There are a number of words that help me better understand the Kingdom of God and my role in helping build it. One that I have been thinking of a lot lately is ‘home’. Earlier this week I got word my 89 year old dad has colon cancer. As I write this, he is in surgery to remove a mass and if the doctors are right, he still has years left to live. But in the space of the unknown this week I called and talked with my dad. Instead of being depressed, he spoke with a joy and anticipation of the home waiting for him.
Last week, I made an airport run to welcome back a group of relocated refugees who were visiting family in SE Asia. It was the first time in 11 years they had gone back to visit family and friends, the camp they lived in, and the villages they fled from before then. When I greeted them at the Denver airport, I almost said "welcome home" but then I realized that might not be the right phrase when you have just returned from a month in the place that is your home culture.
As I reflect on the almost 10 years of ministry for me under Global Service, I am reminded of this theme of helping people find home. My wife and I, along with many others, have seen refugees move into and thrive in our community. I have sent teams to work with children who were either abandoned or orphaned in Mexico, South Africa, and Uganda. I have had the privilege to come alongside agencies and ministries that provide temporary shelter and transitional housing for the homeless. I have helped single moms and widows be able to move into new spaces by finding people or businesses to donate items. (I am always amazed at how many people thank you that you gave them an opportunity to give to someone in need.) I organized teams of volunteers to help with recovery efforts back in 2013 when we had a flood in Boulder county. And under Reintegra, we not only provide grants to survivors of human trafficking for tuition but for living expenses so they can have their own apartments.
Homes. A place of shelter and refuge for people who are often desperate in their crisis of need. Physical homes.
But even if all of us as Global Servants haven’t provided physical spaces, all of us I am sure have come alongside people to help them find their emotional and/or spiritual homes. Rest for weary souls. A true family. A shelter from the storm. A place of refuge. A home not made by human hands. That’s what we are each doing in so many different ways. All of it - the physical home, the spiritual and the emotional - is the gospel that has been entrusted to us.
I have led a bible study for these adults, these relocated refugees, for about 5 years. We gather in their home, share food they have prepared, listen to a chapter out of the bible in their language and discuss it. It has opened up a world of insight for me to see this seamless story from their point of view. Sometime last year, we were studying John 14 where Jesus says that he is going to prepare a place for us in the Father’s home. As we often do, we discussed how the passage related to their own experience of having to flee their homeland, live for years in temporary camps along the Thai border, and then finally - after a long vetting process - were welcomed into our community in Colorado. I said something like, “this is now your home”. My dear friend - Wah Nay - gently corrected me. “Andy,” she said, “I am grateful that we are here, that my family has a place to live, that I am now a US citizen and all the help you, Robin, and Cornerstone church has given us, but this is not my home. We live here. We are grateful we are here. But this is not our home.”
After 11 years, Wah Nay still feels like a stranger in a strange land. But isn’t that how we are all to live and move? We are citizens of heaven. We are pilgrims on a journey. We are strangers in a strange land. We are asylum seekers longing for that permanent place of shelter and refuge that awaits us. We lead people to a home but the real home is not here.
We are not home. This is not our home.
“For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now the one who has fashioned us for this very purpose is God, who has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. For we live by faith, not by sight. We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.” ~ 2 Corinthians 5:1-10
Friday, February 01, 2019
Sunday, January 13, 2019
Reflections on the Future of Global Service
I shared this reflection last year with our members after my annual report. I wanted to republish it for our members.
I have spent time this past month reflecting on the time spent with our associates during the annual report conference calls. The first call had the highest participation but was the worst time of interaction. When I started the call, I felt like I needed to cover the details of the report. When it was over I did have some feedback from several of you. Thanks, because the rest of the calls I asked more questions and we listened to one another discuss our purpose and what our associates valued most about our organization.
I have stated in an earlier newsletter, “Our shared purpose has been to create a place for experienced leaders to pursue their God-given mission. That purpose is worth pursuing for all of our sakes and for the sake of Kingdom. That purpose is one that we each contribute to everyday whether we know it or not by first living out our mission in the place of service that God has called us and the second by enjoying the “place” that God has provided for us to pursue that mission. The passion to share with one another and to contribute to this “organizational place” comes from our shared experience of accomplishment and the anticipation of future accomplishments.”
