Menu Close

Category: Faith Challenges

Thoughts on Hospitality

Some years ago, after reading  Making Room: Recovering  Hospitality as a Christian Tradition by Christine Pohl I was prompted to write a post.

Pohl challenged my notions about hospitality and I thought these excerpts worthy of a re-post as we approach Thanksgiving.

A shared meal is the activity most closely tied to the reality of God’s Kingdom, just as it is the most basic expression of hospitality.

Seeing Jesus in every guest … reduces the inclination to try to calculate the importance of one guest over another.

“The tasks aren’t what hospitality is about, hospitality is giving of yourself.” If hospitality involves sharing your life and sharing the life of others, guests/strangers are not first defined by their need.

(Meal time) is the time when hospitality looks least like social services.

Simple acts of respect and appreciation, presence and friendship are indispensable parts of the affirmation of human personhood.

“… the pinnacle of lovelessness is not our unwillingness to be a neighbor to someone, but our unwillingness to allow them to be a neighbor to us.”

Is it true? vs Does It Work?

Reading a recent post by Pete Enns, I was challenged to do some self-assessment. Self-assessment is not my preferred activity since it usually brings disappointment. However, it is probably the most useful, and hopefully productive, exercise a human being can engage in. No pain no gain! I would recommend reading the entire post but, one section in particular caught my attention and is the subject of this post.

Is it true? Vs Does it work?

This difference comes down to Modernism and Postmodernism. Modernism attempts to construct a coherent worldview through the pursuit of an absolute truth. The Church’s response was to make a fact-based case for Christianity—e.g., eight reasons why Jesus was historically real, five reasons why the resurrection is true, etc.

Postmodernism, on the other hand, is marked by relativism and individualism, which has produced a culture defined by the phrase “you do you.” The value proposition for a Postmodern person is whether or not something works. “What works for me works for me, leave me alone.” This is where searchers reside, and they are not initially looking for a 200-page book of claims or a bulletproof sermon. They would rather taste and see whether what is offered is good.

In other words, the modernist asks the question “Is it true?” whereas the postmodernist asks, “Does it work?” And if it works, then for the postmodernist, it is true–because truth is found in something that works. 

This is not to say that facts do not matter to the postmodernist. But the searcher says, “If something gives me peace, relieves my stress, gives me satisfaction, or provides a feeling of transcendence, then it works, and it surely must be true.” This is the story I’ve heard when Ivy League-educated lawyers in New York convert to Buddhism—it gives them an experience of peace. 

It is my perception that “my people” generally have a negative view of postmodernism and would mostly categorize themselves as modernist as Enns describes. That is how I tend to assess myself, but, candidly, I am probably a chameleon.

Thinking about “Is it true?” vs “Does it work?”, and assessing my value proposition, I was struck by the predominance of “does it work?” in decision making. Of course, “does it work?’ is an important consideration. The problem comes when “Does it work?” trumps “Is it true?”.

The purpose of Enns’ post Is primarily to address ministry to the postmodern culture. It occurred to me that those issues are not confined to church but are also relevant to society in general, more specifically to our tribal and individual value propositions. That lead me to some self assessment.

Betraying my postmodern, relativistic bent; for purposes of self-evaluation, I revised “Does it work?” to “Is it best?”. Truth is important but, pragmatically, my decisions are most often between what works and what is best. What I discovered is disturbing. My propensity to chose what works over what is best has deep implications and reveals the depth of my vulnerability to trajectories that are, at least, ill advised and at worst destructive.

Further consideration brought me to a conclusion that what I am doing is simply mirroring the ethos of our deeply divided and chaotic culture. No matter what ideology is held the prevailing value is ‘does it work?”. Whether it is true or best is irrelevant because if it works, it is true (best). It not necessary for it to really work, uncompromising belief that it will work is enough. I believe that ethic transcends the modernist/postmodernist dichotomy. As a result, the peril of deciding what is true(best) on its utilitarian efficacy Is more than troubling.

I suspect many of “my people” are in the boat with me. I want to think that truth is my propositional value but when subjected to serious self-assessment, “does it work?” often wins the day.

I’m still reflecting on the implications of that reality for me.

Sowing the Seed

“All you can do, Richard,” I tell myself, “is sow the seed.”

Much of the “success” of any talk I give isn’t really in my hands. It’s mostly up to the person listening and the status of their heart. And I don’t have access to their heart. God does, but I don’t. My job is to just sow the seed.

I’ve become more focused on fidelity than to the task than maximizing “effectiveness.” I try to do my very, very best, and once I’m done I’m at peace.

Richard Beck