action as sacrament

I am currently at the Church Resource Ministries (US) conference and am doing a series of talks on Jesus and Hebraic Spirituality. But as we are exploring the mDNA of discipleship at the moment, I thought it worth commenting on the sacramental validity of holy actionand radical goodness. As many would be aware, I am deeply influenced by Judaism, and in light of the last post, particularly Buber and Heschel. Here are some quotes by them on holy action (called mitzvah in Judaism)

To Judaism, the true meaning of life is revealed in the deed. Here, even more distinctly and profoundly than in early Christianity; what matters is not what is being done, but the fact that every act is filled with sanctity–that is, with God-oriented intent–is a road to the heart of the world. There is nothing that is evil in itself, every passion can become a virtue, every inclination a ‘vehicle of God’. It is not the matter of the act that is decisive, but its sanctification. Every act is halowed if it is directed towards salvation. The soul of the doer alone determines the the character of the deed. With this, the deed does in truth become the life centre of religiosity. — M.Buber, On Judaism, 48

Action is truth. The deed is the elucidation of existence, expressing thirst for God with body and soul. The Jewish mitzvah is a prayer in the form of a deed. The mitzvoth are the Jewish sacraments, sacraments that may be performed in common acts of kindness. — Abraham Heschel, Moral Grandeur, 278

I have no doubt that this has massive implications for both a missional perspective as well as for the quality of our discipleship. It should also throw a theological cat among the religious pigeons. So, go for it!

August 14, 2007 | Filed Under discipleship, following jesus |

Comments

31 Responses to “action as sacrament”

Drummer Chris on August 14th, 2007 3:47 am

That sentiment comes through in the Book of James, who was thouroughly “Jewish” in his leadership of the Jerusalem Church. When he said, “Faith without works is dead”, it’s questionable whether or not he felt deeds affected salvation, but the importance of good deeds in being a “vehicle of God”, done for His glorification and leading others to Him comes through as obvious. It could also be said, “Personal salvation, with out living out every minute for Him, is a dead end.”
Richard Clarke on August 14th, 2007 5:26 am

I think it is at least reasonable to draw the conclusion that this focus on the sanctification of the act, in light of Jewish thought, is the defining point of Matthew 7:23 . I believe that it is far easier to understand the New Testament of it’s audience, the Jews. Almost without exception, the analogies and stories speak to a culture and belief system that is largely lost from our western perspective since we have not taken the time (not all of us, but many) to understand where the stories come from. When I have done so, the meaning of the parables and comments that seem cloudy at best in view of our current culture take on a life and meaning that speaks loudly to the point that Jesus is trying to make. I appreciate you Alan, illuminating some of these key points.

We are often so busy ‘doing things for Jesus’ that seem right to us. May this be a reminder that God, through His Holy Spirit, has things for us to do, and they are not always what we think they may be. I believe that it is our responsibility to spend enough time with God, not being busy about things, to understand and grasp those things which God want us (individual us) to do, not just go in a hurry to do ’something for God.’ Great reminder Alan!
Wes Roberts on August 14th, 2007 8:14 am

…will be up in the “neighborhood” Estes tomorrow, and Mr. Halter has invited me to stop by. Will be good to see you and hear, in person, needed and radical thoughts.
pbandj on August 14th, 2007 1:17 pm

it makes a huge difference when we realize this as we are reading Scripture. because when Paul says “faith”, it by necessity means “faithful” as well. because faith is a noun and a verb. it requires action. thus, we see James say, “faith without works is dead” because he realizes that there is no faith if there is no action.

peter
Celtic Son on August 14th, 2007 7:40 pm

Hullo-o-o…

I reckon you’re on the money with the concept of action as sacrament Alan, it is undoubtedly a vital foundation of authentic missional development. I don’t know about your theological cat among religious pigeons, I think your cat is a bit small and we can push the envelope a wee bit further…

In orthodoxy a “sacrament” is described as an “outward sign of an inward grace.” The added dimension of Hebraic thought, would seem to me to indicate that, rather than a dualistic dichotomy - where the outward sign is a product of inward grace - we have a co-dependent synergy; the outward sign and the inward grace being concomitant parts of a holistic system.

