More on Lent…

       More thoughts on Lent, including a clarification:

       To clarify: I am not categorically against the idea of “giving up” something for Lent.

       Especially for young people or relatively new Christians, giving up soda pop or chocolate or Facebook or something similar may be entirely appropriate as a teaching and learning experience.

       It’s just that after awhile you need to move beyond that.

       In more mature Christians especially, I think you need to think more strategically about what you’re giving up. You want to shun those things that distance you from God and move toward those things that bring you closer.

       In that vein, Linda and I are both embracing a more positive approach to Lent this year.

       Following a hint from Nadia Bolz-Weber, Linda is celebrating all the people and experiences that bring her joy.

       Following a hint from Ginger Rothaas, I am celebrating all the people and things I love.

       We’re both recording these things as they occur to us in a Lenten journal.

       Ginger’s suggestion is to record one love for each year of your life. Following that pattern, I need to record 77 loves – and maybe one more because I’ll be a year older in another month.

       So far I’ve got 11. Rather than listing each person individually, I’ve grouped them as Immediate Family, Extended Family, Church Family, Good Neighbors, and so on. Maybe if I run out of ideas in a few weeks, I’ll celebrate people one by one by name.

       Anyway, that’s what we mean by marking a positive Lent rather than a negative one. If repentance really means setting new directions, then careful consideration of all the loves and joys of your life is surely the start of a new direction.

       What do you think? Am I avoiding the issue here, or getting closer to it?

*   *   *   *   *

       In a recent blog on forgiveness, slightly renegade Anglican Bishop Todd Hunter recalls an encounter that has helped him understand the importance of forgiving.

       He writes:

        “In a conference setting I cannot remember, a young man came up to Dallas Willard seeking forgiveness for an unkind, unfair comment he had made against him. Dallas always had a warm, welcoming presence about him, but in this moment his eyes softened even more. The gentleness of Dallas’ face, the peace exuding from his body language, signaled no retaliation or rejection was about to happen.

        “Instead, with a tone full of love, Dallas simply said, ‘Thank you—but don’t give it another thought on my account. You are off the hook. You are free.’ ”

       I find the language intriguing. “You are off the hook. You are free.”

       The expression derives from fishing, of course. When you release a fish, or it evades the hook on its own, it is no longer captive. It is free.

       When you forgive someone, you let them off the hook. You set them free. You also set yourself free, if you were harboring any resentment against them.

       According to various dictionary renderings, getting off the hook means escaping from a difficult situation, escaping from an obligation, or escaping the consequences of an action or a punishment that you deserve because of an action.

       And isn’t that what Jesus has done for us? Hasn’t he let us off the hook for our sins for our many failures to love God and others as we love ourselves? Hasn’t he freed us from some of the consequences of our actions?

       And, depending on how you want to interpret this, hasn’t he placed himself on the hook for us?

       To think of it that way, you don’t have to subscribe to the awful doctrine known as Penal Substitutional Atonement. You just have to know that Jesus has let you off the hook and set you free. That’s enough in my book.

Have a happy Lent!

Ah, Lent

Lent is here. Again.

Here are a few observations on the first day, Ash Wednesday:

Centuries of bad practice have given Lent a bad name.

I have always advocated a joyous, almost cheerful, Lent rather than a grim Lent. Yes, it’s a time for reflection and setting of new directions (often termed repentance). But it’s intended to be a time of renewal, not self-flagellation

We have turned the idea of “giving up” something for Lent into a silly game. We abstain from things to learn their true importance to us. Giving up chocolate for 40 days might give me a powerful hankering for chocolate, but I don’t think it will help my spiritual growth.

That’s because chocolate is not a barrier to my relationship with God. Other things are. These are the things I should shun as acts of self-denial – both during a “test run” during Lent and as a life-affirming practice afterward.

It is possible during Lent to be overwhelmed by distracting obligations. For more about this, check out a blog post by a former Kansas City Star colleague, Bill Tammeus: https://billtammeus429970.substack.com/p/the-dalai-lama-a-grammy-reincarnation

The real kicker of Lent is that it reminds each of us of our own mortality. (More about that another time.) Kate Bowler has some powerful observations here: https://katebowler.substack.com/p/the-ache-is-not-going-away

*  *  *  *  *      *  *  *  *  *      *  *  *  *  *

          Another giant has fallen. Jesse Jackson was a longtime advocate of human rights and a legendary protégé of Martin Luther King Jr. He may be best remembered for his mighty rhetorical affirmations: “I am somebody! I am God’s child!”

          Another passing noted: Robert Duvall, an actor who played good guys and bad, saints and sinners, with equal skill.

Only love is biblical

      If you’re not more loving after reading the Bible, you’re reading it wrong. – St. Augustine, about 400 CE, or some 370 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus

      In my new book, Day by Day, I call that quote from Augustine central to reading the Bible.

      If you’re not more loving after reading scripture, you have totally misread and misunderstood it.

      I find an interesting variation on that theme in last week’s 5th installment of the new TV series “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.”

      The episode involves a search for the truth about what happened to Benjamin Sisko, the legendary commander of Deep Space Nine in the series of that name.

      The show was meant as a tribute to Avery Brooks, the now retired actor who played Sisko in the original series. The show closes with a voiceover by Brooks, who reads from a tribute he did to his father in 2007. The quote is especially fitting because it closes an episode that focuses on Sisko and the meaning of fatherhood.

      Here’s the quote:

      “Divine laws are simpler than human ones, which is why it takes a lifetime to be able to understand them. Only love can understand them. Only love can interpret these words as they were meant to be interpreted.”

