The Olympics

It's the second week of the Olympics and I am still watching it. Michael Phelps has finished and I am still watching it. I am watching things like Water Polo, Diving, Volleyball, and Table Tennis. Not always the glamorous or most watched events, but the medals are the same size, color, and prestige. I like the off beat things about the Olympics. I have watched all the diving events, even the synchronized diving, which I've never seen before. I guess I like these events because I've played them all. I used to dive competitively when I was a teenager. I've played Water Polo and Volleyball competitively, too. When I was going to seminary in Pennsylvania, the competition at the ping-pong tables was pretty intense - not Olympic caliber but pretty good table tennis.
One of the things I have tried to teach over the years it the idea that God can use anyone. I just did a first person narrative sermon as Elijah and one of the points I made in it was that Elijah was someone who, called by God, became more than he thought he could ever be. God does that to people. He makes them more important, more significant, larger than they thought they could ever be. I look at all these athletes doing these amazing things - the Phelps, Bolts, Liukins. And then I think, you know, I might have been able to do that. OK, maybe not but I could have tried. I think many of them are people who realize that they are doing more than they ever thought they could do.
Every time I walk into the classroom or mount a pulpit I feel like Elijah or an Olympic athlete - I'm doing something greater than I ever thought I could do; greater than anything I thought I could be. Not that I am great but that what God has called me to do is greater than I ever hoped to do. I get to influence lives through the power of the Holy Spirit. I get to read and divide the Word of God. I get to study and learn the intricacies of the Word. What a privilege I have. Who'd a thought a kid from Gloucester, N.J. with little to no background in the church would grow up to be at one of the most prestigious schools in the world pursuing a Ph.D in Homiletics? Only God. Only God. He makes us do even greater things than we can ever dream or imagine.

Taking a Break - One Final Break

Over the course of the last month, I have been taking a break. I finished teaching a course for the first five weeks of the quarter and I didn't have to teach again until the final two weeks of the quarter. This is the first quarter since I began my work at Fuller that I have not had to register for a class - just teach. So, I've been taking a break from classes. Well, from taking classes - and from teaching classes during this month.
Instead, we have been traveling. We went to NE Ohio where I preached the NE Ohio Camp Meeting. It was a very enjoyable week. Great people, great fellowship, great response, great food, great setting, great accommodations. It was a great break from school and teaching. Instead of going to class and teaching about preaching, I preached 9 times in 7 days; in addition, I did five hour-long conferences from Monday through Friday. On Monday we rested; on Tuesday we saw a movie (The Dark Night - very good); on Wednesday we took our son and daughter-in-law out to dinner for their anniversary/birthday; and on Thursday we went to the hospital with our daughter-in-law for a procedure that turned out to be benign (Amen). That was our recovery week.
On Friday we flew to North Carolina and spent the weekend at the church were I first went into ministry. I preached there on Sunday morning and spent the entire rest of the day at a party hosted by the folks who were in the youth group when I was the Youth Minister. It was one of the most enjoyable and interesting days I've ever spent. After being gone for 30 years, more than 30 of those students came back to the church, bringing spouses with them, just to say hi and thank me for what I had invested in them years ago. Sometimes, ministry can fill you with a sense of having been used by the Spirit.
After the weekend, we flew to Florida to visit with Joanie's Dad and his wife, Tina. Dad is in his mid 80's and doing well, except for his hearing loss and back problems. We do enjoy spending time with them both and are most comfortable in their home. We also have a host of friends in Tampa from both the church and our ministry travels. We went to dinner or lunch most every with someone; went to a Tampa Bay Rays game (the most exciting game I've ever seen); I traveled to Warner Southern College to meet with the Church Ministries Department to set up things for me to teach a course for them in the Fall on-line.
This week we are in Indiana. Joanie has a meeting for the National Worship Committee tomorrow. Meanwhile, I have offered to sub in tonight for my son's pastor who is having a biopsy today. So, I am planning to teach tonight. I have been working on some of my lessons for the course I am teaching in the Fall at Fuller. On Friday, we go home to Pasadena. Then, it's back to work. We probably won't have another vacation until I finish at the end of 2009. Sure glad we got this break. It's nice to relax and not have anything to do.

