|—||Jordan Bajis, Common Ground: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity for the American Christian, Pg. 230 (via hislivingpoetry)|
There really is no such thing as “Christian marriage” as the term is commonly used. “Christian marriage” is a vain, romantic, unbiblical conception. “Christian marriage” is a fiction. There is no more an institution of “Christian marriage” than there is a “Christian nation” or a “Christian lawyer” or a “Christian athlete.” Even where such terms are invoked as a matter of careless formulation and imprecise speech, they are symptoms of a desire to separate Christians from the common life of the world, whereas Christians are called into radical involvement in the common life of the world. To be sure, there are Christians who are athletes and those who practice law, and there are Christians who are citizens of this and the other nations. But none of these or similar activities or institutions are in any respect essentially Christian, nor can they be changed or reconstituted in order to become Christian. They are, on the contrary, realities of the fallen life of the world. They are inherently secular and worldly; they are subject to the power of death; they are aspects of the present, transient, perishing existence of the world.
It is the same with marriage. Marriage is a fallen estate. That does not mean that it is not an honorable estate, but only that it is a relationship subject to death. It is a relationship established in and appropriate for the present age, but not known or, more precisely, radically transcended and transfigured in both the Creation and the Eschaton - in both the beginning and the end of human history.
|—||William Stringfellow, “Instead of Death.” (via locusimperium)|
The Bible doesn’t exist to please you as its primary audience, or to make you feel understood. It does that sometimes, but that’s not its primary role. Its job is to make you think deeply about the world, and about God, and about your role in it. Its purpose is to form you, and change you- and not just you, but the whole community in which and with which you read it. You can’t expect the Bible to do the work for you. It requires effort, and engagement, and attention. It’s soul work, not beach reading.
Once again, in the attempt to make Jesus relevant to the twenty-first century, another of his followers winds up mischaracterizing first-century Judaism. These seekers after relevance make Jesus’ Jewish context represent everything we don’t like — sexism, elitism, militarism, you name it — and then depict Jesus as the one Jew to stand against his oppressive culture. Jesus can stand very well on his own without having to make Judaism look bad; alas, some of his followers have not yet figured this out.
Justin Welby (via bethmaynard)
Welby said something I like. :)
Stuck visiting a church treating today as “Independence Day Sunday” with a sermon praising the Christian worldview of the Founders that led to limited government
Rev. Dr. Kapya Kaoma, “American Culture Warriors in Africa: A Guide to the Exporters of Homophobia and Sexism.”
(This is also a nice reminder that labels like “evangelical” do not mean the same thing around the world.)
(via Ray Ortland)