      That’s the way it works with the Bible. Only love can interpret the words of scripture as they were meant to be interpreted. Any other reading will distort the message. Any other reading will result in a demonic message, not a message from God.

      That is especially true in this day when white nationalists who call themselves Christian and many other fakers try to read their own hate into the Bible.

      If it ain’t love, it ain’t biblical. It’s that simple. And that hard.

       I am happy to announce publication of my latest book.

       The title is Day by Day: A Journey Into the Bible.

       The publisher is Resource Publications, the practical theology imprint of Wipf & Stock, which also published my two previous books, Change of Heart: A Wesleyan Spirituality, and Keeping Christmas.

       It is now available from wipfandstock.com and from Amazon, both for $25.

       Kindle and hardcover editions are forthcoming, at what price I cannot say, except that the Kindle edition is generally half the price of the paperback and hardcover about twice the price of the paperback. (Not even I own the hardbacks!)

       Here is the back cover description of the book and the featured endorsements:

       In Day by Day, James A. Hopwood presents a straightforward, no-nonsense Journey Into the Bible that’s suitable for personal or small group study. In guiding readers through the big story the Bible tells, the book moves easily from the overall “narrative arc” to such details as how those 10 tribes of Israel got “lost.” Not bound by the constraints of pop religion, the study offers a fresh look at familiar passages and frank evaluations of interpretive issues. It comes in a format that’s conducive to one-year study but is easily adapted for other uses. It includes many insightful questions for personal reflection and group discussion. Its purpose, following Richard of Chichester and a memorable pop song, is to help you to see Christ more clearly, love Christ more dearly, and follow Christ more nearly, day by day.

        “The Bible can be difficult to understand unless one sees it as presenting the story of God centered on Jesus Christ. In this book Jim Hopwood’s careful arrangement of passages enables the reader to follow that story in all its richness and drama. But be ready: he also gets you to think about what you read, often in new and surprising ways. If you want a very understandable, at times challenging, and always fruitful engagement with scripture and the God of which it speaks, this is the book for you.” 

       – Henry H. Knight III, Professor Emeritus of Wesleyan Studies and Evangelism, Saint Paul School of Theology, Leawood, Kansas

       “Day by Day offers an accessible and compelling approach to the Bible’s blueprint of divine love. Written with humor, humility and first-class hermeneutics, Jim has captured the essence of the meta-narrative of scripture, focusing not on the details but on the storyline that consistently points toward God’s inclusive and radical love for humanity. The format of daily readings is adaptable to an individual’s desires or a small group’s time frame. If you’re looking for an overview of the Bible, you won’t find better than Day by Day.”

       – Angie McCarty, Location Pastor, Church of the Resurrection, Leawood, Kansas

       “With the investigative powers of a newspaper man and the spiritual sensitivity of a pastor, this wonderful text for biblical study provides exactly what people need. The introduction alone is worth the price of the book. From there we receive an outline of each book of the Bible, with brief, illuminating comments and just enough questions to take one deeper into the text. I recommend it with enthusiasm.”

       – Tex Sample, Robert B. and Kathleen Rogers Professor Emeritus of Church and Society, Saint Paul School of Theology, Leawood, Kansas

       “I love Jim Hopwood! His approach to scripture study combines the curiosity, research and storytelling of a great journalist with the devotion, passion and theological acumen of thoughtful pastor. Day by Day is a great resource for individuals and groups hoping to hear the Word of the Lord in the words of scripture.” – Adam Hamilton, author of Making Sense of the Bible and senior pastor of Church of the Resurrection, Leawood, Kansas

       I am honored to have received such warm endorsements from several people who are not only friends but also mentors and fine examples of how to follow Jesus day by day.

A battle worth fighting

Well, it sounded a whole lot more interesting than it really is.

  I’m speaking of the book Who Is a True Christian? by David W. Congdon.

  I read a review of it in Christian Century and for some reason that now escapes me, I was intrigued.

  I sent a copy of the review to Hal Knight, a professor at Saint Paul School of Theology in Leawood and longtime friend and mentor, to see whether he thought it might be a candidate for our reading group.

  Based on the review, he was not impressed by the book, but he asked me to let him know what I thought when I read it.

  So this is my message to Hal – and to you, too, if you are inclined.

  Initially, I found the book very hard to read. There are reasons I don’t read much raw theology these days, and this book clicks most of the boxes.

  But I kept reading stubbornly, thinking it would get better. It did, somewhat, until the end, when it crashed and burned.

  Congdon ought to be a good read. He’s senior editor at the University Press of Kansas, and he teaches at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary.

  I have two complaints.

First, he writes for an airy academic audience. He is capable of writing a simple declarative sentence, and even a complex declarative sentence, and he proves this capability several times.

  However, most of his sentences suffer compound fracture. They are overly complex. They have far too many dependent and sub-dependent clauses. Too often his sentences require a second or even third read for me to figure out what he’s trying to say. And then I basically shrug and think, “Well, why didn’t he just say that outright?”

  I know that it is possible to be precise while being concise but density reigns here. I don’t think it needs to reign anywhere.

  Second, his conclusion turns out to be kinda wonky.

For most of the book he appears (at least to me) to oppose orthodoxy of belief because (he says) it always turns out to be right wing and oppressive. (Think Christian nationalism.) But at the end he declares that it is impossible for anybody to define the essence of Christian faith, so everybody ought to be free to believe whatever they want.

  In place of orthodoxy he calls for “polydoxy,” which is essentially anything goes. Or, as he puts it: “everyone must embrace heresy.”

  I don’t buy it. It seems to me that if at least some of us can’t agree on what we’re about as Christians, then we have nothing to say to the world, so we might as well shut up.

  I do not think that’s what Jesus had in mind.