A friend of mine just asked me a question about John Wesley. An encounter with Aldersgate Road in Springfield, MO, prompted he and his wife to seek some information on John Wesley. Their notes showed that Wesley’s conviction of faith was a result of his study of Luther.
The question asked is “why didn’t he pursue Luther further and possibly become a Lutheran?”
I responded in part by noting that Wesley was already an Anglican priest and so transferring may not have been 1) possible, 2) desirable, or 3) acceptable. I also made the conjecture that there may have been other aspects of Luther that kept Wesley in the Anglican church.
So I know turn to the Methoblog and wonder what you all think?
For those on Facebook, please come over to the blog to post your answers so that non-Facebook viewers can see your response as well.
Peace to all and have a pleasant and safe Labor Day while you ponder this question.
We are celebrating the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I. For the next four years or so, we are going to be reminded about the death and carnage that circled the world one hundred years ago.
In one sense, I am more attuned to World War I than World War II simply because I have my Grandfather’s diary that he wrote while in France and Belgium in 1918 and 1919. (I have photos from that period in his life on a backup file and if I can find the software to recover the files, will be able to recover them and publish them even though they aren’t pretty by any means.)
What I find interesting is not that this world went to war 100 years ago or how it began. What I do find interesting is how it all developed into what it became and what happened when it was all over.
First, think back to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 and how John Kennedy was worried that what was happening between Cuba, the Soviet Union, and this country could easily escalate into a major conflict. He pointed out the leaders of Europe felt that they were so attuned to each others thoughts that they could anticipate what they were going to do. Obviously, the outcome of that particular thought process didn’t work and millions died as a result.
The other thing that I find interesting comes from a series of comments for the post “Study War No More”. In response to my comment that wars did not solve problems, one commentator replied “except for slavery, Nazism, fascism, and communism”. I didn’t realize that his comment came from a bumper sticker.
When we look at the map of the world before and after World War I, we see the loss of two empires and the expansion of others. The African and Pacific colonies of Germany were given to other European countries and Japan; the Middle East was re-mapped to favor British and French interests (especially considering oil). The concerns of the people living in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia were ignored in favor of the winning colonial powers. And the burdens placed on Germany by the Allied Powers definitely contributed to the beginning of World War II.
So here we are today, watching wars and conflicts in the Middle East that have roots in a conflict in Europe 100 years ago. How different would the world have been if we been more attuned to the needs of the world instead of mankind’s selfish interests?
So this is anniversary we should remember. Maybe we will learn something this time around.
I published my Grandfather’s thoughts for the day of the Armistice on November 11, 1918 here – “My Grandfather’s Diary entry for this day, 11 November 1918”
For those who are interested in such matters, I recently updated my “This is me” page.
Meditation for June 29, 2014, the 3rd Sunday after Pentecost (Year A)
Genesis 22: 1 – 14, Romans 6: 12 – 23, and Matthew 10: 40 – 42
To say that I am not a fan of the present teaching model would be something of an understatement. But, perhaps not for the reasons you might think.
I was not happy with the way that the Common Core Curriculum was “imposed” on the teachers of this country. It seemed to me that very little was done in the way of preparation for teachers, students, and parents alike. That there needs to be a common core should go without saying but you don’t change the curricula model without some sort of warning or preparatory system If there was such a warning or preparation period, I am not aware of it.
Personally, I didn’t have any problems with the curriculum but then again, I was working with my kindergarten age grandson and most of what we did was pretty simple stuff. I think the problem that most people had was simply with the fact that they had to think for themselves and weren’t able to adjust to the change.
Too many people today don’t want to take on new tasks, especially when it comes to learning. They are quite content to do it the way it was done when they were students and that is all they expect. And when a student, especially a college-age student, encounters a new way of learning, there is much rebellion. And that’s what makes it so easy to have a test-oriented curriculum; all you have to do is present some knowledge to the students, have them memorize it, and then test them on it. Once they are tested on it and they achieve a reasonable success level, then we move onto a new topic. That leads to the quote from “Teaching As A Subversive Activity”, written by Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner way back in the good old days of 1969,
The Vaccination Theory of Education – English is not History and History is not Science and Science is not Art and Art is not Music, and Art and Music are minor subjects and English, History, and Science major subjects, and a subject is something you “take” and, when you have taken it, you have “had” it, and if you have “had” it, you are immune and need not take it again. (This and other sayings I have found interesting are at “A Collection of Sayings”.)
If we simply test our students, we don’t have to get involved in the learning process and that is the problem. Learning is an active and interactive process between people; testing is not.
Some of this saw this coming almost thirty years ago. When I was teaching in Missouri, the State Board of Education, in its infinite wisdom, created the Basic Essential Skills Test or BEST test. Now, the rationale and purpose for this test were valid; every student needs to have a certain basic set of skills for life after school. But the manner in which the BEST test was done required a response.
