This prayer was not written by St. Francis of Assisi. It was not written by Pope Francis. It first began to circulate during World War I. The author is unknown, but early copies of it were on a card in honor of St. Francis, so it has been known as the Peace Prayer of St. Francis.
This prayer was too long to tweet. (Even too long for a Facebook post.)
It is short enough to memorize.
It is deep enough to live in for a while.
It is Christ-like enough to be prayed.
The Peace Prayer of St. Francis
Lord make me an instrument of your peace
Where there is hatred,
Let me sow love;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is error, truth;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
And where there is sadness, Joy.
O Divine Master grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled
As to console;
To be understood,as to understand;
To be loved, as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive,
It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
And it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.
The acceptability of homosexuality is becoming one of the defining issues of our day. Gay marriage has become a polarizing cultural issue with current trends showing a rise in the support for the legalization of same-sex unions. A recent ABC News/Washington Post survey showed 58% of those polls are in favor of gay and lesbian couples legally being allowed to get married. The cultural issue has stirred the conversation with the Church regarding the ordination of practicing homosexual clergy. In 2009 the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the US broke from the tradition of the Anglican communion by allowing those in same-sex relationships to receive ordination without condition. This action was followed by an op-ed piece in the London Times, written by N.T. (Tom) Wright.
I understand some of the complexity of the issue both in the Church and in the wider community. I understand that LGBT people have found themselves at the other end of the hostility and acrimony of professing and practicing followers of Jesus. For that I am deeply sorry. I am a huge advocate for dialogue between homosexual and heterosexual people, so we can begin to understand each other. I am an equally huge advocate for understanding the teachings of Jesus and the Church regarding sexual ethics. In following Jesus, I hear him call us to “lose ourselves” and “die to ourselves,” that is, die to our agendas, dreams, and desires, so we may find ourselves and live in him. As a follower of Jesus, I embrace the Way of Jesus and desire to understand all moral and ethical issues an interpreted by the light of Christ.
In attempting to understand Jesus and the Jesus Way, I have found N.T. Wright to be helpful and compelling His op-ed piece in response to the Episcopal Church in the US entitled “The Americans Know this will End in Schism” was particularly helpful in the conversation about homosexuality in the confines of the Church. I believe this article has implications for the larger conversation about same-sex unions in the wider culture, but the context of Wright’s comments are about the issue within the Church.
I understand that N.T. Wright will not be popular in what he has to say here, but I think he gets to the heart of the teachings of Jesus and the Church on this issue.
Here is what Wright had to say:
In the slow-moving train crash of international Anglicanism, a decision taken in California has finally brought a large coach off the rails altogether. The House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (TEC) in the United States has voted decisively to allow in principle the appointment, to all orders of ministry, of persons in active same-sex relationships. This marks a clear break with the rest of the Anglican Communion.
Both the bishops and deputies (lay and clergy) of TEC knew exactly what they were doing. They were telling the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other “instruments of communion” that they were ignoring their plea for a moratorium on consecrating practising homosexuals as bishops. They were rejecting the two things the Archbishop of Canterbury has named as the pathway to the future — the Windsor Report (2004) and the proposed Covenant (whose aim is to provide a modus operandi for the Anglican Communion). They were formalising the schism they initiated six years ago when they consecrated as bishop a divorced man in an active same-sex relationship, against the Primates’ unanimous statement that this would “tear the fabric of the Communion at its deepest level”. In Windsor’s language, they have chosen to “walk apart”.
Granted, the TEC resolution indicates a strong willingness to remain within the Anglican Communion. But saying “we want to stay in, but we insist on rewriting the rules” is cynical double-think. We should not be fooled.
Of course, matters didn’t begin with the consecration of Gene Robinson. The floodgates opened several years before, particularly in 1996 when a church court acquitted a bishop who had ordained active homosexuals. Many in TEC have long embraced a theology in which chastity, as universally understood by the wider Christian tradition, has been optional.