As a result of the discussions I have had during the conference calls and since I have with Jim Lackey, Dave Jones, and the members who have volunteered to be a part of guiding council as we design our future: Randy Lee, Rich Amos and Niecy Locricchio (Mary Wade was not able to make the call because of scheduling conflict.) Here are some questions I am asking:
If you have any answers to these questions or perhaps you are asking additional questions please e-mail me.
If our mission statement is “a community of servants in mission.” I would also like to invite each of you to add words that connect with your heart to help create a vision statement of what we could be. For example, “a place for leaders to pursue their calling.” Then unpack the phrase by adding adjectives that describe what is important.”For example, “a safe place for proven leaders who are followers of Christ to live out their dreams.
I have spent time this past month reflecting on the time spent with our associates during the annual report conference calls. The first call had the highest participation but was the worst time of interaction. When I started the call, I felt like I needed to cover the details of the report. When it was over I did have some feedback from several of you. Thanks, because the rest of the calls I asked more questions and we listened to one another discuss our purpose and what our associates valued most about our organization.
I have stated in an earlier newsletter, “Our shared purpose has been to create a place for experienced leaders to pursue their God-given mission. That purpose is worth pursuing for all of our sakes and for the sake of Kingdom. That purpose is one that we each contribute to everyday whether we know it or not by first living out our mission in the place of service that God has called us and the second by enjoying the “place” that God has provided for us to pursue that mission. The passion to share with one another and to contribute to this “organizational place” comes from our shared experience of accomplishment and the anticipation of future accomplishments.”
As a result of the discussions I have had during the conference calls and since I have with Jim Lackey, Dave Jones, and the members who have volunteered to be a part of guiding council as we design our future: Randy Lee, Rich Amos and Niecy Locricchio (Mary Wade was not able to make the call because of scheduling conflict.) Here are some questions I am asking:
- If the reason most of our associates join with us is because of the “organizational platform," what are the minimum requirements from our associates that are necessary to maintain that platform?
- Once a member’s ministry outgrows the need for the platform what would make the place attractive enough to want to stay connected?
- What about who we are as a mission organization that compels me and would compel others to voluntarily contribute their time, talents, and money to the whole organization?
- What vision is big enough to not only keep our current members with a desire to share and to contribute but would attract the right kind of future members who would join with us?
- How many members who share and contribute to the whole organization would it take to have enough momentum for the organization to continue to grow?
If you have any answers to these questions or perhaps you are asking additional questions please e-mail me.
If our mission statement is “a community of servants in mission.” I would also like to invite each of you to add words that connect with your heart to help create a vision statement of what we could be. For example, “a place for leaders to pursue their calling.” Then unpack the phrase by adding adjectives that describe what is important.”For example, “a safe place for proven leaders who are followers of Christ to live out their dreams.
Friday, December 14, 2018
Global Service both a Centered Set and a Bonded Set
Paul Hiebert, a Christian anthropologist and missiologist, in his book Anthropological Reflections on Missiological Issues (Baker Books, 1994) presents the concept of bounded and centered sets as description of how humans organize themselves in society.
Hiebert lists five characteristics of bounded sets:
1. The category is created by listing the essential characteristics an object must have in itself to belong to the set.
2. The category is defined by a clear boundary...The central question, therefore, is whether an object is inside or outside the category.
3. Objects within a bounded set are uniform in their essential characteristics - they constitute a homogeneous group.
4. Bounded sets are essentially static sets.
5. Bounded sets, as we use them in the West, are ontological sets. They have to do with the ultimate, changeless structure of reality, which is defined in terms of unchanging, universal, abstract categories. (Hiebert, 112-3)
If we consider the concept of "Christian" as a bounded set, Hiebert notes some interesting results. First, since we must classify objects in the set by their essential nature, in this case, whether someone is a Christian, in the absence of omniscience and a window into the human heart, we focus on external characteristics, such as assent to doctrinal orthodoxy, or adherence to certain moral behaviors, or both. Second, with a bounded set sharp boundaries are drawn between Christians and non-Christians. Hiebert states that with this emphasis, "we would work to maintain this boundary, because the boundary is critical to maintaining the category." From this perspective great emphasis is placed on determining who's in and who's out of the clearly bounded set.
In contrast to bounded sets Hiebert later moves to discussion of extrinsic well-formed (centered) sets. This he defines as a grouping of things "on the basis of how they relate to other things, not what they are in and of themselves" (emphasis in original).