The Changing Society of the Church

The technology with which we live is stunning. Like so many things that we use and work with on a daily basis, the technological marvels we use become commonplace, average, normal, and routine. Usually, it's not until we lose them or they break down that we stop and are amazed by what they do. You take your car for granted until it breaks down and is in the shop for days; you take all the kitchen equipment in stride until your oven or fridge go out and you have to scramble to fix meals or store food; you pick up the clicker and turn on the TV without a thought until that one time that it doesn't come on and you have to spend hours figuring out if the problem is the clicker, the TV, or the Dish (or cable or cable box or dish converter - you get the picture); and we assume the ability to get to the Internet or access the things we have saved on our computer is a natural right - until they break down and you can't get to anything. Such has been the last few weeks for me. No computer. No Internet. No life.

I have two computers - a desktop model and a laptop. Joanie uses the desktop most of the time and I use the laptop all the time. We sit in the living room together with both of us on the computer doing work or finding information or playing. Joanie mentioned we had some problems with the desktop while I was on vacation. After getting back, I tried to fix it but couldn't. No problem, I have the laptop. So, I took my laptop to class and set it up to use in teaching. Suddenly the screen went black and I had no access. Within a few hours, both computers were down experiencing different problems. The PC had a corrupted hard drive and the laptop back light had blown out. The result was I had neither, nor a recent back up of either, and no way to get to the files. If it had not been for a very knowledgeable friend who lives in our complex, I would have been out of luck. He was able to retrieve the files on both units and we purchased a new hard drive for the PC and it is up and running. The laptop will take a little longer, but it should be fine, too. But, I am now in the library at Fuller using one of their computers to do some work and write this blog.

We are learning as a society that what we have taken for granted (cheap gas, ease of travel, soda and snacks on airplanes) is changing rapidly. I have to go to Ohio to preach a camp meeting in a couple of weeks. I won't take any suits or suit jackets. I don't want to pay the extra money for the other piece of luggage that would be required. We are also learning as a church that some things that have been just are not going to continue. Denominational loyalties are non-existent, changes in social attitudes are splitting churches over issues such as homosexuality, and technology and music styles still impact how the church perceives itself and is viewed by the community around it. Here at Fuller, some 50% of the student body, preparing to serve God and the Church in the future, do not attend a local congregation. Things are changing.

Whatever the future holds for the church it will be full of adjustments. Congregations are becoming more multi ethnic in makeup. Whereas Martin Luther King called the 11 o'clock hour on Sunday morning the most segregated hour in American life, the church is finding ways to be more like the neighborhoods in which the serve - black, white, brown, yellow, red, and variations of each. What you may take for granted today, may be different tomorrow. The question is and will be: does the church have anything to say or to contribute to a changing society? I spent yesterday delivering a lecture to students of preaching. It was on multicultural preaching. My friend, Dr. Lisa Lamb, says that the multicultural church is the church of the eschaton - it is the church of the future. The church will be multicultural either here on earth or we will be when we all get to heaven. Maybe we should begin making those adjustments now. After all, what we have come to depend upon and we think is normal may suddenly change, like the breakdown of computers. At that point, you either adjust to the new situation or become irrelevant.