That wider tradition always was counter-cultural as well as counter-intuitive. Our supposedly selfish genes crave a variety of sexual possibilities. But Jewish, Christian and Muslim teachers have always insisted that lifelong man-plus-woman marriage is the proper context for sexual intercourse. This is not (as is frequently suggested) an arbitrary rule, dualistic in overtone and killjoy in intention. It is a deep structural reflection of the belief in a creator God who has entered into covenant both with his creation and with his people (who carry forward his purposes for that creation).
Paganism ancient and modern has always found this ethic, and this belief, ridiculous and incredible. But the biblical witness is scarcely confined, as the shrill leader in yesterday’s Times suggests, to a few verses in St Paul. Jesus’s own stern denunciation of sexual immorality would certainly have carried, to his hearers, a clear implied rejection of all sexual behaviour outside heterosexual monogamy. This isn’t a matter of “private response to Scripture” but of the uniform teaching of the whole Bible, of Jesus himself, and of the entire Christian tradition.
The appeal to justice as a way of cutting the ethical knot in favour of including active homosexuals in Christian ministry simply begs the question. Nobody has a right to be ordained: it is always a gift of sheer and unmerited grace. The appeal also seriously misrepresents the notion of justice itself, not just in the Christian tradition of Augustine, Aquinas and others, but in the wider philosophical discussion from Aristotle to John Rawls. Justice never means “treating everybody the same way”, but “treating people appropriately”, which involves making distinctions between different people and situations. Justice has never meant “the right to give active expression to any and every sexual desire”.
Such a novel usage would also raise the further question of identity. It is a very recent innovation to consider sexual preferences as a marker of “identity” parallel to, say, being male or female, English or African, rich or poor. Within the “gay community” much postmodern reflection has turned away from “identity” as a modernist fiction. We simply “construct” ourselves from day to day.
We must insist, too, on the distinction between inclination and desire on the one hand and activity on the other — a distinction regularly obscured by references to “homosexual clergy” and so on. We all have all kinds of deep-rooted inclinations and desires. The question is, what shall we do with them? One of the great Prayer Book collects asks God that we may “love the thing which thou commandest, and desire that which thou dost promise”. That is always tough, for all of us. Much easier to ask God to command what we already love, and promise what we already desire. But much less like the challenge of the Gospel.
The question then presses: who, in the US, is now in communion with the great majority of the Anglican world? It would be too hasty to answer, the newly formed “province” of the “Anglican Church in North America”. One can sympathise with some of the motivations of these breakaway Episcopalians. But we should not forget the Episcopalian bishops, who, doggedly loyal to their own Church, and to the expressed mind of the wider Communion, voted against the current resolution. Nor should we forget the many parishes and worshippers who take the same stance. There are many American Episcopalians, inside and outside the present TEC, who are eager to sign the proposed Covenant. That aspiration must be honoured.
Contrary to some who have recently adopted the phrase, there is already a “fellowship of confessing Anglicans”. It is called the Anglican Communion. The Episcopal Church is now distancing itself from that fellowship. Ways must be found for all in America who want to be loyal to it, and to scripture, tradition and Jesus, to have that loyalty recognised and affirmed at the highest level.
When searching for the “best trails” in Missouri, I came across a number of blogs and reviews describing the Big Piney Trail, including a write-up inBackpacker Magazine. I was looking for a loop to hike over two days, with one night of back country camping. I wanted to hike a trail with different looks and plenty of spots to explore. The Big Piney Trail (BPT) in the Paddy Creek Wilderness outside of Roby, Missouri did not disappoint. I recently hiked the trail with my friend Ben in preparation for taking some guys from my church to hike the BPT in May. I wanted to have the experience of hiking the trail before leading a small group of others on this hike. And I am glad I did. While the trail is easily recognizable, there are side trails and horse trails that made us stop and check the map and compass. Speaking of maps, do not waste your time on any of the maps on the Internet. Get the Mark Twain National Forest map, a black and white map that has the most details of the trail and terrain. We picked up a copy at the trailhead, but it may be better to call the Forest Service office and order one ahead a time just in case they are out at the trailhead.
