Why do little things sometimes hurt so nastily?
I liked to belong to the community as into a big family. We were together our daily free time, we shared our lives with each other, belonged together. We met brothers from other towns at weekends. In winter we often rented some classrooms in a schoolhouse for this. Sunday evening we packed our things, made order after ourselves and drove home. There was a place for everyone in the vans.
Not all was in a good balance there, but I miss especially this belonging into a big family. Everybody was waited to the meetings, everybody was called to take responsibility for our common life and mission, an everyone did it more or less. There was time to talk personally.
Well, this year I have already the second time am frustrated after a period of daily meetings. There was a week-long conference and a two-week course where I was daily together with some people. And after this time, the world outside of our community seems especially individualistic and cold. Everyone returns to his den to his private life or other friends. And I'm again only in two in my immediate family.
Both times, it seems, I expected something according my community's standards. To be a bit longer together, to share still something before the departure.. I forgot I was not any more in the community where knowing each other and sharing is of much higher value than usually..
So there was a situation that reminded our community weekend cleanup. I expected to get a lift with a car as it had often happened.. But without any explanation somebody else was invited to the car and there were not enough places for all of us in the car...
Well, it's their car, not a common van as in the community. Perhaps we even don't win much in time comparing to taking bus. It's matter of relationships, of belonging together,... If they had at least given a reason for the choice in the very situation, it could have been easier. I cannot blame them really, it's a clash of different sub-cultures. In the community the vans united us, enabling us to meet brothers in other towns, but outside, cars tend to separate, because there is often not enought space for everyone who might join. :(
I liked to belong to the community as into a big family. We were together our daily free time, we shared our lives with each other, belonged together. We met brothers from other towns at weekends. In winter we often rented some classrooms in a schoolhouse for this. Sunday evening we packed our things, made order after ourselves and drove home. There was a place for everyone in the vans.
Not all was in a good balance there, but I miss especially this belonging into a big family. Everybody was waited to the meetings, everybody was called to take responsibility for our common life and mission, an everyone did it more or less. There was time to talk personally.
Well, this year I have already the second time am frustrated after a period of daily meetings. There was a week-long conference and a two-week course where I was daily together with some people. And after this time, the world outside of our community seems especially individualistic and cold. Everyone returns to his den to his private life or other friends. And I'm again only in two in my immediate family.
Both times, it seems, I expected something according my community's standards. To be a bit longer together, to share still something before the departure.. I forgot I was not any more in the community where knowing each other and sharing is of much higher value than usually..
So there was a situation that reminded our community weekend cleanup. I expected to get a lift with a car as it had often happened.. But without any explanation somebody else was invited to the car and there were not enough places for all of us in the car...
Well, it's their car, not a common van as in the community. Perhaps we even don't win much in time comparing to taking bus. It's matter of relationships, of belonging together,... If they had at least given a reason for the choice in the very situation, it could have been easier. I cannot blame them really, it's a clash of different sub-cultures. In the community the vans united us, enabling us to meet brothers in other towns, but outside, cars tend to separate, because there is often not enought space for everyone who might join. :(
16 comments:
I used to belong to the Community long time ago. I did not stay there for a long. I must admit that I learnt a lot there and there was a spiritual growth. In the Community I had both good and bad times. One of the areas that really bothered me was you have no right to marry. I think it is very unScriptural. of course, there are problems in the marriage, but then again with the help from God these problems could be solved, if we always put God first. Some people in the community say that the marriage is selfish. I do not know if their marriage was like that.I do not believe that. Not all marriages like that, you can make a difference.
Hi You both!
I found occasionally your writing sites and got interested.
Is the community christian? Do all people live together or can tere be members who live in their own apartments?
Hi.
It is a Christian community, but in some things extreme.
Most of us lived together, but some lived in own flat or with parents. The rare cases when somebody had own family, they lived also in own flat, as much as I know.
No right to marry...
because there are problems in the marriage.
I don´t think God promised us a life without problems. It is about we handle the different crisis in our lives..
God can really show His strength in helping us through the problems
Psalm 23: If I walk through the valleys of death..
So we are going to face hard times, but we don´t have to be afraid, He will guide us and give us wisdom how to let the Love win
[by homo ludens] ok, in many cases we did it as you describe it, but I recall also other cases when we wanted to "educate" somebody among us and deliberately limited our help - f.e. after weekend went by car to hometown and got some girl out of the car in the early morning, so that she travels further by public transport, even if it would not cost us much time to get her to her flat. or we took some hitchhikers on the way and told them to get out in the middle of nowhere just because they "turned out to be not interested" in becoming members of out group after 10 or 20 minutes of talking.