Time and Timing

I am preaching a sermon tomorrow entitled, "It's All a Matter of Timing." I'm not sure I will put all this in the sermon, but it has gotten me thinking. Some of the materials I used recently for a paper were on Albert Einstein. I was doing some work on the neurological functions of the brain as they relate to creativity. Einstein's life and self-understanding about his own thought processes are quite revealing. He may have been one of the most creative thinkers in the history of the world. I am convinced that all great thinkers have one thing in common - and it's not intelligence. It's the ability to think outside the box; to think creatively. But, I digress. Back to time.
Time is invisible. In order to believe in time you have to find some way to measure it or to measure its effects. For instance, we know that there is such a thing as time because we see its effects - our bodies age, children grow, a man's beard lengthens, flowers bloom, the sun rises and sets, things change as we observe them over, well, time. Like the Holy Spirit, whom we can only see through the effects of the Spirit, time is something we measure and understand through its effect on things. This is actually how Einstein explained the existence of the universe. He postulated that the universe was real because you could measure its effects. Bodies move through the universe and they are affected by that movement. By measuring those effects we know that there is a universe and, Einstein speculated, it can be measured.
Isn't it fascinating how something so invisible is so visible in our society. Looking at my computer screen there is a clock in the bottom right hand corner. It is more accurate than the digital clock on my desk because it is coordinated with more exacting time stamps through a signal received electronically. However, it is not completely accurate if compared to the official U.S. time clock, which they claim is accurate within 0.2 seconds. My question is, "How do they know what time is - it's invisible?" We have fooled ourselves into measuring a concept and believing that the measurement we make based on certain effects is accurate. It is only accurate to the extent that it measures what it claims to measure. And time, the invisible divine entity, cannot be measured unless you measure its effects.
I guess the lesson I gleaned from all of this is that, as a Christian, your life of faith is a lot like time. You cannot measure it other than by measuring its effects. The key to living the Christian life is to allow the Holy Spirit to work through you in such a way that the effect of your faith can be measured by the things, the objects, the love, the works, the testimony that hurdles through the universe. If the Word of God really lasts forever; and if the old Negro spiritual is true when it says, "Only What We Do for Christ Will Last" then it is our witness that measures eternity.
Time marches on is not true. What marches on is the measurement of the effects of time. My hair is graying, my tissue and muscles are less pliable, my eyesight is less clear, and my mind is, well, it actually is working better. Hmmmm. Not everything deteriorates with time.

A Theology of Preaching

One of the first lectures I was asked to do centered around my theology of preaching. I learned a long time ago that one of the great problems of the church both locally and nationally is that it often forgets about theology and moves pragmatically (whatever works). Neither Jesus nor Paul seemed much concerned with pragmatism. However, they were both deeply concerned about the theology of what we do and how we do it. To put it simply, God cares as much about the why as he does about the how (maybe more). Therefore, what you believe about preaching effects what you do in preaching. Let me explain.
One of the points in my Theology of Preaching lecture is that every sermon must have a text. And then, the sermon must be about the text. The text matters. People don't come to hear me, they come to hear from on high. My task is to do the study and the work that is necessary for me to speak about the text; to speak into the text; to speak from the text; and to speak with the authority of the Holy Spirit who has revealed, preserved, and applied the text. While that may seem basic to most preachers, it can be difficult to do. It happened to me this weekend.
My wife had put together the worship service for Sunday based on her own inspiration. I was still knee-deep in Comps and didn't have anything done on my sermon. Her service centered around the name of Jesus. It was a good service. Joanie is gifted and talented and I have learned the wisdom of trusting her sense of the Spirit and her knowledge of worship. So, as the weekend rolled around, I still had no sermon. So, I did what I rarely do but have the capability of doing. I looked through my filed sermons and found an old one. It was from Philippians 2:5-11 and the title of the sermon was, "The Names of God." Well, that sounded like a perfect fit and I pulled out the material and took it home. I figured that, with a little work, I could shape it up and it would work just fine. It was hardly the case.
When I sat down to really look at the sermon I found that the sermon had a theme but no text. I had not really dealt with the text in the whole of the sermon. It was a thematic sermon (and I like and think all sermons should have theme) but the theme had become the sermon. The text had become an afterthought. So, my debate was to just preach the sermon and not worry about it. After all, if you ignore your theology of preaching once, what's the big deal? It was just one sermon. None of my homiletics professors were going to be there. I had all the excuses in the world. Just let it go. But I couldn't. Not because I am some principled, disciplined hermeneut. I couldn't because it just wasn't worthy of representing what I know and believe about preaching, God, and theology. It was a matter of integrity. Either you do it right or you don't do it at all.
So, I spent a good part of Saturday afternoon and evening reworking an old sermon. I got out my word study books, my Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, a couple of commentaries, my Greek study tools, and the notes I had made from the previous sermon and I completely reworded the message. I found the heart of the text and what I sensed it really meant. I spent time learning what the word Christ means, what the meaning is of the name Jesus and how that relates to the names of God in the O.T. Ultimately I dealt with the concept of God's anointing and how that applies to priests in the Temple and to Christians in the N.T. The conclusion of the sermon called on the congregation to experience the anointing of God. A time of commitment and sanctification was experienced by the church. Verse 11 became the focus and the idea that Christ is "kupios insous Xpistos" (the Greek phrase translated as Jesus Christ Lord) was the challenge - to make Christ the "kupios" (Lord) of your life.
The real reason I reworked the sermon was to be able to stand at the end of the sermon and know that whatever God wanted to do with the sermon was just fine with me. I had been faithful - the results were up to him. Preachers, do the work so that you may stand at the door of the church when the service is over knowing that you were faithful to the text, faithful to your calling, and that your theology of preaching kept you in the text.