Day One: Friday, March 15, 2013
We drove to the Roby Lake parking lot just North of Roby, Missouri. We took Hwy 32 from Lebanon to Roby and then turned North on Hwy 17. We went about a half a mile and then turned right (East) on Lake Dr. (Forestry Road 274). Once we parked facing Roby Lake, we crossed the road and walked up the road a bit and went through a gate into a pasture. We started hiking at about 11:40 AM.
We continued for about a half a mile until we arrived at a second gate, where we entered the Big Paddy Wilderness. From here it was a short hike to the actual trailhead where we picked up a map and signed the register.
From where we signed the register we hiked another half mile or so to the first “Y” in the trail. There was a sign at the intersection pointing to the North Loop to the left and the South Loop to the right. I found these titles (“North Loop” & “South Loop”) to be confusing and counter-intuitive. When you look at the map you will see why they are given those titles. If it were me, I would refer to these as the South Trail and the North Trail (which are connected, making both trails a loop. There are two different loop options — a small loop (approximately 8-9 miles) and a large loop (17-18 miles). We choose the large loop and we chose to do it counter clockwise. See the map below. (We started in the lower left-hand corner.)
We hiked along the South Loop (South “Trail”) pass hardwoods, pines, and an occasional pond. Parts are the trail were surrounded by pine trees, reminding me of the Pine Mountain Trail in South Georgia. We stopped at the first scenic overlook which looked towards the South. This was a good spot to take a break and take some pictures. It was easy to see down into the valley below, but it was not the best view of the day.
We continued on the trail which has the rocks and roots you would expect on a trail through the Ozarks. The BPT is shared by hikers and horses and in places the trail was muddy and torn up by horses, but because we were hiking mid-March the ground had just begun to thaw and was still in good condition for the most part. We could not have asked for better weather. It reached 78 degrees and was sunny. Ben and I both hiked in shorts and short sleeves. We crossed the Little Paddy Creek at some point on the South Loop before getting to the place where the Little Paddy and the Big Paddy meet.
It took a little navigating to figure out exactly where we were supposed to cross. We saw a “Y” in the trail and choose to go to the left and cross the Little Paddy Creek. Once we crossed, we could see where we thought the trail picked up, but this was NOT the BPT but the Paddy Creek Trail, a short loop for people staying at the Paddy Creek Campground. We went back across the Little Paddy and backtracked to where we turned left at the “Y” in the trail. I laid two sticks in the shape of an “X” on the left trail and built a rock cairn near the V-shaped tree marking the correct way to go.
The trail that veered off to the right was the correct way to go. A sign at this intersection would have been helpful, but signage and blazes where at a minimum on this trail. If you attempt this hike, I would recommend familiarizing yourself with the map, particularly the NE corner of the trail where you cross the Big Paddy Creek.
I was looking forward to crossing the Big Paddy so I could try out my DIY river shoes. (I did try them out on the Little Paddy Creek crossing (twice!) when we went down the wrong trail.) I made homemade sandals (which I later named “river shoes”) before the trip because I have become fascinated with DIY gear I can make cheap at home. I created these river shoes after learning about “invisible shoes.” I took his idea and fashioned my own shoes out of paracord and $1 flip-flops from Wal-Mart.
After we crossed the creek, we followed the trail with a fairly tall bluff to our left. By looking at the map we could see we were walking east to get around to the backside of the bluff to hike up it. The hike up was the most strenuous part of the hike, but it wasn’t too bad. We made it to the top of the ridge and we checked to see if we could get a cell/data signal on our phones. We lucked out! This was the only spot on the trail where we were able to obtain a signal. With At&T I had two bars.
We also thought this high point was the scenic overlook mentioned on the map, but we were wrong. We hiked on maybe a quarter mile and off to the left I could see a rock jutting out from the bluff. We had to descend down a side trail to get to the rock outcropping, but it was worth it. This was the scenic overlook marked on the map, overlooking the Big Paddy Creek. This was the best view of the hike.
