in his relationship with this often-oppressed minority group.

Yet racial divisions are not just those that are in the written law but, more importantly, in our hearts. When the world looks at the body of Christ, what does it see? For example, in the United States, the most racially segregated hour of the week is when churches meet on Sunday mornings. Yes, this is beginning to change, but we have a long way to go.

What words that stand out for me here:

1. Lament. This is where mark #4 starts, and it means a period of mournful reflection and careful consideration. Then, a period of tearful consideration gives way to the next stand-out word …

2. Active. Something that is active is not something that is on proverbial “back burner”. It something to be pursued now and continuously until the goal is fully achieved.

Can the body of Christ express true racial reconciliation? If the answer is no, then we are truly without hope on the earth. Yet in our hearts we know that the answer must be yes. With that, we must each take the courage to step towards this just end.

The essay entitled “Bridges for Evangelicals: Journeying into Contemplative Spirituality and Spiritual Direction” by Elsa McInnes discusses five “great divides” that evangelical followers of Christ must cross over in order to enter into a more contemplative spirituality. I offer these here for your review and comments …

1.  Sacred or Secular. The ancient Greek philosophical idea that divides sacred things from secular things is not part of the life of Jesus Christ. With this divide removed, God is then free to express himself to us through his creation, through the arts, music, etc.

2.  Knowing or Feeling, the Head or the Heart, law or love. Evangelicalism stresses knowing God through the mind. Yet knowing about someone is not the same knowing someone personally. As with our close personal relationships with other people, we must not only approach God intellectually but also through our emotions and senses.

3.  Doing or Being, Inner Journey or Outer Service. Evangelicalism stresses visible ministry activities and generally looks down upon any inner spiritual reflection. Yet we are and must be human beings before we can become “human doings”. Who we truly are, spiritually, our true spiritual identity, is just as important (if not more so) than the spiritual or religious ministries we perform.

4.  Individualism or Faith Community. Evangelicalism emphasizes salvation of the individual. Yet evangelicals often find themselves isolated from the rich traditions of other parts of Christianity. It’s only in the whole of the experience of the greater Christian community that someone can find his or her true identity and calling in Christ.

5.  Mastery or Mystery. Evangelicalism tends to want to define the exact meaning of the Bible and the nature of God. Yet those same sacred scriptures say that God’s ways are higher than our ways and his thoughts are higher than our thoughts. Yet even with our close human relationships, there is always an element of discovery and mystery. How much more so with God?

The great monastery complex at Mount Athos of Greece is really a series of self-governing monasteries, as well as sketes and hermitages. Called simply the Holy Mountain in English, Mount Athos is accessible only by sea even though it is a peninsula and not an island. Mount Athos is the second holiest site in Orthodox Christianity. Only men 18 years or older may enter Mount Athos and preference is always given to Orthodox Christians. (Only about 10 non-Orthodox visitors are allowed to visit each day.)

To get to Mount Athos, visitors must obtain a special pass called a diamoneterion. Stamped with the date according to the Julian Calendar, the diamoneterion allows for the enforcement of the strict entrance requirements to Mount Athos. You can see the diamoneterion at:

http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/Athos/MonasteryImages/DIAFORA/diamonitirion.html

The Greek word diamoneterion has three parts:

1.  The prefix dia, which means across or through;
2.  mone, which means dwelling place or place to stay; and
3.  The suffix terion, which means “place where”.

Putting the three together, diamoneterion means “across to the place where there are dwelling places”.

_________

The Greek word mone is used only twice in the New Testament, both times in the Gospel of John. The first is where Jesus, on the night before his execution, told his disciples that there were many mone (dwelling places) in his father’s house and that he was going to prepare a place for each of them there. This statement by Jesus is well-known to his followers today. It is a statement of anticipation of the heavenly journey at the end of this life (although it should be noted that heaven is not specifically mentioned in this part of the Gospel of John).

The second use of the word mone comes from Jesus on that same night but is less recognized by today’s Christ-followers. Here, Jesus told his followers that if someone loves him and obeys his teaching, his father and him would come and make their mone (dwelling place) inside of him or her. This second and only other use of mone in the NT complements the earlier statement by Jesus. It describes how God wants to work through his followers on earth: By dwelling inside of them and living through them on a daily basis in their day-to-day lives. Rather than allowing the world around us to be blinded by the very brightness of the unveiled light of God, the father lets the world see the “enfleshed shadow” of God living in those who follow after him in his love and in the love of his son. It’s in this way that the world might gently comprehend his goodness.