Characteristics of centered sets are:
1. A centered set is created by defining a center or reference point and the relationship to that center.
2. Centered sets do not have sharp boundaries that separate the set from those outside it. The boundary emerges automatically by the relationship of the object to the center.
3. The variables of centered sets are membership and distance from the center.
4. Things headed away from the center can shift and turn toward or away from the center. (Hiebert, 123-4)
Hiebert then discusses the concept of "Christian" as a centered set. From this perspective Christians primarily define themselves as followers of the biblical Christ as the defining center of their lives. Second, and very importantly, Hiebert notes that while there is still a clear separation between Christians and non-Christians "the emphasis, however, would be on exhorting people to follow Christ, rather than on excluding others to preserve the purity of the set."
Hiebert then applies the concept of centered set to missions and states that "our primary aim would be to invite people to become followers of Jesus, not to prove that other religions are false. We would stress our personal testimonies of what Christ has done for us more than argue the superiority of Christianity."
As missional thinkers draw upon insights from various disciplines, including mathematics as applied within the context of missiology, set theory can help us rethink our concepts of "Christian", "Christianity", "church" and "missions". There are helpful aspects found in both bounded and centered sets. In terms of a bounded set concept, perhaps the primary concept most western evangelicals would consciously or subconsciously adhere to, the church must have some kind of boundary, defined in a variety of ways, including relationships, beliefs, and practices. These boundaries must be carefully defined and maintained, and yet balance is key to such efforts. As Roger Olson has insightfully noted, "The bounded set model ends up allowing little or no distinction between the center (the gospel) and the boundaries (orthodoxy). It also leads inevitably to obsessive boundary maintenance and inquisitorial judgments about whether persons and groups are Christian or not." (Roger E. Olson, The Mosaic of Christian Belief: Twenty Centuries of Unity & Diversity, [InterVarsity Press, 2002])
A 21st century application of leadership for a missional community is to encourage centered set invitations that are based not on an external system of propositional beliefs but on the sincere expression of the internal journey toward meaning and purpose of life, a sincere search for true spirituality, or in service to our fellow man. As members of Global Service we are a bonded set and our commissioning has real meaning but when we are in mission we prioritize being a centered-set and everyone is invited to join us.
Hiebert lists five characteristics of bounded sets:
1. The category is created by listing the essential characteristics an object must have in itself to belong to the set.
2. The category is defined by a clear boundary...The central question, therefore, is whether an object is inside or outside the category.
3. Objects within a bounded set are uniform in their essential characteristics - they constitute a homogeneous group.
4. Bounded sets are essentially static sets.
5. Bounded sets, as we use them in the West, are ontological sets. They have to do with the ultimate, changeless structure of reality, which is defined in terms of unchanging, universal, abstract categories. (Hiebert, 112-3)
If we consider the concept of "Christian" as a bounded set, Hiebert notes some interesting results. First, since we must classify objects in the set by their essential nature, in this case, whether someone is a Christian, in the absence of omniscience and a window into the human heart, we focus on external characteristics, such as assent to doctrinal orthodoxy, or adherence to certain moral behaviors, or both. Second, with a bounded set sharp boundaries are drawn between Christians and non-Christians. Hiebert states that with this emphasis, "we would work to maintain this boundary, because the boundary is critical to maintaining the category." From this perspective great emphasis is placed on determining who's in and who's out of the clearly bounded set.
In contrast to bounded sets Hiebert later moves to discussion of extrinsic well-formed (centered) sets. This he defines as a grouping of things "on the basis of how they relate to other things, not what they are in and of themselves" (emphasis in original).
Characteristics of centered sets are:
1. A centered set is created by defining a center or reference point and the relationship to that center.
2. Centered sets do not have sharp boundaries that separate the set from those outside it. The boundary emerges automatically by the relationship of the object to the center.
3. The variables of centered sets are membership and distance from the center.
4. Things headed away from the center can shift and turn toward or away from the center. (Hiebert, 123-4)
Hiebert then discusses the concept of "Christian" as a centered set. From this perspective Christians primarily define themselves as followers of the biblical Christ as the defining center of their lives. Second, and very importantly, Hiebert notes that while there is still a clear separation between Christians and non-Christians "the emphasis, however, would be on exhorting people to follow Christ, rather than on excluding others to preserve the purity of the set."
Hiebert then applies the concept of centered set to missions and states that "our primary aim would be to invite people to become followers of Jesus, not to prove that other religions are false. We would stress our personal testimonies of what Christ has done for us more than argue the superiority of Christianity."