Elation and Satisfaction

One of the things that always frustrated me about being a local pastor was the lack of joy one could have upon the completion of anything. For instance, there is a sense of joy that comes in the planning and preparation of a worship service (all the elements, including the sermon preparation and delivery). However, once it is completed, there is little chance to celebrate. You feel a sense of satisfaction at the completion of the task and you celebrate what God did, then you have to begin preparing for the next Sunday. You evaluate the service the next week and do what I used to call a postmortem on the previous Sunday, but you are already trying to put all your time and effort into the next week. Sometimes it is hard to find time to celebrate.
At other times you want to celebrate what God has done in people's lives. Decisions they've made, growth they have accomplished - but that was always terribly hard to measure. It's kind of like seeing a child grow up everyday. There doesn't seem to be nearly as much progress as when you live all the way in California and don't get to see your grandson in Illinois except once every six months and then you see a big change! But, I digress. (Just a cheap excuse to put in a picture of our grandson being held by grandma). Anyway, it is hard to celebrate progress when you can't always find the right tool by which to measure it.
However, in my Ph.D program I find that there are milestones that you get to achieve and there is time to celebrate. I finished my Comprehensive Exams today. Four of them over the past two weeks. I have spent more than 6 weeks preparing directly for them. I have been barely visible with friends and neighbors. It is the most intense thing I have ever done. Just before taking the last exam today (the fourth of four) I was informed that I had passed the first three. I think I did well on the one today (it was the easiest of the four) and I am confident that I passed them all. As of today, I am no longer a doctoral student. I am now a doctoral candidate. All I have left is the work that prepares me to write my dissertation and the actual writing of the dissertation. My goal is to have all my preparation work done by the end of next summer and to have completed the dissertation writing by December of 2009. That would mean that I will graduate in June of 2010. That means, from start to finish, I will have completed the Ph.D in 3 1/2 years. That is as fast as it can be done. I still don't know if I will be able to keep up the pace, but that is my goal.
But all that is in the future. For today, and the next few weeks, I am going to celebrate the completion of my Comps. I like that. It feels good to celebrate and to have a long, long party in which to rejoice. Amen.