[by homo ludens] and it was a bit like in Orwells book "all live beings are the same, but some are more" :)
f.e. exclusive car for the non-working older man, where he slept in silence, undisturbed alone, while all others were often like fish in a tin, often disturbed by some noise of other car users, and they were responsible for safe driving [not falling in sleep at the wheel] and they were getting up in early morning to get to work, while the older man did not
[by homo ludens] about marriage: we preferred to cut off entire arm, in order to avoid a possible hand-cut. so was our doctrine, in short. the idea was to upkeep our life-style as the only allowed, and the elders knew that couples with children would not be manage to live that way,
I agree not all was nice, especially concerning hitchhikers and marriage
I agree with Paul as follows.
„In view of the present crisis, I think it is good for you to remain as you are. Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? So do not look for a wife. But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.“ (1Co 7:26-28)
Paul recommends the best and wants to preserve from troubles.
“I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lords affairs, how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned of the affairs of this world, how he can please his wife, and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lords affairs: her aim is to be devoted to Lord in both in body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world, how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.” (1Co 7:32-35)
In the same way Paul recommends in this Verses as well (and in verse 8) the best one can do, like a loving Mother. He is sober and obedient to see Gods directive and to make a profound assessment of that time with a right estimation of the crisis. Being lead by the same spirit as Paul was, also these days Jesus-church will recognize, by the obedience and goodwill of each one, what is best to do. At least this was the case in my long lasting time. The current time the community asses it as crisis as well, there was plenty of tasks. Each one who dared to endeavour knows very well how much we were challenged. Being free for all the brethren and the Folks outside the church brings much fruits and a fulfilled being. Isn't it a benefit for all men, when we can just sharing out the love which is poured out in our hearts?
I think, that in many cases of unreadiness to see and do what is best in this question, was an expression of little love. Hence a cause to develop apparent arguments and to have an alibi to make the narrow path a bit larger then it is, and so, to have a justification not to be in unity any more. (The best was just to narrow and Paul him self didn't speak about sin!)
James 4, 17b
2.Peter 1, 5-11
I think the church was not unscriptural but right in the will of God.
Anonymous said:
"Isn't it a benefit for all men, when we can just sharing out the love which is poured out in our hearts? I think, that in many cases of unreadiness to see and do what is best in this question, was an expression of little love."
R.A.:
I think now my icy heart almost started really to melt down, seeing such cute words!
If I knew less, what kind of connotation has for community the word 'love', then I would think that this is are really thoughts, that must make somebody to think about.
Knowing but the background of the community's designation to the word 'love', that the 'love' is actually perceived by outsiders as something upmost cold and contained of lack of interest and disability to empathy towards evangelised one, also perceived as impatient, intolerate, full of distrust, prejudice, then it makes me rather think, why this mentioning about lack of love of outsiders?
It is worth to notice, that in the community and also in evangelisation we circulated the same tags like 'lack of love', 'assess yourself and others', 'unity' etc. which I would label with the label 'community discourse'. I think community language has degenerated into that level of hypostasis, that I think - when one would change completely the order of words in the sentence, which is stated by community language speaker, I would easily recognize the community's ideological discourse behind that despite of disordered syntax.
So, if community generates new topics and websites incognito (about Taizé or smth else), it is very easy to recognise through the keywords, that behind the conglomeration of these words is somebody from our community.
Again: why the excessive coinage of the same words, that are representative of our ideas, but have been actually become rather devaluated, distorted, biased from the meaning and effect, which it would have for outsiders, for other believers?
To be continued....
Love is nothing separate from others. I think somebody in our community said, that there must be at least two persons for love. 'Love' is not perceived 'love' not only from one part, but from both parts. If community would say, that other churches or unbelievers don't understand, what is love like, then let's discover, what meaning it has in the Bible:
1. "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud." (1 Cor 13:4)
Did we have patience towards evangelised ones? We had patience as far we could see some give-up from him/her. Mostly our patience was limited with short discussion about the provocative topics, about false teachings of evangelised one. We boasted, that we have in the community such a unity, that is missing in other denominations. Being honest, we were proud of our unique community.
2. "It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs." (1 Cor 13:5)
Look at HG's example and 'assess' yorself the 'love' he had towards outsiders.