As missional thinkers draw upon insights from various disciplines, including mathematics as applied within the context of missiology, set theory can help us rethink our concepts of "Christian", "Christianity", "church" and "missions". There are helpful aspects found in both bounded and centered sets. In terms of a bounded set concept, perhaps the primary concept most western evangelicals would consciously or subconsciously adhere to, the church must have some kind of boundary, defined in a variety of ways, including relationships, beliefs, and practices. These boundaries must be carefully defined and maintained, and yet balance is key to such efforts. As Roger Olson has insightfully noted, "The bounded set model ends up allowing little or no distinction between the center (the gospel) and the boundaries (orthodoxy). It also leads inevitably to obsessive boundary maintenance and inquisitorial judgments about whether persons and groups are Christian or not." (Roger E. Olson, The Mosaic of Christian Belief: Twenty Centuries of Unity & Diversity, [InterVarsity Press, 2002])
A 21st century application of leadership for a missional community is to encourage centered set invitations that are based not on an external system of propositional beliefs but on the sincere expression of the internal journey toward meaning and purpose of life, a sincere search for true spirituality, or in service to our fellow man. As members of Global Service we are a bonded set and our commissioning has real meaning but when we are in mission we prioritize being a centered-set and everyone is invited to join us.
Saturday, December 01, 2018
International Summit on Global Mission, 2019
Over the last 14 years, God has grown our mission organization from an idea of empowering servant leaders to pursue his or her God-given mission to having more than 80 members serving around the world. Of course there have been ups and downs, but it seems as though God has us on a seven-year growth cycle. I think this is a result of our commitment personally to a seven-year term of membership with the seventh year a sabbatical year.
At the beginning of a new seven-year cycle, I'm calling for us to gather for a "Summit on Global Mission," to celebrate as a community God’s grace that has brought us this far and to seek his direction for our future in anticipation of even greater contribution to God’s mission. I want to invite you and your ministry partners to gather together in Colorado to "climb to the summit" in order that we may “see further” and gain a new perspective on our lives, our mission, our community and our world. Not only will we learn from one another but I also have invited “experienced guides” from the missions world to help lead us “higher.” I do not anticipate that we will gather again in this way until 2026, so I am expecting that this will be an important gathering in our organization's history.
When: 5 days/4 nights, to begin at 4 p.m., Friday, July 19, and conclude Tuesday, July 23, at noon.
Where: The Village at Breckenridge Conference Center, Breckenridge, Colorado.
At the beginning of a new seven-year cycle, I'm calling for us to gather for a "Summit on Global Mission," to celebrate as a community God’s grace that has brought us this far and to seek his direction for our future in anticipation of even greater contribution to God’s mission. I want to invite you and your ministry partners to gather together in Colorado to "climb to the summit" in order that we may “see further” and gain a new perspective on our lives, our mission, our community and our world. Not only will we learn from one another but I also have invited “experienced guides” from the missions world to help lead us “higher.” I do not anticipate that we will gather again in this way until 2026, so I am expecting that this will be an important gathering in our organization's history.
When: 5 days/4 nights, to begin at 4 p.m., Friday, July 19, and conclude Tuesday, July 23, at noon.
Where: The Village at Breckenridge Conference Center, Breckenridge, Colorado.
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
Pack Your Suitcase by Dr. Jay Gary
Bruce McCluggage shared this essay at our 2017 gathering in Colorado Springs. I am sharing this today with our members for your reflection, particularly with those serving in the University world.
How should we think about our intellectual journey as we prepare to travel in the post-normal world of the 21st century? In this essay, Dr. Jay Gary offers four principles on how we should integrate faith and reason as Christian leaders.
“The illiterate of the twenty-first century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” -Alvin Toffler
In this poignant quote Toffler underscores the irony that we face in the 21st century. Whether as saints or scientists, we all run the risk of becoming illiterate. It is as if we have packed our mental suitcase for a vacation in the tropics, but have landed in Greenland. We are now ill-suited for the new terrain of this post-normal world.
Our “illiteracy” does not come from the lack of learning, but from the ill-suited filters we use to make sense of reality. Stated pro-activity, as Christian educators, we must give attention to constructing, deconstructing, and constructing a robust biblical world view for our times.