We wanted to spend more time here, but the sun was setting and we had another half mile or so to get to camp. We could have caught a really good sunset over the western bluff, but it had clouded up, partially covering the setting sun. We hiked on to the “Big Piney Trail Camp” just as it was getting dark. This campground marked on the map was right next to a road and I really wasn’t interested in setting up camp on a Friday night right next to a country road.
So we turned on our headlamps and did a little night hiking. We hiked for another half mile or so and found the closest thing to a flat spot and made camp. It was close to 9 PM and we had hiked about 9.5 miles. I was excited to use my new Coleman Solo Max cookpot and alcohol stove.
I boiled water and made instant mash potatoes. I sliced up some summer sausage to add to it and dinner was served. The mash potatoes package said it served four, but on that night it served one. We let the fire die down and we got to bed by 11:30 PM. By 11:35 I was fast asleep.
Day Two: Saturday, March 16, 2013
I woke up around 7 AM. It was a good night sleep. We started stirring by 7:30. It was a cool, but not cold morning, somewhere in the upper 40s. I started packing up and I snapped this shot of camp.
We made the mistake of not collecting enough water while we were at Big Paddy Creek. We were unsure how long it would be until we came across a stream, so we decided to down a couple granola bars and wait for the first stream to pump water and have our oatmeal and coffee. We left camp about 8:30 AM.
We hiked about a mile or so when we came across a fairly large campground. Just on the other side of that campground was a stream where we gathered water and had (second) breakfast. We loaded up on water (more than 2 liters each) and headed down the trail after spending about an hour at the stream.
As we started down the trail, I recorded this video, recapping day one.
Here is a gear comment for all you gear geeks. (If you could care less about camping gear then skip to the next paragraph.) I have been working the last 6 months or so to lighten my pack weight. I was so happy to get my base weight (minus food and water) down to 19 lbs. for this two-day trip. I received a lightweight sleeping bag for Christmas (Thanks Kit!), and gave up the Jetboil for an alcohol stove. I also went through and eliminated unneeded gear and swapped out heavier gear for lighter gear. For example I traded out a Nalgene bottle for a Platypus bottle. I also gave up my hydration bladder for two .5 liter bottles I carried on my shoulder straps. I got the idea from Stick on his blog here: http://sticksblog.com/2013/01/20/diy-shoulder-strap-water-bottle-holders. Stick has a lot of gear reviews and a lot of clever DIY gear tips. He used shock cord and mitten hooks to secure his bottles to his shoulder straps, but I saved even more money by using four of my wife’s ponytail holders. Ok, enough gear talk…back to day two…
We headed on down the trail energized by breakfast. It was cloudy and mild. Perfect hiking weather. We were all set to make it back to the trailhead with plenty of time, but we missed some signs pointing us to stay left on the trail and we went right. We found ourselves on a horse trail thinking we were still on the BPT. We ended up on somebody’s property on Slabtown Road. Apparently the owner of the property offered trail rides and owned a campground. We slowly backtracked trying to figure out where we got off the trail. We chose not to start bushwhacking, opting instead for the backtrack-until-you-know-where-you-are rule of hiking. When we got back on the trail we saw the sign we missed.
This was one of the few intersections on the trail with signage and we missed it. We ended up hiking 1.5 miles off trail (3 miles round trip) and wasting around three hours. We did come up on four horseman (not those ”four horseman”) on the side trail. Besides one rabbit, the horses were the only animals we saw on our trip.
With time running out on us, we double-timed-it down the trail to get back to the parking lot. At this point it was more about the miles than the smiles. We did stop near some rock formations for a quick refueling break and then we stopped at the waterfalls at the end of the loop.
