Why Bartimaeus matters

They came to Jericho. As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” Jesus stood still and said, “Call him here.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart; get up, he is calling you.” So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. Then Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man said to him, “My teacher, let me see again.”Jesus said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way. - Mark 10:46-52

Talking about this text with my wife and co-pastor, she mentioned how commentaries point to this story as a story of great discipleship. And it is. 

But why?

This was the question she and I thought about for a bit. Then something dawned upon me, it is this insight that I want to share.

It could be imagined that as a blind person, Bartimaeus was always following people. He had to in order to survive. he had to follow people to food, water and even the temple. Being blind at this time meant that you were, by definition, a follower. 

And so when Bartimaeus was healed and able to see, he no longer was bound to be a follower. He could find his own food, water and place of worship. He was free to be a leader for the first time in his life free from following anyone. And yet, Bartimaeus chooses the life of a follower even though he is no longer dependent as he once was.

Choosing to relinquish freedoms is the ultimate expression of freedom. Christianity is about choosing to follow Christ when you do not have to.

We call that freedom in Christ. 

We are not the only ones safeguarding the gains

In the previous post I mentioned McLaren who said, that movements are organizations which call institutions to new social gains and institutions are organizations which conserve the gains made by past movements.

If this is a fair representation of the church as an institution  the question becomes what social gains are being conserved made in the past?

To put it another way, if the UMC ended tomorrow, what social gains would be lost?

I am not a huge scholar in this area but here are just a few I thought of:
The UMC conserves gains and deficits in ecumenical work (see the denominational unification)
The UMC conserves gains made in workers rights (see the UMC's involvement in the Fair Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act)
The UMC conserves gains made in women's rights (see John Wesley ordaining women back in 1760's)
The UMC conserves gains made in eradicating global disease (see efforts in eradicating malaria)

Not a bad list really for thirty seconds of thought. 

Glide Memorial UMC - An institution conserving new gains

The UMC should be very proud of this, but the fact of the matter is the UMC was once one of the few institutions to conserve gains, but now we are one of many institutions conserving the same gains.

Take for instance women's rights. Where the UMC was once one of the only institutions to advocate and protect women, now there are hundreds of institutions conserving the gains made by and for women.

Perhaps the way forward for the UMC is to let go of working to conserve some gains because we no longer have the major responsibility to conserve these gains. 

What does it look like for the UMC to seek out new gains to preserve?

What would it look like for this institution (and lets not kid ourselves, no matter how much "movement" rhetoric is out there we are and will be an institution for a while still), moved toward the frontier of social gains? 

Can we conserve social gains made by the "green" movement? The LGBT movement? The "99%" movement? The "Tea Party" movement?

Why these are the best cookies in the world

I have a grand-father-in-law who makes these cookies. They are chocolate chip cookies. They are made with Crisco. They are delicious. 

They are, by all accounts, the best cookies in the world. 

Seriously. I am sure you have a cookie recipe that is great. I am sure that you think your grandma's cookies the best you have eaten. 

You my friend are a good person, but you are also wrong. 

These cookies made by Fred Wolf are the best. 

The reason they are the best is not so much the taste or the memories that are wrapped up in them. They are the best because they each have five chocolate chips in them. They are each 3.25 inches in diameter and the bottoms of them have a slight saltiness that is countered by the upper crust's sweetness. 

They are all uniform and made by hand. Fred miraculously rolls each cookie to the right size (based upon the feel). He adds the chips by hand to each ball. He puts only so many on the pan and he cooks them to perfection each and every time. 

They are the best because they are made with the greatest intention and care. Each cookie is thought about and considered. Each one matters to Fred because he wants to ensure each bite is the best bite you have eaten. 

Call it baking if you would like, but I call it a spiritual discipline. 

There are great cookies out there, but few are made because it is a spiritual discipline. 

These are the best cookies in the world for the same reason this is the best beer in the world.