Therefore, the lack of an outward sign would indicate the non-existence of an inward grace… despite any emotive claims to recipient status! The development of “Drummer Chris’s” thoughts on James’ thinking would be that, while “it’s questionable whether or not he felt deeds affected salvation,” it would be fair to say that, in James’ Hebraic worldview, no deeds at all would reveal no salvation!

In that same framework I’d suggest that “church” in God’s sacramental system, is intended to be an outward sign of an inward missional grace… no authentic church exists without an impulse to mission and authentic mission of necessity produces “church.” No mission, no church - no church, no mission!

That’s what I’d call “a theological cat among the religious pigeons”

Slainte

A Celtic Son
Richard Clarke on August 14th, 2007 11:32 pm

Church = Mission, Mission = Church. Ok, then would you go so far as to say that since I am the church, not the building or the group, if I do not have a mission, am not pursuing mission, am not pursuing God, that I am not the church?

I am serious with this question. It is one I am currently pursuing. I agree with the concept that church does equal mission. My issue is what you say to people who are NOT pursuing a direction towards mission…and the communities that do not warn them of the danger.

I have recently heard, and I think it was either here in comments or in something I am reading that Alan wrote, that entry into the early church was not easy. The cost was high both in terms of commitment and possible death or persecution. I keep thinking that if we made the entry more difficult, then our communities might be more realistic, because they would be made up of a higher percentage of individuals who have actually decided to follow Jesus.
John Page on August 15th, 2007 7:42 am

If Ephesians 2 .10 is correct then are we not supposed to be about doing what God has for us? And rather than separating doing/being as if they are two separate things, aren’t they one in the same thing of living out who/what God is in us and through us?
So, Richard, (and I may be misunderstanding you so work with me on this one) I see “being” with God as just another aspect of “doing” the Christian life. So, while we can get busy with the mundane, isn’t that where we can most see God, in the little details of life? Is not God going to be present and active in every arena of life, therefore “being busy” may be reframed to say “I’m doing the the Christian life everywhere I am, in everything I do.” What aspect of our lives would we Not be doing/being Christian, and thus missional? I’m kinda curious on this one.
alan hirsch on August 15th, 2007 8:10 am

And then there are all the parables of judgement. Of course we would rather leave those to those to those naughty pharisees, as if they never apply to us. But Richard, the best I can say for a church that it not doing what a church is made to do, is that it is almost a church…a protochurch.
alan hirsch on August 15th, 2007 8:12 am

CS, I like! Another definition of a sacrament of course is that it is a means of grace. In other words it is a place where the actor/person can experience God and his grace. A good deed is profoundly such a place! The rabbis teach that no one is ever lonely when they do a good deed, because they meet with God in the doing of the deed. Not only do others experience grace through goodness…we do as well!
Celtic Son on August 15th, 2007 9:05 am

Hullo-o-o,

Richard asked “what you say to people who are NOT pursuing a direction towards mission?”

Why is it that continually we return to the idea that we have to “say” something to others who have not yet discovered what has been revealed to us? As a movement towards mission let’s get on with mission first and let God reveal His heart to others - as He already has to us - and let us support that Word of God through what we do. I have discovered that, rather than saying things TO others, it’s generally more productive to invite them alongside us, in what we are already doing in mission - which we can’t do if we’re simply sitting around another theological coffee table discussing the accuracy of our concepts. Frankly there’s way too many people saying way too much in critique of others… “Christians” applying all their energy to straining gnats, rather than applying their energies to authentic mission.