So we created the Scholastic Education Council on New Directions Basic Essential Skills Test – 1) I will let you figure out the acronym and 2) the actual questions are at “THE BETTER TEST”. Clearly, our response was satire but it went to the point of what students should learn, how they should learn, and how that learning should be measured.
There was an episode in the TV series, “The Paper Chase” that speaks to this point. It was the final exam in Contract Law and Professor Kingsfield had created an exam with 100 questions covering a myriad of law-based topics in areas such as real estate, medicine, theology, and probably a few areas that one would not relate to the study and practice of the law.
To get the answers required the students search not only the law library but practically ever other library on campus. And because the students were competitive to the point of insanity, when they found the answer to one of the questions, they kept the resources for themselves so that other students would not be able to answer the question.
You can imagine the chaos that ensued because students were unable to answer all the questions (certain in their own minds that completion of all the questions was necessary for success). In the end, the students or rather the various study groups began to work how ways to share the work that they had with other groups so that they could get the answers for the questions. In the end, they wrote a series of contracts.
And what you have to remember was this was a course in Contract Law. The purpose of the exam was not to obtain all the answers individually but work together and develop solid and viable contracts, which was the purpose of the course.
A second example occurred while I was a graduate student at Memphis State University (now the University of Memphis). The Memphis Fire Department had agreed to take away several 55-gallon drums filled with chemical waste that the Chemistry Department had collected over the years. But before they could take them, the contents of each drum had to be identified.
Chemistry graduate students at that time took a series of monthly exams that measured their knowledge and competency. The solution to the problem of identifying the contents of the drums was to give each student a drum and tell them to apply their analytical and organic knowledge to the identification of the contents. (Of course, while this solved the department’s problem, it may have created problems for the individual students.)
I am not entirely certain that our present model of teaching can do that. In the end, our students learn to solve problems that already have solutions but they are not capable of solving problems that haven’t been solved.
And what perhaps bothers me more than anything else is that there will be a point in our own personal lives where we are going to be faced with such a problem. We shall be asked a question for which we may not know the answer and then what will or shall we do?
There really isn’t a question in the Old Testament reading for today but it is quite clear that God is testing Abraham. It is as if God is asking Abraham to prove that he, Abraham, will fulfill his part of the covenant. This covenant is the promise that Abraham’s descendants will outnumber the stars in the sky and yet God has directed Abraham to take Isaac to Mount Moriah and sacrifice him.
What must Abraham have thought? After all, as far as I know, Abraham believes that his oldest son, Ishmael, is dead and now he is about to kill his other son. The promise, the fulfillment of the covenant is clearly at stake at this point.
How would we respond in such a case? How would we respond if we had to put our faith on the line and just hope, without a single piece of evidence that God would fulfill His part of the covenant. And that is the real final exam! It is the one question that we have no way to study for; there is no book in which we can find the answer.
We could, I suppose, not worry about it. As Paul pointed out, you could lead the life we want, do what we want and ignore God. That way you wouldn’t have to worry or bother about right thinking or right living. But what do you get for all of that? Not much and when that moment comes when you have to answer the question you have avoided all your life, you won’t have the time, let alone the ability to think about what to say.
In the end, what you do, what you say, how you think shows where Christ is in your life. Many years ago I taught a course in how to teach science (a methods course). Most of my students expected me to lecture them on the various ways that one could teach science and sometimes I did just that. But a lot of times, I used the method that was the lesson, having the students do what they were going to be doing later on in life. I thought it was more important to do the method than simply speak about it. Not all my students got the message.
I would like to think that this is what Jesus was doing, having his students, his disciples do that which He taught them. It wasn’t easy for them to learn (and we know that many dropped out over the course of the three years). But in the end, enough understood and when the Holy Spirit came to them on that first Pentecost, they understood what they needed to do and then went from there.
Are you prepared today to take all that you have learned and go out into the world to show others who Christ is? The class is dismissed and the course begins.
The title of a recent post by John Meunier, “Only Two Things In The Middle of The Road?”, posed a question that I am sure not many people would know how to answer. For those who are not enlightened and never read Molly Ivins or Jim Hightower, I am providing the answer as the title of this piece.
But the purpose of John’s post was not to offer some Texas humor but rather provide links to some of the discussion taking place in the blogosphere concerning the thoughts and efforts of some to seek a schism or not seek a schism in the United Methodist Church.
Now, if you have received an e-mail from me, you know that there are a series of quotes that I find interesting:
If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away. (Henry David Thoreau)
- And you will know the truth and the truth will set you free (John 8: 32)
- Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind. (John F. Kennedy)
The quote from President Kennedy was given in response to the need for a ban on nuclear weapons but could easily apply to the situation the United Methodist Church is facing today. If we don’t end that which threatens to divide this denomination, then it will kill it. I don’t think that schism is the answer simply because neither side will be able to survive the aftermath.
I was brought up to seek the truth. I choose to walk a path that encompassed and still encompasses a life of science and faith. To seek the truth should be each person’s goal and the distillation of the facts to their simplest components the means by which we find that one single truth. (There may be a hint of Eastern mysticism in that, I am not sure.)