Comprehensive Exams

Well, it is finally here. The next major hurdle in my PhD program. Comprehensive Exams. Four exams over the course of two weeks. Each exam is to show you have a comprehensive knowledge of the material for that area of study. It begins Friday afternoon (16th) and
they are scheduled for the following Monday, Friday, and then Thursday (29th). Each exam is one or two questions and you have three hours to take them. No books, no notes, not bible, no nothing. Just you and the computer and what it is that you know. So, this posting will be short and I doubt I will write anything until they are over. Here are the four subjects:
1. Practical Theology. I have to give a history of its development, an understanding of the major issues in the area, compare the work of two major theorists, come up with my own Practical Theology and apply all that to a specific case study.
2. Theology of Preaching. I am going to be asked about the meaning of being called to ministry, provide a historical background for it, tell about the call of women to ministry and use the case of an 18th century woman named Sarah Osborn to make an argument against the restrictions but on women in ministry by Martin Luther.
3. Word and Meaning. Two questions here. The first has to do with the 11 books and materials we read for class. I have no idea what the question will be but intend to be prepared to discuss several of the books. The second question is about the meaning and importance of metaphor in preaching and how it limits and expands preaching.
4. History of Preaching. Here I have chosen to deal with African American preaching. Specifically, I am comparing two scholars (Cleophus LaRue and James Earl Massey) and their views on what comprises the distinctiveness in African American preaching. I will be doing a comparison and a study of whether or not Massey's issue of festive preaching is part of the black hermeneutic. Sounds technical, I know, but it is interesting. I will also be analyzing a couple of sermons. One is from Jeremiah Wright. Might as well be contemporary.

Anyway, those are the questions. Pray for me. This is the last chance they have to flunk me out. I don't think they will but I must perform. Thanks.

Changing My Theology on Baptism

I've just had an epiphany reading Barbara Brown Taylor's book, "The Preaching Life." In talking about vocation, she is hitting hard the idea of the priesthood of all believers. I am in the process of studying to take a Comprehensive Exam question on the whole idea of the Call to Ministry and what that means. Doing the historical background, many interesting things have cropped up. Not the least of which has been the distinction in Martin Luther, John Calvin and in most theologians since the Reformation to recognize the fact that we are all called to be involved in ministry. Salvation is a call to become part of the Body of Christ and the Body of Christ is the Church and the Church is the ministering community of Jesus Christ. So, what was the epiphany?
Simply put, I have been teaching baptism incorrectly. I have not been teaching it in any heretical way. I have simply been missing an opportunity to tell others the full meaning of the baptismal event. In leaving out this important piece, I have missed a great chance to help new believers understand what it means to be part of the priesthood of all believers. Here is what I read in Taylor:
"Our offices are the 'texts' of our lives, to use a dramatic term, but the 'subtext' is the common vocation to which we are all called at baptism."
Baptism is the act by which a believer makes a public declaration of his or her commitment to Christ. In that sense, it is the witness and testimony of the believer that they have received the grace of God and "enlisted in His service." It this dimension that my teaching on baptism has lacked. I have certainly taught that it is testimony and a response to the salvation which God has given. I have talked about the symbolic meaning of baptism in the public witness of Christ's death and resurrection. I have used it to tell about how our lives have "died" to the old life and that we are "raised" to a new life. However, I have never subscribed to the idea that baptism is what saves you. I have spent some time making sure that candidates understood what baptism would not do and not nearly enough time telling them what baptism will do. It seems to me that one of the key features of baptism is that the candidate is ordained to ministry. Not to the Office of Clergy but to the Office of Ministry. If the world is going to be changed by the message of the gospel in a post-Christian world, it will be because those who are ordained to the Office of Ministry at baptism understand that they are accepting a call to minister in the name of Jesus Christ.

