God's Grace and Church Growth and "Survival"

On January 25, 2013, an article was posted in The United Methodist Reporter by Dr. Stephen Rankin, chaplain of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Tx.  The article was titled "SMU Chaplain: The United Methodist Church is Imploding."

Dr. Rankin is very careful to qualify his statement that this "implosion" is not a quick event as one normally pictures an implosion of a building, per se.  He is also very explicit that he writes this article in love for the Church, and does not want to be a "gloom and doom" person, and that there are "beautiful exceptions," as he quotes.

I do not want to discredit what Dr. Rankin has to say.  The statistics of the UMC show that numbers are down (the same can be said of many, if not all North American Churches, but I will focus on the UMC).  Dr. Rankin makes a very good point that the church needs leadership that MUST involve young people to overcome this decline.

I wish to offer an alternate perspective without denying the realities that Dr. Rankin discussed. We do not worship a God who pays much attention to statistics. Starting int he Hebrew Scriptures, there is no statistical reason that Israel should have survived to the Babylonian Exile, much less very far past it.  But, they did.  Even after their expulsion from Israel, the Jewish people, God's covenant people, maintained their nationhood in exile throughout the world, and though the modern state of Israel exists, There are millions of Jews still living throughout the world, some in areas of high persecution. But they survive.  This defies all statistical analysis.

Dr. Rankin uses a troublesome analogy to me.  He says, "what if we realized that God can, and might, and maybe has – at least for a time – removed the glory from us?"  To his credit, he does not wish to press this analogy very far.  I object to this possibility for several reasons.  First: God cannot be absent from any of his creation.  Second: The glory is not ours to have, the glory belongs to God and God alone.  Third: The solutions belong to God. Through human cooperation and following God's leading through the Holy Spirit, a church cannot "implode."

Continually beating down pastors and other church leaders as not "doing enough" does not inspire - it creates a sense of panic and worry.  That does not mean that I'm not in favor of accountability.  In fact, we need more.  But accountability is not through statistics alone. There are external variables (location, population, preceding factors before a pastor comes to a congregation, the spiritual state of the congregation, etc.) that the pastor alone cannot overcome.  The pastor needs God. Only God can overcome these barriers and the pastor can cooperate with God.    

The UMC can and should adapt, and maybe even change.  The UMC should take ownership of our own problems, but we cannot forget that the answers ONLY lie in God's leading.  We can ONLY cooperate in God's leading.  We cannot lead God.  We cannot be ruled by fear, but rather, we must be ruled by the hope made possible by Christ - the one we worship!

Reflecting on DRC/Rwanda Conversations

I’ve again recently engaged in some discussions concerning my writings about the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.  These discussions have at times been respectful questioning of my motives, and at other times ad hominem attacks of my person and motives. 

As a person who writes about social situations, and especially about controversial situations, I fully expect such interaction.  Everyone who reads my writing is entitled to his or her own interpretation and belief. 

After these recent discussions, I want to lay out my issues as I see them to make things as clear as possible.

First of all, and this is very important:  I am NOT a journalist.  I am a pastor and theology student.  I take situations and frame them theologically.  Whether I mention God or not by name, God is first and foremost the subject of what I have to say.  When I say, “The Congolese people deserve peace,” I say that because all of God’s children deserve peace.

I have been told in recent conversations that I should go to Rwanda to do my own research to find the truth.  I object to this argument on several points.  First, the research has been done.  Why do I need to research what has already been researched?  Some may object to the findings of this research, but the Government of Rwanda has been given multiple opportunities to present their case.  They have presented arguments against this research, though the world community has not accepted it.  Why would anything I have to find be any different? 

Let me elaborate more on this point.  Rwanda engages in intimidation techniques of those with whom they disagree.  See this interview with Steve Hege of the Group of Experts that presented the United Nations with a report incriminating Members within the Government of Rwanda with supporting the M23 Militia that has invaded and is terrorizing the people of the DRC (http://theglobalobservatory.org/interviews/414-interview-with-steve-hege-former-coordinator-un-group-of-experts-on-the-drc.html) In this article, Hege describes his research methodology, but also the intimidation techniques used against him.

I also have been victim of Rwanda’s intimidation techniques.  To me this is abhorrent.  I am of NO threat to any government.  I will not go into detail, but those who read this who have engaged in this intimidation know what I am speaking of.  I know of others who also have been victims. 

I have to ask as I did in a recent post…If you are right, and all of these reports are wrong, why intimidate? Why not prove to us that we are wrong?  I have yet to receive ONE piece of evidence disproving ANYTHING.  I have not received ONE web link, one article, or one substantive piece of evidence.  All I’ve received is name-calling and “intimidation.”  Those who have been respectful have told me to do my own research.  Again, I ask, why?