So step one would be allow your actions to speak loudly first… and that takes time, it’s not just instant results that give weight to our arguments, people are looking for fruit that remains, before they trust us to speak with integrity. That does not mean that there is not a time to speak, but when you are biting off missional projects in your community you realise that it is difficult to speak with your mouth full and you have to swallow some food first. What I have found in our community is that after a period - for us it’s now over seven years - people in the community are beginning to ask who we are and ask why we do so much in our community. It is still very small beginnings, but although the steps are little ones,they are significant. When a member of our local community asks me a question, they are giving me permission to speak to them about mission, rather than me invading their space to aggressively proselytise - which is basically about me fulfilling my “duty” to God, rather than about the other person, and is rarely effective anyway

The foundational issue is that if we were actually the church in mission we could simply say to others… “come follow me… let’s GO and walk into what God has already prepared for us to walk into” and I think I’ve heard those statements somewhere before. And I’d add Alan’s point that “no one is ever lonely when they do a good deed, because they meet with God in the doing of the deed.” It is the paradox of being Abraham’s offspring by faith; we are blessed to be a blessing, and in the process of being a blessing we are blessed.

Historically we have messed with the church and made it something it was never meant to be, we have promoted organisational aspects at the expense of the organic - we do need to be organised, but like the stakes and wires that support vines in the vineyard, the organisational is meant to be in service to the organic… not crushing the life out of it! As we return to an understanding that we are created in the image of God, to partnership in God’s elemental mission, to the priesthood of all believers, to understand that every person has a gift and a role, that we belong to one another, that we are a community, that we are God’s adopted children, that we have purpose, that God has prepared works for us, that God loves every human being… etc basically as our ecclessiology is informed by authentic theology, by authentic relationship with God and engagement with the things that impact the heart of God, rather than just remiaining bound by our prior historical ecclessiology… then we might approach those bound up in a lifeless “church” with love and compassion, to see them released into mission where we can all be blessed and be a blessing, being blessed even as we are blessing…

In the meantime I’d best get off my arse and practice what I preach

Slainte

A Celtic Son
Peggy Brown on August 15th, 2007 12:00 pm

Well, CS, it did preach well…and I am grateful to know that it is well practiced, too

Richard, I feel your frustration as you consider the implications of what could be but are stuck in your situation as it is…and into that frustration I speak the words I was given with the vision for CovenantClusters: don’t wait; be patient. Don’t wait to understand and engage here in ardent discussion and processing of your thoughts and concerns. Be patient for God to reveal his will in his way and his time. Do everything you can to be ready–and be ready to respond when he says: GO!

Be blessed.
Janet on August 15th, 2007 5:46 pm

“Since I am the church, not the building or the group, if I do not have a mission, am not pursuing mission, am not pursuing God, that I am not the church?”

Richard… you are not the church. You are part of the body of Christ, you are PART of the church universal…

I’ve been mulling over the extent to which we read the New Testament in English and in our heads whenever we see “you” we think: Me, I, an individual, what should I as an individual do in mission? In worship? In life?

But when Paul writes “You are the body of Christ” it’s plural. Most New Testament “yous” are plural.

It may well be that an individual person is part of the mission of the church without being a frontline evangelist… but they may be doing precisely what God has called them to do by (say) teaching the bible to new believers, or cooking meals for a casserole bank, or caring for preschool children while someone else is doing more overtly “missional” stuff with young mothers… etc. etc.

I’m not saying individual calling isn’t a reality… I just think as Westerners still profoundly influenced by Enlightenment thought, (and an individualist consumerist culture), who read English translations of the bible, we often greatly overemphasise individual action and thought, and underplay the church universal.

I’m sure you believe that… I’m probably just reacting to your choice of phrase.

I certainly agree that if a congregation (or a cell group) that has no mission, it’s time for the prophets to say some strong words of judgment!
len hjalmarson on August 16th, 2007 5:22 am

I was reading in Roger Stronstad this morning. Working through Luke’s teaching on the Spirit he carefully builds the argument that the Spirit is not primarily given for salvation but to empower mission. We, self-focused, individualistic, consumptive culture, have made it all about getting through the gate.
Richard Clarke on August 17th, 2007 2:52 am

Interesting conversation here, which if I understand some of Alan’s comments…is the point.

Howard Hendricks use the line from the Old Testament, Iron sharpens Iron. I believe that the process we are involved in here is a part of that growing in each of us, at least I know it is in me.

