God Weeps With Us

Matthew 26:37-50

...“I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and stay awake with me.” And going a little farther, he threw himself on the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want...”

I will never forget a story shared to me by Bill Mallard, one of my theology professors at Emory. He recalled a story of visiting a friend whose husband had died way too early in a tragic situation. As the people were at the house grieving, a friend of the husband asked Mallard in the presence of the wife, “Bill, where is God in all this?” Bill Mallard shared how he looked back with tears in his eyes and he replied, “God is here. And he is weeping with us.”

That’s not always how we think of God. We get that God is with us, but the weeping part has never been a part of our understanding.

N.T. Wright is the former Bishop of Durham and now Professor at the University of St. Andrews. When students would come to him and say, “I won’t be attending chapel, I don’t believe in God,” his reply was, “Which God is it you don’t believe in?” This would cause them a little hesitation, then they would begin to describe something like this, “I don’t believe in a God up in the sky looking down, a God who doesn’t care about humanity and suffering, a God who is removed from the world.” N.T. Wright’s response was, “I don’t believe in that God either!”

On this Palm Sunday and as we begin Holy Week, we are reminded of the last week of Jesus’ life. During this week, we see betrayal, suffering, and death. The death of Jesus at the hands of those in power. This was always God’s plan, but it doesn’t make it any easier for Jesus. You see, we seem to forget that Jesus was a man (yes, he was God in the flesh, but let us never forget that he was a man) – human flesh and blood just like us – and he suffered tremendously.

At this moment in the Garden of Gethsemene, Tom Long points out that "we see the collision of wills and desires at work". This happens to us all the time in our Moments in the Wilderness. The collision is between the divine will and the human will. There are times when we can clearly draw lines of distinction between divine and human wills, but when times are difficult and suffering and grief are present, the lines are not as clear. We’ve all dealt with this – when something has happened to us – a broken relationship, divorce, loss of a loved one, loss of a job, loss of anything of value or importance – we struggle with the why. That is normal and God doesn’t have a problem with that at all. The hard part is when we move beyond the grief work and try to figure out the why. When we struggle to answer the why of the conflict between the human and divine wills, we find confusion and a lack of clarity. This causes many of us to believe God is not with us, God doesn't care, or God somehow caused and we just have to accept it.

In the Garden of Gethsemene, we see Jesus grappling with the same thing. The tension between the divine will and the human will. Trust me; it's not easy to see God and believe and understand when you are in the midst of great suffering. Here we see Jesus struggling in his soul. He is profoundly anguished. Jesus knows his life is in peril. He knows what is coming and he doesn’t face it with stoic resolve. He is emotional, full of sorrow, and distressed. Like the Psalmist in Psalm 42 and 43, his “soul is cast down” and he is “deeply grieved even to the point of death.”

In this moment of trouble, we have been taught that Jesus says, “Alright God, I know what I’ve got to do, give me the strength.” In almost every church Sunday school or sanctuary stained glass is the image of Jesus kneeling in the garden with his back straight, his eyes toward heaven, and a light beaming down. Funny thing is that the passage in Matthew 26 says that Jesus "threw himself down on the ground and prayed." Jesus reveals deep pathos and humanity by asking God to provide a way out, an easier road that his life may be spared.

Jesus can relate to our grief and suffering. Not only because he has felt suffering and stared into it with the same questions we have, but because he also knows what if feels like to go through it alone. I think it is ironic that he asks his friends to stay up with him to pray. They cannot. This passage of waking them up and them falling back asleep communicates something we all know; we go through suffering alone. Jesus experienced this. Thomas Merton writes, "When a man [sic] suffers, he is most alone. Therefore, it is in suffering that we are most tested as persons. How can we face the awful interior questioning? What shall we answer when we come to be examined by pain? Without God, we are no longer persons. We lose our humanity and our dignity." We must suffer with faith, knowing God is with us - knowing God weeps with us.