In response to this context of change, what is my philosophy of truth? What practices do I engage in order to encourage students to create a unity of faith and learning? How do I help them navigate the push of tradition and the pull of innovation, or reconcile the tensions between religion and science? How should Christian Higher Education approach what Richard Florida calls the “Great Reset”–finding new ways of living and working to create post-crash prosperity.
Let me offer four principles that I follow to integrate both my religious and intellectual life, and invite others to follow Jesus.
1. We must stand on the firm foundation of God’s Word, but realize our search for truth about God’s world is still open.
This first principle says that all truth is God’s truth, whether it comes from religion or whether it comes from science. It also maintains that truth, which was once made know in Jesus Christ is final; but also that more truth is being apprehended as we study God’s creation.
This means as Christian scholars we must maintain our integrity in our disciplines with both the Reformation and the Enlightenment. We must live by both our hearts and our heads. We must embrace both the humanities and the sciences. We must use words and numbers. We must draw upon both qualitative interpretation and quantitative measurement.
2. We must live constructively in this tension between being a Christian and being a citizen of our Republic.
In his 2005 book, The Vocation of a Christian Scholar, Richard Hughes speaks to how two religious traditions emerged in America. The first was based on theism and drew from evangelical Christianity; the second was based on deism and drew from the Declaration of Independence.
As Christian scholars we must keep faith with both “religions,” or with both Church and State.
We must affirm both the particularity of Christianity and the universality of the Republic.
Rather than foment a war between the sacred and secular, or seek to coerce righteousness, we must use the power of persuasion, as Os Guinness says, to call our nation back to God. In this regard I reject both the propaganda of the New Atheists and the New Theocrats to polarize the church and our society.
3. We must see the quest for knowledge as the prelude to service, and help our students build deep vocations.
Once we unshackle ourselves and our students from the false war between religion and science, we must set our students on the path of serving others. In the Christian tradition, we are not Gnostics. We are saved by divine love, not by knowledge.
Therefore, as Christian scholars we must die to ourselves and take a posture of service. This must start first in our disciplines. We must earn the right to be a voice and speak as both pastors and prophets. We must invite our students into this living community of practice, which encompasses both saints and sinners.
The apostle Paul, who was quite learned, renounced his inherited knowledge as rubbish. In speaking of his new vocation, he wrote, “I became a servant of this gospel by the gift of God’s grace given me through the working of his power” (Eph. 3:7).
Jurgen Habermas wrote that society must restrain itself from maximizing the knowledge interests or special interests, in order to focus on the emancipatory interest. I help my students overcome the tension between faith and reason by inviting them, as Paul did, to embrace the emancipatory interests of the underserved. I call them in critical loyalty to follow the Great Commandment and fulfill the Great Commission of Jesus, by embracing the Great Work of time to build mutual civilizations of peace, prosperity and equity.
4. We must model for our students a life well lived, in, by and through the Spirit of God.
The final principle we must follow to help our students integrate faith and learning is to insure that we as faculty walk in the Spirit each day, and invite them to follow us, as we in turn follow Christ. I aspire to treat every student as child of God. I approach them, as psychologist Carl Rogers says, with ‘unconditional positive regard.’ I cannot do this in the Flesh, but only in the Spirit.
I believe the Spirit of God is calling forth a new generation of Christ followers, who are focused on creating a way beyond the internal contradictions of modernity, and beyond the Babylonian captivity of the Church. I see Christian Higher Education, if shaped by this integration of faith and learning, as vital to releasing this digital generation into the open, democratic, and high value learning societies of the 21st century.
This will require a paradigm shift from old command and control models, as Toffler said, to new open dynamic models of life, where humility, mercy and justice meet. It is to this end that I labor with all the strength God gives me to see a new generation enter a new land, empowered to create the new worlds of tomorrow.
Dr. Jay Gary is president of PeakFutures.com, a foresight consulting group. Over the past twenty years he has helped non-profits, foundations, civic leaders, and strategic alliances to create more promise filled futures. He also teaches strategic foresight, innovation and leadership at the graduate level and through professional development courses.
Pack Your Suitcase: Fold Faith into Learning
How should we think about our intellectual journey as we prepare to travel in the post-normal world of the 21st century? In this essay, Dr. Jay Gary offers four principles on how we should integrate faith and reason as Christian leaders.
“The illiterate of the twenty-first century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” -Alvin Toffler
In this poignant quote Toffler underscores the irony that we face in the 21st century. Whether as saints or scientists, we all run the risk of becoming illiterate. It is as if we have packed our mental suitcase for a vacation in the tropics, but have landed in Greenland. We are now ill-suited for the new terrain of this post-normal world.