CS, I agree with you that it is not our job to confront those that are not living up to the mission. In my own feeble way of using the written language, what I was trying to say is that it is our job as leaders to set expectations for what the disciples life should be like, and to live that life. That is what I should have said…all too often we don’t set high enough expectations with others and then they think they are doing fine, and then I do not have anything to say, especially if I am not living the life myself.

Janet, I agree with you as well, as far as you have gone with this. I know, I know, there is a but there. Yes, there is a mission that is inclusive. Yes, the ‘you’s’ are plural. That is the nature of writing letters to a group rather than an individual. However, in reading these letters, it seems fairly clear that the responsibility and expectations fall on the group…and each individual within the group, individually as well to carry out the thoughts and process. The letters were not just read to the leaders and then interpreted to the congregation, they were read out loud to everyone, and each was expected to take from them what the Spirit quickened.

My issue is not that we do not have the over-arching covering and focus as the body of Christ, but that many of our body parts, thinking that they are not important (maybe an armpit like me), tend to not perform their function within the body, which is between them and God, and me and God. That role is different within each of us, as God has created us as individuals, and may not look the same as others roles and function within the overall mission of gathering and creating disciples.

I am definitely not suggesting that each of us should go off in a different direction. What I am suggesting is that we as leaders expect more sameness and obedience out of our followers/partners than maybe we should, considering that the same Spirit that is within us, is within them. Dealing with their gifts and talents, which will be different than how he deals with us individually.

There must be balance. We all to often tend to swing on an emphasis pendulum that goes back and forth from individualism to group and back again.

I heard a comment that rang true to me recently. There is no consistent co-relationship between group (church) activities and spiritual growth. The relationship was found between one’s one-on-one experience growing closer to Jesus and God through the Spirit. This came from a study of 13000 believers across quite a few churches and has caused the comissioning church to go back to the drawing board and take another look at many of the community activities they have previously pursued. And, then Willow Creek announced to the people that typically listen to them that they might have been wrong in quite a few of the thins they were recommending and are revisiting the model. Pretty brave to announce to other leaders that you have had the wrong emphasis in my opinion.

If we as a church (I am talking principally about mine here) spend our time doing good works and service and never get to the time necessary to build our relationship to Christ, we do not become more mature in Christ, thus becoming more like Christ. If this is the case, then the action is us doing things for God…and not with God. And God has clearly stated that this is not what He intended. And seems to be the point of Alan’s posting.

The thing I always think about is this. The benefit God got from the death and resurrection of Christ for us, was renewed relationship, individually and as a people. In order to draw each of us closer to Him, to be trained and empowered for our part in the mission (group with individual roles) that He put in front of us.

I am excited for each of us as we find our place in the body, and grow our relationship to Him in order to more closely know His mind for us.
Richard Clarke on August 17th, 2007 2:52 am

Gag, long-winded again…
len hjalmarson on August 17th, 2007 5:28 am

“There is no consistent co-relationship between group (church) activities and spiritual growth.”

Verrry interesting.. of course that could be interpreted to mean that there is no relationship between community and growth, which would go against my experience and the experience of others. But the nature of that community, relative to the programmatic attempts at community that come out of organized religion, would be the question…
Patrick on August 17th, 2007 6:12 am

“of course that could be interpreted to mean that there is no relationship between community and growth”

Len, I don’t think that is what is meant. Rather the simulated forms of community that churches do in terms of programs, events, and formalized gatherings. A person could show up for every event and have no experience of spiritual maturing. Or they might. Or they might not show up to any formal event and have spiritual maturing.

Just having programs makes no difference. Which is a big realization for many churches who spend a huge amount of money to put on programs and events and give people a fine product to attend.

Community, real community in which there is no place for passive participation nor mere reception of the religious products served, is essential for maturity.
Peggy Brown on August 17th, 2007 8:52 am

Len and Patrick,

My experience leading a large (50-75 groups) small group ministry suggests that the “community” that is “simulated” has shown itself to be unable to spontaneously reproduce itself.

These types of small group ministries are full of immature Christians…with just enough mature ones to make it look like it is growing. But they are not replicating…they are not apprenticing…they are not burdened for the mission.