Let us look deeper into the life of Christ and say, “The God I believe in is not some God living in the sky who doesn’t know me or my struggles.” No, we serve a God who is revealed through Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus who died for us -yes; but Jesus who has also suffered. Jesus is acquainted with our griefs and our sorrows when we are in our moments of wilderness.

Is Adaptive Change What We Need? Reflections on the UM Leadership Summit

In the world of 24/7/365 social media, I realize I am a dinosaur in the amount of time that has passed since last Wednesday's UM Leadership Summit. For the five people out there who are not aware of what the summit was, it was a collection of leaders in the United Methodist Church who led the entire denomination in a live web feed discussion concerning the issues and concerns regarding the Methodist church. The primary focus was the Call to Action Report which calls for confession from us all that we have not been as intentional as we should in making disciples. The study also spent $500,000 to define and identify "vitality" in vital congregations. You may decide if the money was worth it or not, that's not what I want to discuss. I am more intrigued by the primary use of the word "adaptive" which is used significantly and defines the way in which we deal with the challenges. (Call to Action, pg. 22, pp. 25ff)

As a student of systems theory, organizational culture, and learning organizations, I was most fascinated by the leaders' use of the word "adaptive". Bishop Gregory Palmer uses it first when he states in the video (at 37:41 and 37:56) what our "adaptive" challenge is: Redirect attention, energy, and resources to increase the number of vital congregations. The actual report itself has an entire section devoted to "Adaptive Challenges" (pp.25ff)

I understand that anyone can define any word to mean anything they want, but I'm not sure what we need is "adaptive learning". Maybe its what the institutional church and leaders desire, but its not really what true reformation is all about.

Peter Senge, noted systems theorist, learning organization guru and author of The Fifth Discipline, defines a "learning organization" as "an organization that is continually expanding its capacity to create its future. For such organizations it is not enough to merely survive. 'Survival learning', or what is most often termed 'adaptive learning' is important - indeed it is necessary. But for the learning organization, 'adaptive learning' must be joined with 'generative learning' - learning that enhances our capacity to create." (The Fifth Discipline, pg. 14).

Adaptive challenges and adaptive learning are all rooted in the struggle to survive. There is nothing created or recreated in adaptive learning. Adaptive learning is kin to the old adage "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." Adaptive learning is reactionary and is motivated from fear of survival. Adaptive learning also usually comes from the top down as the institution or organization meets survival challenges and works diligently to stay alive.

Generative learning, on the other hand, creates something new - or recreates that which once was vital. Generative learning is closely connected to the scriptural word metanoia. Metanoia is in no way connected to adapting. It has always been connected to conversion and recreation. The great central truth of our faith in Christ is that the dead can live again and that mediocre living can be recreated to something abundant! Abundant life (vitality?) is our fundamental need which is why the word "vital" is central in the Call to Action Report. Unfortunately, as with any large initiative coming from the top, it is extremely difficult to step away from the drive to survive. The drive to survive (adaptive) is not the same and the drive to live creatively and abundantly (generative). This, in my opinion, is why the creators of the report feel the urgency to increase reporting and accountability. While rooted in something that seems generative, it is totally adaptive and rooted in the fear of death. "Maybe, if we watch our numbers more closely and measure everything more carefully, we will become more vital." It's like watching a pot of water waiting for it to boil but never turning on the heat.

In the Call to Action Report, they write "Adaptive change and leadership are not possible without an authentic purpose and vision; powerful, cohesive, guiding coalition; strong standards, and accountability." In truth, adaptive change is entirely possible without purpose and vision. Dying churches engage in adaptive learning every day and it hasn't really changed anything because they are not expanding their capacity to create! The essence of adapting is merely adjusting to the external factors to survive.

Do we merely need to survive? If that is all we are after, then I say the Call to Action Report is just what we need. More reporting, more dashboards, more numbers, and more measurables.

Or do we want to breathe new life into these dry bones? If that is what we are after, it will start in the local church, with local laity, and local pastors who will define vitality rather than live into definitions from Nashville.

So, do we really desire to live and create?