Our “illiteracy” does not come from the lack of learning, but from the ill-suited filters we use to make sense of reality. Stated pro-activity, as Christian educators, we must give attention to constructing, deconstructing, and constructing a robust biblical world view for our times.
In response to this context of change, what is my philosophy of truth? What practices do I engage in order to encourage students to create a unity of faith and learning? How do I help them navigate the push of tradition and the pull of innovation, or reconcile the tensions between religion and science? How should Christian Higher Education approach what Richard Florida calls the “Great Reset”–finding new ways of living and working to create post-crash prosperity.
Let me offer four principles that I follow to integrate both my religious and intellectual life, and invite others to follow Jesus.
1. We must stand on the firm foundation of God’s Word, but realize our search for truth about God’s world is still open.
This first principle says that all truth is God’s truth, whether it comes from religion or whether it comes from science. It also maintains that truth, which was once made know in Jesus Christ is final; but also that more truth is being apprehended as we study God’s creation.
This means as Christian scholars we must maintain our integrity in our disciplines with both the Reformation and the Enlightenment. We must live by both our hearts and our heads. We must embrace both the humanities and the sciences. We must use words and numbers. We must draw upon both qualitative interpretation and quantitative measurement.
2. We must live constructively in this tension between being a Christian and being a citizen of our Republic.
In his 2005 book, The Vocation of a Christian Scholar, Richard Hughes speaks to how two religious traditions emerged in America. The first was based on theism and drew from evangelical Christianity; the second was based on deism and drew from the Declaration of Independence.
As Christian scholars we must keep faith with both “religions,” or with both Church and State.
We must affirm both the particularity of Christianity and the universality of the Republic.
Rather than foment a war between the sacred and secular, or seek to coerce righteousness, we must use the power of persuasion, as Os Guinness says, to call our nation back to God. In this regard I reject both the propaganda of the New Atheists and the New Theocrats to polarize the church and our society.
3. We must see the quest for knowledge as the prelude to service, and help our students build deep vocations.
Once we unshackle ourselves and our students from the false war between religion and science, we must set our students on the path of serving others. In the Christian tradition, we are not Gnostics. We are saved by divine love, not by knowledge.
Therefore, as Christian scholars we must die to ourselves and take a posture of service. This must start first in our disciplines. We must earn the right to be a voice and speak as both pastors and prophets. We must invite our students into this living community of practice, which encompasses both saints and sinners.
The apostle Paul, who was quite learned, renounced his inherited knowledge as rubbish. In speaking of his new vocation, he wrote, “I became a servant of this gospel by the gift of God’s grace given me through the working of his power” (Eph. 3:7).
Jurgen Habermas wrote that society must restrain itself from maximizing the knowledge interests or special interests, in order to focus on the emancipatory interest. I help my students overcome the tension between faith and reason by inviting them, as Paul did, to embrace the emancipatory interests of the underserved. I call them in critical loyalty to follow the Great Commandment and fulfill the Great Commission of Jesus, by embracing the Great Work of time to build mutual civilizations of peace, prosperity and equity.
4. We must model for our students a life well lived, in, by and through the Spirit of God.
The final principle we must follow to help our students integrate faith and learning is to insure that we as faculty walk in the Spirit each day, and invite them to follow us, as we in turn follow Christ. I aspire to treat every student as child of God. I approach them, as psychologist Carl Rogers says, with ‘unconditional positive regard.’ I cannot do this in the Flesh, but only in the Spirit.
I believe the Spirit of God is calling forth a new generation of Christ followers, who are focused on creating a way beyond the internal contradictions of modernity, and beyond the Babylonian captivity of the Church. I see Christian Higher Education, if shaped by this integration of faith and learning, as vital to releasing this digital generation into the open, democratic, and high value learning societies of the 21st century.
This will require a paradigm shift from old command and control models, as Toffler said, to new open dynamic models of life, where humility, mercy and justice meet. It is to this end that I labor with all the strength God gives me to see a new generation enter a new land, empowered to create the new worlds of tomorrow.
Dr. Jay Gary is president of PeakFutures.com, a foresight consulting group. Over the past twenty years he has helped non-profits, foundations, civic leaders, and strategic alliances to create more promise filled futures. He also teaches strategic foresight, innovation and leadership at the graduate level and through professional development courses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)