This would be differentiated from what Alan calls “communitas” where the demands of liminal life send us groping for ways to adapt and grow more like Christ–and our need for each other is life and death, not just convenient or uplifting.

It is in the “allelon” nature of hesed–the faithfulness to one another–that we turn from having a small group ministry to going out missionally in small groups–where each is known and knows; is accountable and accepted; is fed and feeds; is growing and spurring growth; is serving with the Spirit’s gifts and being served by the Spirit’s gifts in others…this is not your mother’s (father’s or brother’s or sister’s) small group!

Just as no young child can flourish with just food and water and shelter–they die without physical human tough–so God’s children cannot flourish without recognizing that they are part of the Body of Christ…and finding ways to dynamically connect. No amount of personal study and intimate communion with God/Holy Sprit/Jesus will get you there without engaging with the Body.

(This, of course, recognizes that there are always times and places of “desert” isolation and withdrawal to regroup and reconnect, as well as times of persecution-induced isolation. Those are the exception in this conversation.)
Matt Stone on August 17th, 2007 10:47 pm

Alan, I would be interested in hearing more about how Judaism has impacted your walk personally some time.
Richard Clarke on August 18th, 2007 1:04 am

What Patrick and Peggy said…
alan hirsch on August 18th, 2007 3:17 am

Matt, will do. In short, for me it grounded the faith in the world in which we live. Honed the senses, and gave me a redemptive framework in which to interpret everyday experiences.
Erik on August 19th, 2007 4:26 am

Forgive the intrusion please but I am left with what might seem a simplistic question. I agree with many of the points brought up and am very much in line with the idea that incarnality drives us to a life filled with sacramental action (understood through a practice of discipleship, mission, and culminated through a subjective relationship with Jesus).

However, in my past accounts of interaction with the (C)hurch, sacrament/s takes on a seemingly much different point of view traditionally (Attractional as it is I know). Particularly within the NA ‘Churches of Christ’. Sacrament is institutionalized in religious practice (i.e. baptism, communion, ect.)

Not dismissing the obvious value in scriptural integrity (very well pointed out through James, Ephesians, Matthew, ect.), “What do we do with the ‘traditional’ values to sacrament?
Alan Hirsch on August 19th, 2007 5:15 am

You know Eric, I am also associated with Restorationist circles, but this can apply beyond them to most denoms. I am actually not so sure about the way we have previously configured the idea of sacraments. One of my problems with it is by saying this or that church-based ritual is a sacrament, do we not fall into the danger of desacramentalizing all of life? And why limit it to communion and baptism? Why not include foot washing? Or the community itself? I think our idea of sacraments is loaded with false dualisms!
Patrick on August 19th, 2007 7:24 am

The study of the sacraments is one of my first steps back towards emerging/missional thought. After encountering and participating in early forms, and those early forms exhibiting much the same issues of leadership and power that I saw elsewhere, I stepped away. But, in doing my own study and writing on this topic I soon saw how the emerging/missional communities might be the only places to really practice the idea of the sacraments of baptism and definitely communion that we see in the earliest communities up to about 300AD or so. The sacraments, like worship, like most things, became tools to consolidate power and so lost their original and most potent function.

Indeed, the sacraments were key expressions of liminality and marked participation by catechumens. I see them as being like seashores or like dusk and dawn. Not of being moments of divine separation but as moments of connection, in which we acknowledge the sacred within our lives. Marking our death and rebirth. Marking, regularly, our community through the shared meal that means community and more, constantly being reminded that there is not just the secular.

However, these became forms of grace that were themselves somehow sacred moments and in that they lost their original purpose.

It is the moment of salvation, the fulfilled Passover meal. It is the love feast, the agape, which constantly reminds us of our participation in this world and with Christ.