LIfe Changing

I've spent part of the day watching the NFL College Draft. I'm always fascinated by this weekend. Although I watch the draft because I am an avid NFL fan and Fantasy Football player, I watch it too because I am fascinated by change. When you believe in the power of conversion and the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation, change is a very interesting aspect of ministry and faith. I would even go so far as to say the very nature of God is change. The bible begins not with "creation" but with God "changing" nothing into something. The New Testament does not begin with the "incarnation" but with the the coming of the Word - and the Word changes things when it arrives. The one common denominator for Christians is change. It is the stuff of faith and the intent of ministry and mission. And yet, amazingly, the church (God's visible presence on earth) is hesitant to embrace change. We have become so concerned about orthodoxy that we spend all our time defending what we think we know and very little time investigating what is not known or needs to be changed from how we do things. If I have learned anything in studying Practical Theology at the PhD level it is that the idea of change is integral to the whole idea of what God is doing "on the ground." If we are not responding to the work of the Holy Spirit in the world today then we have lost the connection we must have with the Living Christ. We dare not substitute an "orthodoxy" for a real presence.
So, I watch the NFL draft. Not because I am a football fan but because I am a change fan. These young men will spend a couple of hours waiting to hear how their lives will change. Teams will draft them, sign them for millions of dollars (the first pick this year received almost 30 million dollars - guaranteed), and join a group of players whose lives may be changed by the contribution of this new player to their team. Change. It is a religious experience. I understand that change can be uncomfortable, even painful. Believe me, I have experienced more change in the last couple of years than most. Joanie and I have moved, changed lifestyles, gone back to school, and experienced an entire financial and relational change. It has even continued this week as Joanie has found out that her teaching position has been cut and she will not have a job next year. She has lovingly been the breadwinner for us in this venture at Fuller. I know she does not relish either the job search process nor the uncertainty of not knowing where she will be working in the Fall. But, change is a normal part of life that should be embraced as something that God produces or provides. Joanie has been considering looking for a new job and has been praying what she should do. This decision is the answer she has been seeking (maybe not the way but surely the answer). But it will require her to make some significant changes.
When change comes or is thrust upon you, one of the things you have to do is embrace the possibilities that God is at work. This does not mean we can be foolish with our choices but it does mean that when things happen you look to see what Christ is doing. And so, we are seeing how God's hand is at work in our lives.
Sure would be easier if I was drafted by the NFL and got a million dollar contract. Surely every NFL team needs a slow, old white guy to play for them. If they do , I'm ready. Is that God's hand? It would be if I got drafted.