_________

Also, please see the recent Reuters article about Mount Athos:

http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE4AC3RY20081113

Denver Post article:

http://www.denverpost.com/travel/ci_10441425

Scot McKnight has just published a series of posts called the Kingdom Gospel.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-1.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-2.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-3.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-4.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-5.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-6.html
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/kingdom-gospel-7.html

I was wondering if anyone else had thoughts about these posts, either agreeing or disagreeing.

In the Bible, mountains are often symbolic of kingdoms. Hills, in turn, are smaller kingdoms or principalities. Islands are symbols of democracies or republics, and the landless sea is a symbol either of outright anarchy or perhaps of tribal rule. Valleys are symbolic places of the weak and disadvantaged in society.

With this in mind, the biblical reader can discern parabolic meanings:

• In stories like Noah and the flood, where the flood is said to have covered even the highest mountains.
• The psalmist lifted up his eyes to the hills (mountains) in Psalm 121 in attempt to find help.
• The hills are said to melt like wax at the presence of the Lord in Psalm 97.
• The promise of the prophet Isaiah that every valley will be lifted up and every hill and mountain be made low.
• The devil tempted Jesus by taking him to “a very high mountain” and showed him all of the kingdoms of the world.
• Jesus’s bold statement about faith, where mountains would be flung into the sea at the command of someone speaking in faith.
• In the end of days, the Book of Revelation speaks of the islands and mountains “running away” and hiding.

But it is to the words of the prophets Micah and Isaiah that I would most like to draw your attention to here:

“And it will come about in the last days: The mountain of the house of the Lord will be established as the greatest mountain. It will be raised above the hills, and people will stream to it. Many nations will come and say, ‘Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord and to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.’ For from Zion will go forth the law, even the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he will judge between many peoples and render decisions for mighty and distant nations. Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they train for war.” (a modification of the NASB version)

What is this mountain of the house of the Lord that is somehow associated with the coming of peace on earth? How can something as mighty as a mountain (which is symbolic of a kingdom) be associated with a single house? What would induce all of the nations of the world to stop fighting each other and voluntarily go up to this “house of the Lord”?

We’ll explore more about this in the coming days ahead.

Spiritual shadows and symbols in this world are not always benign or helpful. Sometimes they can be employed for terrible or cruel purposes. I say this not to make anyone afraid or upset. That’s definitely nor my intent here. Rather, I’d like to offer you a simple, cautionary note via this post for your consideration. …

So, with some apologies, I’m starting another post here with a Greek word. Before it was anastasis, and this time it’s kosmokrator. The kosmokrator is what the New Testament calls the god of this world. More specifically, we should say that the kosmokrator is the god of the dehumanizing systems of this world. As opposed to the God of all (the pantakrator), the invisible kosmokrator is said by the NT to be actively involved in “blinding the eyes” of people.

Since it is obviously not our natural eyes that are blinded, it must be another means of sight that we each have that the god of this world is trying to take away. This other, invisible sense of sight that we each have is in our souls.

A soul is a deeply spiritual mystery. It is an invisible essence of ourselves. Anyone who would pretend to understand everything about it is clearly not telling the truth. However, we can examine three broad aspects of our souls that would seem to be plausible: the mind, the will, and the emotions. Given these three characteristics of our souls, we can look at how the kosmokrator might seek to try to attack or “blind” each of us.

1.  Agitation of the Emotions.  Emotions can be critical expressions of our lives and can serve as “leading indicators” for what we should or shouldn’t do. Our emotions are expressed when we say “I feel …”. Yet our emotions can also be agitated into doing things that we later regret, like “fight-or-flight” responses. Agitated emotions may cause us to cling to pride or fear: things that separate us from giving or receiving love.

2.  Propaganda for the Mind.  The mind is the “thinking function” of our souls. It is the interior world of ideas and thoughts. The mind is our complex “mental map”.  The mind is expressed when we say “I think …”. Propaganda is not just something done for whole societies (which is now the usual English language connotation for that word) but also for small groups of people and even individuals. Propaganda is an overall map or system for how we should think. It is an overarching plan for making sense of our thoughts. The kosmokrator seeks to make us see things his way. He doesn’t have control over our thoughts, but he does have the ability to try to provide us with a blueprint (schemata) for how we categorize and make sense of the thoughts in our minds.