The Group of Experts Report (GoE)(http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2012/843) implicates Rwandan officials of illegal activities.  Rwanda did respond to this report (http://www.minaffet.gov.rw/fileadmin/templates/minaffet/doc/Rwanda's%20Response.pdf) and the Group of Experts replied to it in Annex 3 in the GoE Report above. 

I will be fair in saying that I realize there are multiple militias in the DRC that are NOT affiliated with Rwanda.  The DRC is a poorly run nation under the poor leadership of Joseph Kabila.  Kabila is nothing short of an incompetent dictator.  When he sent DRC forces to battle M23 in the city of Goma, it was the Congolese forces who committed sexual violence and rape against THEIR OWN women along with the UN Peacekeeping forces (MONUSCO); NOT M23. 

The DRC is a living Hell for its citizens who deserve much better!  They live in abject poverty since the nation is in constant chaos and militia battles.  And remember, this is one of the richest nations in the world with minerals.

I also do not need to travel to Rwanda to do research because of how its president Paul Kagame treats opposition.  He arrests and even kills those who show opposition.  Rwanda is a one party state.  (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/01/13/the-case-against-rwanda-s-president-paul-kagame.html).  Kagame is also responsible for the deaths of millions. Estimates range from 6-10 million dead.  Following the Rwandan Genocide, Kagame invaded the DRC two times under the guise of attacking those who committed the genocide.  However, Kagame ordered his Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) army to kill indiscriminately, thus sparking the First and Second Congo Wars (http://www.friendsofthecongo.org/pdf/mapping_report_en.pdf). 

It is not simple to explain away the situation in either Rwanda or the DRC.  Yes, Kagame has modernized Rwanda.  He has brought positive changes.  But, this is at the expense of millions of lives and despotic rule. 

The DRC suffers not only because of Rwanda – they would have their own problems if M23 were not involved. 

So, what is the solution?  The solution is NOT more violence.  Though Kagame is a war criminal and a murderer bordering on a perpetrator of genocide, he does not need to be killed.  He needs to stop all violence and autocratic rule.  The United Nations Security Council needs to formally charge him with war crimes with the International Criminal Court where he needs to be tried. 

Rwanda then needs a leader that will lead them to true reconciliation following the Genocide of 1994.  Kagame’s solution was to blame it entirely on the Hutu tribe and then “officially” eradicate tribal affiliation, while still maintaining that if one even mentions that Hutus suffered, that person is guilty of the crime of Genocide Denial (punishable by long prison sentences).  This reconciliation will be painful and it will be long. But, it is possible.  It happened in South Africa after apartheid (which involved senseless massacres).  It unofficially happened in Zimbabwe after independence when Zimbabwe emerged from what was once called Rhodesia.  Now, whites and blacks can live in the same country without killing one another.  Reconciliation is not perfect. There may be grievances for a long time, but it allows for the wounds to begin to truly heal.  Kagame has only pronounced them healed with no treatment.

As for the DRC, the solution is very complex.  First, they need a competent leader.  That leader needs competent regional leaders.  These leaders must be democratically elected and truly represent the people.  Congo’s wealth must belong to the Congolese people.  Foreign invasion (military or corporate) must stop.  Instead of invasion, there needs to be investment and partnership. 

Is any of this possible?  Absolutely!  It is all possible.  Is it likely?  It’s as likely as a snowball in Hell.  Kagame is seduced by the idolatry of power.  If he lets go of power, he knows he will be charged with serious war crimes.  Therefore, he must continue his despotic rule and indoctrination of his citizens.  In the DRC, this is only possible if the people of the DRC say enough is enough.  Sadly, they are so used to suffering that many don’t know another way of life.  They’ve accepted it as normal. 

To conclude, I will be accused of being a neo-colonialist.  I will be accused of being a white preaching to Africa how to run itself.  As for the colonialist, that is a distraction.  Nowhere did I mention that any foreign intervention is needed.  It is true, I am white.  I can’t do anything about that.  Am I preaching to Africa?  I suppose I am if one considers it preaching to say that murder and genocide are wrong; if one considers despotism and rape evil.  But, these are not confined to Africa – these are universal realities and truths.

There will also be name calling and someone will ask, what makes me an expert?  To that, I ask, “Does one have to be an expert to know that people should be able to live in peace?” “Does one have to be an expert to know that genocide and murder are wrong?”  I think not. 

Others will say that I’m jumping into something that is none of my business.  How is this not my business?  When tragedies happen in the US, isn’t that everyone’s business?  Shouldn’t the world care more about each other and not less?  Aren’t we all Children of God?