The Quakers responded to wrong ideas about sacraments by tossing them out. I think that they serve a wonderful purpose, however, but need to be re-infused with their Jewish meaning and taken out from the responsibility of supposed professional grace-givers.
alan hirsch on August 19th, 2007 12:31 pm

Good comments and observation Patrick. Once again, either Plato’s idealism or as in the case of St. Thomas, Aristotilian substantialism, dominated our inherited view of the sacraments. Either way, our ideas of sacraments veer away from biblical views on the topic.
Patrick Oden on August 20th, 2007 2:13 am

Alan, spot on about Plato and the others. I know you think Constantine was the inner foe of the church but I’ve increasingly found Augustine more dangerous. Constantine, I think, opened up the context which led to dangerous power plays. Augustine, however, because he was frankly so brilliant and rhetorically gifted swamped the historical church with his often distorted views on the mission of God. Inner angst became the driving force of theology. Good works drifted into the background. The Good News became about guilt relief, rather than present good news for life.

Finding the threads of the early church which, then, varied with Augustine is a wonderfully encouraging exercise. I guess that’s why I see Tertullian’s chapter 39 of his apology so interesting as a model.

And since I’m linking, here’s the paper I wrote about 5 years ago on Communion that I think might better fit into the Jewish conception.
Erik on August 22nd, 2007 6:49 am

I am in complete agreement Alan with the dualistic treatment of both the sacraments and community traditionally played out by the church. Quit frankly, with my wife and I both in wheelchairs we have found it difficult to “fulfill” the religious expectations within a traditional mandate to CC’s sacramental views (most particularly their views on baptism) and I have found myself in more then one theological debate over them throughout my 5 years in Bible College. I must confess that personally it has left me feeling very much alone in faith at times! Perhaps that is wrong however.

Thank you Patrick for the links! It was a very insightful paper you referred too. I myself am particularly drawn to Paul’s writings to the Corinthians and personally feel that the North American context has a great deal to learn from the lessons within these two letters. I am not computer efficient enough to know how to add links however, I have published two papers on my blog under ‘Article Publications’ as an in-depth study into 1 Cor. 6:9-20 mainly looking at Paul’s holistic projections and expectations in discipleship.

Your historical & theological views of communion specifically reminded me of Michael Frost’s picture of ‘The Table’ in his book ‘Exiles’. Perhaps sacraments have a place in the body (discipling community) as a unifying force but only, as Alan points out, were it finds its context to be meaningful and expressive. Interesting when you consider your remarks Alan with regards to foot washing. Perhaps “sacraments” can be culturally annual and/or individual, experiential (”in the moment”), and unrepeatable events both within and without or control and awareness!

Thank You Both!!!
Patrick on August 22nd, 2007 10:34 am

Erik, thanks for the kind words. Interesting that you note your situation with a wheelchair. My mom had polio when she was young and all my life has used crutches, until recently when even those couldn’t help, and now she can’t walk at all. Growing up with her definitely shaped my views on not just theology but also the practical aspects of church. Indeed, I wrote that paper about the time my church, where my parents attended, changed from the pass the plates style of communion to the go up front, stand in line style. Very much alienated my mom. So you’re not alone. But I got into an argument over that kind of stuff too. (This church had CE classrooms only on the second floor with no elevators).

And thanks for the pointers to your papers! I’m going to have a look at them.

Your comment reminded me also about my thoughts on foot washing, that for some reason didn’t get mentioned after Alan’s post. I think the sacraments absolutely should be practical. We’ve made the sacraments into being only sacred symbols divorced from real life. But what’s more real than eating together? Instead of foot washing, which has no meaning anymore, lets go out into the parking lot and wash each others cars. Or do dishes. A kind of symbolic and practical act of servant hood.

So, yeah, I think following the idea of Jewish holidays and mitzvahs, sacraments should relate to historical and pragmatic moments which give rhythm to our calendar and help us both to see love for God and love for neighbor in visible moments of the Kingdom.
Alan Hirsch on August 22nd, 2007 11:20 am

So then its settled, we are the neo-Judaizers!! Long may we live!
Patrick on August 22nd, 2007 11:28 am

Does this mean I have to stop eating bacon and lobster sandwiches?
Alan Hirsch on August 22nd, 2007 1:01 pm

Nah, that’s why we are the neo-Judaizers. We are for freedom in Jesus.