The Presence of the Word

I am working on an understanding of a philosophy of practical theology. In May, I have to answer that question during one of my comprehensive exams. It is a fundamental question for anyone in ministry, though I had never quite thought about it in the terms I do now after taking a seminar on the subject. During the seminar I was quite affected by the writing and teaching of Ray Anderson. He is a semi-retired professor here at Fuller. He is a prolific writer and quite a teacher. His PhD is in Systematic Theology but he has spent the majority of his academic life working in the area of Practical Theology.
What Dr. Anderson has developed is a rationale for a praxis-theory-praxis model for Practical Theology. If you are interested in his work, the book I am using is called, "The Shape of Practical Theology." In it, he makes the case that Practical Theology (indeed all theology) must be based on the concept of what he calls Christopraxis. Now, let me try and explain all of this in terms I can understand!
First, praxis means practice. So, all theology begins with practice. This is very different than how Systematic Theology (the king of theological studies in graduate school). Systematics begins with theory. All theology begins with theory, philosophy. Anderson says that all ministry begins with practice. In other words, if the Holy Spirit is active and leading in all of life and ministry and if Jesus Christ is really resurrected from the dead, then God is still at work in our lives and in our ministries. So far so good? It sounds like good, solid Church of God theology.
What Practical Theology then states is that we interpret the movement of God in the practice of ministry (Anderson does say that the praxis he is describing is more than just practice but it it theory laden praxis - by that he means that our praxis already has a theological, biblical rationale behind it). Here is where his theology gets interesting. If we find that what God is doing "on the ground" differs from our theology, we should then begin to look at our theology and see if it is wrong. At that point your praxis informs your theory. If your theory (theology) disagrees with the praxis, you must be willing to look hard at the theology to see if it is accurate. That means you have to be willing to look at some very entrenched theological ideas in a very different light. Maybe, you will have to change your theology to fit the practice. I know of few church groups, seminaries, or ministers that are prepared to change their theological framework because they see something different going on in a local ministry situation.
When I spoke with Dr. Anderson about his theology, I told him that I thought his book was powerful, intriguing, and dangerous. He agreed. But up until this week, I wasn't quite sure how dangerous and difficult it might be. When Anderson diagrams this out he puts Christopraxis (the praxis of what Christ is doing) in the middle of the diagram. Theological reflection and determination are moved from their usual place at the center to one of the outer rims. For Anderson, Christ is at the center of everything. He supports this with the idea that the praxis of Christ will never be in conflict with scripture. But if it is, we should be willing to change how we read and understand the scriptures.
The dangerous part of this comes from the Reformation (No, not Warner but Luther). When the Protestant Reformation took hold, Luther based his stance on two things: salvation by faith (alone) and "sola scriptura" (scripture alone). I still believe in the first. The second one is in question. The Wikipedia article on sola scriptura defines it thusly: "Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture alone") is the assertion that the Bible as God's written word is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine." If one is to embrace the theology of Anderson then you must also be willing to take the doctrine of sola scriptura out of the center of the diagram. Let me be clear. This does not mean that you either disbelieve or devalue scripture. Quite the contrary. It just means that the bible is not the center of your theology - Christ is. Scripture is both the Word of God and the voice of God. God's voice in praxis disagrees with God's voice in the Word, one of them must be wrong.
In his book, Anderson talks about the issue of gender. He details his journey through the women in ministry debate and how, through what God was doing on the ground, he began to challenge the accepted doctrine that women couldn't be in ministry. The praxis they observed caused them to challenge the accepted exegesis of scripture that women could not be accepted in ministry. After finding numerous positive biblical examples and problems related to how those doctrinal positions were exegeted, Anderson helped change the position of Fuller to allow women to study for the pastoral ministry. He believed the praxis and changed the way he viewed scripture. In another chapter he takes on the issue of homosexuality. He talks about how many homosexuals claim that they can be believers in Christ and continue to live the gay lifestyle. Anderson found that there were no positive statements in scripture nor was there one single example of a positive homosexual person or act anywhere in scripture. At this point, he disagreed with the praxis principle.
One final thought. By moving the principle of scripture from the center to the outer layer of Anderson's diagram, I think I am moving closer to the principles of the early saints of the Church of God. Warner was someone who believed strongly in the leading and guidance of the Holy Spirit (certainly a form of Christopraxis). There are numerous stories of the pioneers of this Movement being led by the Spirit to act in certain ways that were contrary to the normally accepted theological idea. When we took things into our own hands (like when the brethren suggested that blacks might be better having their own camp meeting) we lose the movement of the Holy Spirit and get our eyes off of Christ.

Einstien's Brain

I just finished a paper for my seminar. It is on creativity and how the brain functions. Here is the opening of the paper. It is an unforgettable and true story.

When Albert Einstein died on April 18, 1955 he was one of the most celebrated and respected men in the world. His scientific genius was recognized as extraordinary. Dubbed the greatest scientist of the 20^th Century, he was listed among the most influential people in the history of the world.[1] Time Magazine, on the eve of the new millennium, named him the most influential person of the century.[2] After his death, the body of Einstein was moved to the morgue of Princeton Hospital and Thomas Harvey, the pathologist on call that evening performed the autopsy. From that moment forward, the odyssey of Einstein’s brain would take a series of twists and turns that would not resolve themselves for more than four decades.