(By the way, because agitation and propaganda often come in tandem, they are sometimes called agitprop.)

3.  Coercion of the Will.  The will is the decistion-making function of the soul. Once a decision has been made, the will provides the strength to maintain the position of that decision. The will is expressed when we say “I do …” or “I will …”. If agitprop fails, the final tactic of the god of this world is coercion or at least the thread of it. Coercion is not the classic “the devil made me do it” excuse. Rather, it is the strong threat against our souls that bad consequences will follow if we do not conform our wills to the world systems around us. It is intimidation that may blind us if we let the fear of coercion overtake us.

So, how can the knowledge of these tactics be useful to the spiritual explorer?

If you find that your emotions are being agitated, especially if such agitation is driving you away from loving other people, then please be on the alert. Let peace, calm, and rest enter into your soul instead.

If you find that you are being strongly challenged to think in a certain way: in a way that seems to conform closely to the world systems around you but also in a way that might be unjust to other people, then please be warned: Love is surely the most excellent way.

Finally, if your cause is just and you encounter the forces of corecion and intimidation along the path toward justice, take courage and make you stand.

Today, Shadows and Symbols is pleased to introduce a new category: history. With this new category for posts, we’ll be able to explore shadows and symbols of the past.

————–

The military and political structure of the empire had evolved into a governmental system where the western and eastern halves of the empire each had one or two emperors. These emperors, at least in theory, ruled over supreme military commanders. The eastern side of the empire had multiple military commanders, and the emperors there managed to maintain control over these military leaders. In the west, however, there was only one military commander, and successively weaker emperors began to lose control over them.

By the mid-470s, the last remnants of the Western Roman Empire were decaying to the point of disappearance. The last western emperor to be approved by the eastern leadership, Julius Nepos, made a mistake that cost him his throne: He appointed a military commander named Orestes who would soon overthrow him.

The usurpation of a ruler by military generals is an old story in history throughout the world, and there is nothing remarkable about it. Yet, what Orestes did next after deposing Julius Nepos was unusual.

Instead of taking the imperial throne for himself or appointing his brother or another adult, Orestes decided to appoint his teenage son, Romulus, as emperor. The reasons for Orestes’s action are not clear, yet it does appear that this was a way for this commanding general to maintain his military office while filling the imperial throne with someone whom he could control. Finally, the western empire had changed to the point where the emperor was a complete figurehead.

Through his actions, Orestes had involved his own son, Romulus, within his own political machinations in at least three different harmful ways:

1.  Rebellion. The father had made his own son into a usurper. The western and eastern emperors had by custom concurred on the imperial succession of the other half of the empire. Since Julius Nepos had been deposed without the permission of the east, Orestes had undertaken the illegal overthrow of a legitimate emperor.

2.  Hypocrisy. The father, Orestes, nominally was serving his son but, in reality, the father was controlling his son for his own political purposes.

3.  Endangerment. Orestes was himself deposed and executed within a year of his own coup against Julius Nepos by Odoacer, a Germanic king. For some reason, Odoacer decided not to kill Romulus but merely to depose him. Still, the young son had been placed into a position of danger and risk-of-life by his father.

The life of Jesus presents a different picture of fathers and sons. It demonstrates to us a heavenly father and his love for his adopted children on earth. The Lord’s Prayer itself begins with an affirmation of our relationship to God, when it says, “Our Father”. Consider what Jesus and his original followers said that runs directly counter to the three items above:

1.  Legitimacy. Adopted sons and daughters have a full share of the inheritance of their heavenly father. The children are legitimate because they are of the same house (family) as their father. They are also privileged to call upon him in order to see his will done on earth as it is in heaven, and then to participate in his plans to make that will a reality.

2.  Truth and Reality. Rather than seeking to use us for selfish purposes, our heavenly father earnestly seeks to bring his children into a full measure of maturity. Those who are faithful with a little are then given much more to be faithful over. Authority in the kingdom of heaven is given to us those who are clothed in humility.

3.  Protection. The shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. The children of God have no need for “bargained-for exchanges”, where a weaker person lays claims on higher authorities through legal processes. The hairs on their heads are numbered, and they are fully entitled to all of the provision and protection of heaven.

« Older Posts — Newer Posts »