But the one quote that has been a part of my life for as long as I have known the quote and even before I knew that there was such a quote was the one from Thoreau. Circumstances and choice lead me to a path of my own choosing.
I choose to walk with Jesus Christ. It has taken me many places. And when I may have strayed from that path, I always found a way to get back to it. The discussion of, for, or about a schism in the United Methodist Church seems to suggest that there are only two paths and I have to choose between one of two possibilities.
That I would have to choose between those two options neither sets well with my own philosophy/approach or the path that I did choose to walk. And so many other times, the finality of the choice being offered doesn’t give me the opportunity to make up my own mind.
Granted, I would be considered a political liberal or progressive. And I have written that I don’t see how one can consider the Gospel message to be a conservative one, especially not in the context of today’s conservativism. Granted, I came to this conclusion because I saw too many individuals who did not care about others or worked to insure that their views were the dominant ones.
And when you look at what Jesus did to the power structure of his society, how can anyone work to make sure that the power structure of today’s society excludes others. I am not a Wesleyan scholar but I get the impression that was the thinking that drove Wesley to begin the Methodist Revival some two hundred years ago.
The one thing that I do know is that the road I walk demands attention to Jesus, not what others are doing or saying. I hold to the faith and work to see that the Gospel is there for everyone, not selecting those who get to hear it or somehow don’t come up to a particular set of standards.
The question we perhaps need to be asking at this time is more to the point about where you are headed, not which side of the road you are walking on? Are you headed in the right direction with your life and your goals? Are you helping others find their own path to Christ?
The Scriptures for this Sunday are Acts 7: 55 – 60, 1 Peter 2: 2 – 10 and John 14: 1 – 14.
My initial thoughts when I read the three readings for this Sunday suggested possible titles of “Rolling Stones” or “Sticks and Stones”.
But I have never been a big fan of Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones (though I once suggested that the AARP was making a big mistake – see “I Think The AARP Is Making A Big Mistake”). And there is too much violence and discord in the world to even think of using the other possibility.
But there came an image in my mind from many, many years ago when my family moved into our house on Coyle in San Antonio, just down the street from Maverick Elementary School. Our house had just been built and there really wasn’t much grass in the back yard (and the dirt that was made of a rather insidious clay that, after getting wet, hardened into a almost unbreakable rock known as caliche). My dad assigned me the task of clearing out all of the rocks and stones in the backyard so that we could plant grass. I was paid, I believe the grandiose sum of $.25 per 100 rocks!
And there were the rocks that we pulled out of the ground when we were preparing the Children’s Garden at Grace UMC in Newburgh (see “The Garden We Plant”).
The key to all of this, you see, is not that we gather the rocks together but what we do with them afterwards. As best as I can remember, I merely moved all of the rocks in our backyard in San Antonio from all over the backyard to one spot where they probably got covered up. The stones I uncovered in the Children’s Garden at Grace were moved to one spot and marked off a section of the garden.
You get the impression in reading the passage from Acts that the people went around gathering up stones in order to make Stephen the first person to die for his faith. But we are also told in this passage that Saul was there that day and those who participated in the stoning gave their cloaks to him for safekeeping. And while it is necessary that we understand why Stephen died on that day, it is also important that we know that Saul was there as well, for it suggests to the reader that something else is about to happen.
You don’t put someone’s name in a passage from the Bible unless there is a reason for doing so (see some thoughts on this in “The Other Side Of The Universe”).
In his letter to the congregation Peter speaks of the stone that is the cornerstone of faith, Jesus Christ, and like the cornerstone of a building, the most important stone in our life. When I think of Saul going to Damascus to continuing persecuting those who will become known as Christians, I thought of the road or roads from Jerusalem to Damascus that he had to have walked on.
I recall from some history that I read many years ago that it was the roads that the Romans build that linked the places of the Empire together. The primary purpose of the roads was to insure that the Roman troops could get from place to place in order to maintain order. But those roads were built to last and many are still in existence today.
The Roman troops had to have gathered countless stones in order to build each road. But the irony of this is that a road that was built to let troops get from point A to point B in order to put down a possible rebellion or allow a young, angry prosecutor to continue the repression of a new faith group became the site of an encounter between Christ and that prosecutor. Instead of being a path of potential violence and hatred, it became the path that would lead to The Truth and The Way, the very path that Jesus spoke of when Thomas asked Him where they were all going.
What are the stones in your life today? What stones must you gather together for the sole purpose of getting rid of them? We cannot build the Kingdom of God here on earth when we gather the rocks and stones out of hatred and ignorance, when we gather them for purposes of violence and oppression. Such rocks become, as Peter pointed out, something to trip over.
But in choosing to follow Christ, those same rocks can be gathered together and help build a new life.
There are stones in our lives today. The question will always be “What will you do with them?” Shall we destroy this world or shall we build this world through Christ?