We really could have spent more time here, but it was nearing 4 PM and we had a 4.5-hour drive home. So we completed the loop, returning to the trailhead. We darted across the pasture and back to the parking lot. Overall it was a great hike. I am returning to the trail the first weekend in May and I am glad I hiked it first before leading a group of others. If you are looking for a two-day adventure in the Ozarks, I highly recommend this trail. It is challenging, but if you are in moderate physical condition, you will find it not too difficult. It makes for a perfect two-day hike, but with plenty of places to camp, you could make it a three-day hike.
Recently I was listening to a representative from an evangelical ministry make a broad appeal to pastors and church leaders to sign up for their next event to introduce non-Christians to Christ. I was familiar with their overall strategy, and I was familiar with the specific event he was describing, but something caught my attention in listening to his appeal. He described how their ministry had seen numerous decisions for Christ over the years. (I did not doubt his statistics; this was a well-known ministry that had been around for a long time.) The report of the “success” of their evangelistic endeavors was followed by a bleak picture of American life – increased destructive behavior (crime, violence, abortion, drugs etc.), increased secularism, increased hopelessness, decreased church attendance, and the increase of young adults leaving the church. This picture was then followed by his announcement of another nation-wide event to do something to bring real hope, life, and salvation. The strategy was somewhat different, but the goal was the same: get people to make a decision for Christ. While listening, I had this thought: If your ministry has seen so many decisions for Christ made across the nation and around the world, then why is there such a decrease in church attendance? I had already seen the material to be used in this ministry event; it (like all their other events) culminated with inviting people to make a decision for Christ. I tried not to become cynical, but I continued to think, why would I invest time and resources in an event that does not seem to have lasting fruitfulness? After all, our goal is not simply to get people to make a decision for Jesus; our goal is to make disciples of Jesus.
The seeds of doubt regarding the effectiveness of “making decisions for Christ” go back to reading Scot McKnight’s book King Jesus Gospel where he argues we preach a weak gospel when the emphasis is the plan of salvation (which includes making a decision). This most recent experience only solidifies the conclusion I came to some time ago: a push to make decisions for Christ is counterproductive to making disciples of Christ.
The gospel preached in Acts was neither an invitation to make a decision for Christ nor an appeal to invite Jesus in your heart to be your personal Lord and Savior. The gospel preached by the Apostles in Acts was the proclamation that Israel’s long-awaited Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, had arrived and we killed him. While Jesus did enter into death, God raised him from the dead and exalted him to a place of authority. And now “let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). The proper response to the gospel is “repent and be baptized…and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). There is not talk in the sermons preached in the book of Acts about making a decision or asking Jesus into your heart or life.
Do not misunderstand my point: repenting, being baptized, and receiving the Holy Spirit certainly do require making a conscious decision. God will not force us into repentance. He will not twist our arm or beat us into submission. We must of our own volition choose to repent, be baptized and receive the Spirit, but these are not necessarily one-time events.
We repent and we continue to live a life of repentance.
We are baptized and we continue to live out of our baptismal identity as buried and risen with Jesus.
We receive the Holy Spirit and we continue to allow our lives to be immersed in the life of the Spirit.
Living out our response to the gospel is a much better picture of discipleship than making a decision for Christ. So how does should this critique shape evangelical methodology?
We must abandon the invitation to make a decision and we must resume the invitation to come and follow Jesus. This approach sounds much more like an invite to a party than a high-pressure sales pitch to purchase a new car. This approach is much more about belonging to a community than making a personal and individual choice. This approach may not appeal to the masses, but we will make disciples from the few who see the power, position, and authority of Jesus.
I agree that with this approach – inviting people to follow Jesus and be his disciple –we will not see the outward, numeric success seen by other groups going out getting people to make decisions, but I have repented of measuring success by numbers. I have repented of desiring success at all. I have turned away from ambition & success and turned towards faithfulness & fruitfulness. I want to make disciples of Jesus. I want to make more disciples of Jesus. I want to see people following Jesus and allowing the Holy Spirit to conform them into the image of Jesus, but this is a slow, arduous process.
So Instead of making a decisions for Christ in order to get saved, let’s follow Jesus and find ourselves being saved.