Harvey performed a routine autopsy that night, though without apparent cause or a request from the family (though permission was obtained after the autopsy was completed). Einstein had left specific instructions for the disposal of his remains. They were to be cremated and the ashes spread anonymously to discourage thrill seekers and souvenir hunters. Harvey, either unaware of these wishes or caught up in the emotion of the moment (or both), removed the eyes and gave them to Henry Abrams, Einstein’s eye doctor. But the strangest act that night was what happened to the brain. Harvey, apparently at the request of his mentor and Einstein’s personal physician Dr. Harry Zimmer, removed the brain from the skull and took it home. Harvey was not a neurologist nor did he have any training in the brain other than the normal pathological understandings related to postmortem disease, injury or atrophy. He took the brain for reasons that can only be speculated. Once the loss was discovered, Harvey refused to return Einstein’s brain to the pathology department. He was fired from his job as a pathologist. Not long after, he took the brain to Philadelphia where a technician sectioned it off into hundreds of blocks for study. Encased in celloidin (a substance used to embed tissues for microscopic examination) the brain was placed in a plastic container and Harvey took it home and put it in his house. It would remain there for the next 40 years.[3]

Periodically, Harvey would take out the brain to cut off a slice for some scientist who was requesting research material. He tried, unsuccessfully, to interest the larger scientific community in researching the nature of his prized possession. Finally, at the age of 80, Harvey packed up Einstein’s brain and put it in the trunk of his Buick Skylark. Accompanied by a writer named Michael Peterniti, they took off across the country to return what was left of the prized brain to its rightful heir, Einstein’s granddaughter. After traveling all the way to California, she refused to take possession of the gruesome artifact. In the end, the brain was finally returned to where this whole bizarre story began – to the pathologist at Princeton that held the same job Harvey had when he first took the brain some four decades earlier.[4]

---

[1] Michael H. Hart, The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History (New York: Hart Pub. Co., 1978).

[2] Frederic Golden, "Person of the Century: Albert Einstein," Time Magazine 2000.

[3] Brian Burrell, Postcards from the Brain Museum: The Improbable Search for Meaning in the Matter of Famous Minds, 1st ed. (New York: Broadway Books, 2004).

[4] Michael Paterniti, Driving Mr. Albert: A Trip across America with Einstein's Brain (New York: Dial Press, 2000).

Dr. Gilbert Stafford

After commenting on the death of Horace Sheppard, Sr. I did not think I would have to return to eulogize another colleague and influential mentor so quickly. However, I received word the other night that another friend and person of great influence in my life, Dr. Gil Stafford, passed away after suffering from cancer over the last year. He spent more than three decades teaching at the Church of God Seminary in Anderson. He spoke for years on CBH, the radio voice of the Church of God. He wrote some of the most helpful and provocative books for the church to use. He was a voice of scholarship, faith, outreach, and unity. For years he served on the Faith and Order Commission of the Council of Churches - reaching out across the denominational divide. He taught and encouraged women in ministry - reaching across the gender divide. He spoke through radio to anyone who would listen and spoke in love - reaching across the believer-unbeliever divide. He spoke to both the laity and the student - reaching across the educational divide. Very few have done as much to live out the message of unity that was central to Gil's theology and to the theology of the Church of God Movement. And few did it with greater grace or humility.
The loss of Gil Stafford to the life of the church is a huge one. His voice and character will be greatly missed. My son, Jonathan, went to the funeral and called me following the service. He mentioned that he had trouble taking his eyes off the set communion table that was sitting conspicuously in the middle of the chancel. He knew it was there purposefully. Gil was one of the best I ever sat under in leading a communion service. The last time I had the privilege was a meeting of church leaders in Colorado Springs some years back. With 300 delegates representing the church across North America, it was quite a gathering of folks. Several papers were presented. Numerous presentations. But the highlight was Gil leading us to the Table of the Lord. He just had a way.
I know the Seminary is hurting at the loss of a friend and leader. I know that it is also in a transitional phase as they make decisions about new staffing for the graduate school. May I suggest that those who read this blog spend a few moments praying for the seminary community and the university community. In so many ways those places have been molded by the gentle voice of a giant of a man.