So why am I harping on this? It’s just my old complaint about individualism: While loving without getting loved back can be made to sound like the ultimate kind of love, it actually promotes a kind of individualism by ignoring that we are relational beings for whom a mutual benefit to loving is good and healthy. Loving with no expectation of return can be a temporary discipline, but if we make it the ultimate definition of love we are actually undercutting the need for other people. We are setting up the individual self-sufficient lover/giver as the ideal. This person does not need to get anything back when he or she loves because, well, it would not really be love if they did. That just seems kid of cold and twisted if you think about it.

This is a really good reflection on something we rarely question ourselves. Click here to read the full post. It’s really worth reading.

I would say there is nothing wrong with having expectations or hope for a reciprocal response in a loving relationship. There is a problem only when we manipulate or coerce the fulfillment of that expectation. If that is the case, then it is not love. Love must be freely given and received in return.

“Fools have no interest in understanding;
    they only want to air their own opinions.”

– Proverbs 18:2, NLT

“Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the Lord your God that he has given you.” (Deut. 16:17)

“But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able thus to offer willingly? For all things come from you, and of your own have we given you.” (1 Chr. 29:14)

“And God is able to bless you abundantly, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work…… You will be made rich in every way so that you can be generous on every occasion, and through us your generosity will result in thanksgiving to God.” (2 Cor. 9:8, 11)

Before we ask the question “What can I give?”, let us ask ourselves “What have I been given?”

Sometimes we question others: “Why are you not giving?” I think there may be a hidden phrase not spelled out: “Why are you not giving [what I am expecting you to give]?” Perhaps it is better to first examine what have they been given by God.

Identify, Empower, Unleash — the three-steps to mobilize people according to their gifts.

The Aedyn Chronicles: Chosen Ones by Alister E. McGrath

How on earth can one simultaneously be a full-time theology professor, a historical/systematic/scientific theologian, a popular apologist, a world-touring speaker, yet still finds the leisure of becoming…… a children’s fantasy writer? Judging from the title, this doesn’t seem to be the only one, but the beginning of a series…

With more than 66 titles published while he’s only 57 years old, I can only conclude that he is indeed a literature-producing machine……

“…… eternity is not an unending succession of days in the calendar, but something more like the supreme moment of satisfaction, in which totality embraces us and we embrace totality…… It would be like plunging into the ocean of infinite love, a moment in which time–the before and after–no longer exists. We can only attempt to grasp the idea that such a moment is life in the full sense, a plunging ever anew into the vastness of being, in which we are simply overwhelmed by joy.”

Pope Benedict XVI, Spe Salvi, 12.

With a bit of tweaking and re-phrasing, I think it can translate into some fairly biblically-sound principles that church ministry should be done according to:

1. Autonomy –> Each person should ultimately be led by the inner guidance of the Holy Spirit, instead of the type of church leadership that likes to seize control and micro-manage things. (Of course church unity and proper individual/corporate spiritual discernment must be emphasized here, in order to prevent everyone basically doing their own thing.)
2. Mastery –> Each person’s spiritual gifts should be identified, embraced, and unleashed. Reintroduce spiritual disciplines into the life of church, so that people learn to become better at it. Develop a culture of excellence, for the glory of God.
3. Purpose –> We need a robust biblical theology to give us the grand purpose and eschatalogical meaning of living our lives and being the Church in this age. We should not be motivated by church growth or any kind of glorious numerical increase, but by God’s deep love for the world and the eschatalogical picture of the redeemed cosmos.

I believe we must not orient ourselves towards only one of the past, present, or future perspectives, but embrace all three under the providence of our Triune God. Just as it is written in the Anglican liturgy:

“Have mercy upon us, have mercy upon us, most merciful Father; for thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, forgive us all that is past; and grant that we may ever hereafter serve and please thee in newness of life, to the honor and glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.” (Book of Common Prayer, Confession of Sin)

「現在我們痛心懊悔，求你憐憫我們，為了聖子耶穌基督，饒恕我們的已往，扶助我們的現在， 引導我們的將來，使我們樂意遵行你的旨意，歸榮耀給你的聖名。阿們。」（公禱書，認罪文）

Curses:

33 He turned rivers into a desert,
flowing springs into thirsty ground,

34 and fruitful land into a salt waste,
because of the wickedness of those who lived there.

Blessings:

35 He turned the desert into pools of water
and the parched ground into flowing springs;

36 there he brought the hungry to live,
and they founded a city where they could settle.

37 They sowed fields and planted vineyards
that yielded a fruitful harvest;

38 he blessed them, and their numbers greatly increased,
and he did not let their herds diminish.

Yes, you are right.

Curses are contingent upon the sin of mankind, but blessings are given freely out of God’s mercy without any human cause.

There is no “because” to make the blessings conditional.

What did Abraham do to merit God’s blessing in the beginning of Genesis 12? Absolutely nothing.

This contrast just highlights the inherent goodness and the steadfast love of God…… which is in fact the overarching theme of Psalm 107.

Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures forever. (Ps. 107:1)

雖然以往在波士頓的 St. Paul’s Cathedral 和三藩市的 Grace Cathedral 都見過明陣 (Labyrinth)，但這次算是第一次行和親身體驗個中的感受。

有關明陣的介紹，這裡不會詳盡說明。請看這裡的簡介。

道風山基督教叢林：明陣

1. 本人發覺行得越近中心時，路徑會變得越短和越有壓逼感。若有其他人一起共用明陣時，會很容易行得很近，亦可能會有身體上的接觸。我也不其然地感到非常不自在，很想離開。感到最舒服的，反而是行在最外圍的路徑的時候。我體會到，若中心點代表三位一體上帝的親密團契，聖徒越親近上帝時也必然會越親近其他人。而這個經歷更使我領會到原來我是有點怕 intimacy 的。
2. 行了三份一，我站在樹旁停下來。乘涼之際，觀察一下別人的進程。不知為何，停下來便不想再起步。站在樹蔭下比繼續前往中心點的渴求更大。這有點像我讀神學的心路歷程，不少次跪下來想放棄也不想再上路。但這次的分別，是我不再只是抽象地在腦裡打轉，與那孤單無力感糾纏，而是很具體地用雙眼看見別人的同行 (co-pilgrimage)。有些人跟我一樣停了下來默想、有些人繼續行、有些行得快點、有些行得慢點。觀察了片刻，心裡頓然感到安慰，知道人人都像我一樣，是個 pilgrim。有停滯不前的，也有積極前進的。我頑固的心，被這個場面軟化了。心裡跟自己說一句：「不如繼續上路吧」，雙腳便開始行了。這經歷告訴我，原來一個有血有肉、能夠看得見、在信徒 proximity 內的群體，是何等的重要呢！Spiritual pilgrimage 重要，physical pilgrimage 也一樣重要。
3. 我一直對明陣這玩兒都有保留的地方，可能因為我曾在兩個極其 liberal 的聖公會處見到，再加上它的來源不明，不知會否有些 pagan 的影子。不過，我都抱著一個開放的態度去認識、學習和嘗試，要親身經歷了才敢下結論。我得出來的結論是，明陣的確是一個非常好的靈修默想工具。它所涉及的層面，包括時間 (temporal)、空間 (spatial)、以及全人的身心靈。未行之前也不能估計到行完之後有那麼深刻的感受。若有機會，我也想在我後花園弄個小明陣玩呢！

“You of little faith, why did you doubt?” (Matthew 14:31)