3. "It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." (1 Cor 13:7)
How did we protect outsiders? In which way we showed trust towards outsiders? We didn't want even to introduce ourselves, our name etc. We evangelised incognito, because we had fear, that somebody will detect our 'loving' mission. That kind of love is not talking John about , who says, that there is no fear in love (1 John 4:18).
Did apostles have fear about intrigues, that might have occured during evangelisation? Not at all. Read the missionary accounts of Luke, which describe and emphasise the way of evangelisation (Acts 5:42 Acts 9:27,28, Acts 13:46, Acts 14:3). They evangelised OPENLY, FEARLESSLY, PUBLICLY.
When we didn't evangelise in the same way in the community, maybe WE had 'lack of love', 'lack on faith', and not the outsiders? Apostles didn't fear even the death, but community has fear of misinterpretations and misusage of community's statements and prescious love, which mustn't be thrown carelessly to the feet of everyone.
That much about love, which is always the same forever and immutable also towards outsiders and insiders.
I think our understanding about practice of love in the community can be summarized thus:
To love means to assess one's state in front of God and to act respectively: to admonish or 'encourage' somebody. Actually there was only a slight difference between them, as it was perhaps for jews ;-)
My suggestion for community is just to omit the word 'love' for a while in their daily speech and then they would see, what this practice of X actually is, what sort of deeds they try to laminate with the beautiful word 'love'.
... in the manner you write, you can speak only about your self!
I and the community is not response for it.
R.A. said...(full name removed)
About the manner I write here: I think I've learned this manner from community. This is the so called 'community discourse' I told you before.
It reminds me something from Josef's apology that I would like to cite. Quotation (from English PDF version) follows as thus:
"The “warmth and friendliness”, that “do exist within the Group”, are what we wish to share with every person. But a certain common ground is necessary for that. For us, the terms, “brother” and “sister”, are not just religious clichés,..."
Of course, Jesus didn't say, that we need a certain common ground for showing warmth and friendliness. Jesus expressed in Matthew 5:39-47 rather something quite opposite:
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
----
So, forgive me and Josef, that in hot discussion we sometimes forget the teaching of Jesus and follow by rote the principles and guidelines, that are not taught by Jesus, but are unfortunately quite predominant in our community.
If I've said something that is not kind towards you, then please forgive me.
Me and Josef are really responsible only of our own statements. We present only our own person, also in front of God.
09 January, 2011 02:23
R.A. said...
As I said, community wants to diminish God's love in praxis to the assessment of one's state in front of God and to act respectively: to admonish or 'encourage' somebody. Those, who have not 'certain common ground' with community, receive therefore almost always admonishments.
Yes, I think, assessments are one of important things, that belong to the love.
But THIS is not the feature, that makes the love of God unique and visible among pagans. We see that kind of 'assessing love' also among politicians, who always try to find, what is wrong and what must be changed. We see that kind of 'assessing love' also among Jehovah's Witnesses, who act in the same way as our community. So we don't need to be afraid, that these encouragements and admonishments against lukewarmness and false teachings is something among religious groups that are not brought attention for.
In above mentioned passage (Mt 5:39-47) Jesus shows, in which point our love must differ, so that this love is visible and will be light for the world. THIS is the passage, and THIS is the love we must be guided by. This is the core teaching of Jesus about love, which is not looking for common ground to practice it, but which is conditionless and the same towards everybody.
Our community saw often the practice of love in other denomination as inclination to excessive religious tolerance. We saw a certain formalism, which it caused among religious groups.
But again: 'assess yourself', what is more difficult: whether to follow the teaching about love based on Mt 5:39-47 or the kind of 'assessing love', which is practiced by our community and which says goodbye to everybody as soon they've lost the 'common ground'.
My personal opinion is, that love, which is expressed in Mt 5:39-47 is the ground, which is missing in our community and THIS must be searched for. And then it would give sense and justification also to this strenghtless, bigot and dried-up 'assessing love' of our community, which contains only remnant of that love from Pauline doctrine, which has its base in 1 Cor 13.
This is my assessment. I encourage community to love everybody conditionless, without looking common ground for being warm and kindhearted towards others. Because, in this way the love is not conditionless anymore.
I know, it is hard to follow the principles of love described in Mt 5:39-47. And my comments here show, that often I myself don't manage to follow it. But I keep trying in faith, that taking Mt 5:39-47 as a basis for love, I'll have hope, that my ability to be empathetic, kind and warm to EVERYBODY and WITHOUT CONDITION developes.
09 January, 2011 14:28
Post a Comment