Some will say I don’t know what I’m talking about because I haven’t been there.  As a Pastor, I have never met Jesus in the flesh, but I put my faith in him because I’ve met him in other non-physical ways.  Since I haven’t “been there” with Jesus does that mean I don’t know what I’m talking about?

None of this is to promote hatred, it’s to promote peace.  Is it controversial? – absolutely!  Will people hate me? – probably.  Will I hate them back? – no!

If You Have a Zombie Apocalypse Plan - Read This!

I was quite disturbed lately to find out how many people actually have a Zombie Apocalypse plan.  At first I thought this was a joke or some TV show that I missed.  But then I realized that some people are very serious about this.  They may not believe in true zombies, but they do have actual plans for Global Catastrophes.  I was even more shocked when I saw a TV show dedicated to people with such plans.  It was disturbing to see the level to which people will go for a "what if" scenario.  

Will something catastrophic happen?  Most definitely.  Will it happen in our lifetime?  I have no idea. Should we prepare for it? I don't know how we can.  

Some of these people are Christians. What is the Christian stance on all of this?  How can a person go to church and talk about "Hope in Christ," and then go home and prepare for "Doom and Gloom?"  


The connection is not hard to see.  It was made after World War II in a term called "Christian Realism"

Christian Realism is a philosophical perspective developed by the theologian and public intellectual Reinhold Niebuhr in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Niebuhr argued that the Kingdom of God cannot be realized on earth because of the innately corrupt tendencies of society. Due to the injustices that arise on earth, a person is therefore forced to compromise the ideal of the kingdom of heaven on earth. Niebuhr argued that human perfectibility was an illusion, highlighting the sinfulness of humanity at a time when the world was confronted by the horrors of experiences such World War ll, the reigns of both Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, and the Holocaust.  (This Definition is Directly Copied from This Wikipedia Article on Christian Realism)

By all visible intents and purposes, Christian Realism, appears to be the way that Christians should live. We live in a sinful world.  There are evil people.  Society is corrupt.  Because of these "realities" (as defined by Reinhold Niebuhr), living exactly the way that God intends for us to live is impossible.  We can live as closely to God's virtues as possible, but we must make concessions because of the sins of others...Or so the argument goes.

It is my argument, however, that if we buy into "Christian Realism," we deny the reality of the Gospel.  If we live as people who live according to "Christian Realism," we are in essence saying that the Gospel is a "dream," or a "mere good idea," or an "unattainable utopia."  "Christian Realism" and The Gospel hold two distinct manners of living for Christians in the world.  Each defines how Christians engage the world.  "Christian Realism" says that we should engage the world on the world's terms, but doing so in "as Christian of a manner as possible."  The Gospel says that we should engage the world on Christ's terms.

First of all, let me be clear that Reinhold Niebuhr developed this Theology at the time when media could, for the first time, give great attention to the mass genocide of the Holocaust and the tragedies of World War II and the crimes of Hitler and Stalin.  Niebuhr was not a bad person. In fact, Niebuhr contributed greatly to the Kingdom of God in his ministry.  Niebuhr, to the best of my knowledge, was a faithful Christian and follower of Christ.  My argument is not with him as a person, but with this one particular philosophy or theology.

It is true, we do live in a corrupt world filled with evil people.  That is undeniable.  We just have to turn on the news to see that for a fact.  The Gospel is not a "fairy tale" that we look to in order to say that none of this is real and that we just have to wait to "get to heaven" for it all to get better.  The Gospel IS about Heaven, but the Gospel is a message for the HERE and NOW as well.  In Academic Theology, we often call this the "Already and the Not Yet" that has been been revealed and realized in Christ.  

Christ has "Already" come to set up his reign and his Kingdom on earth. This was accomplished through his birth, life, teaching, death, resurrection, and ascension.  He reigns as King "Already."  But his reign is "Not Yet" fully realized.  The entire earth does not yet fully accept or know Christ.  Christ has "Not Yet" returned to reign in glory.

But the question comes - How do we reconcile Christ with the reality of evil in the world.  It is true that there is war, murder, rape, abuse, fear, robbery, abuse, and the list goes on.  Christian Realism says that we must deal with these powers on their terms.  The Gospel says that we should deal with them on Christ's terms.  Using logic, both can be true, neither can be true, one can be true, one can be more true than the other, or a different method of engaging the sinful powers must be true.

I entirely argue that the Gospel is the way that we are to engage the powers of sin and evil, and that "Christian Realism" is but a "cop-out" for those who need to grow the virtues of patience and faith.  For those who use "Christian Realism" as their standard of engaging the powers of evil, they are saying, "I believe that Christ is Lord, but not entirely, so I have to finish the job myself."  In essence, that makes the practitioner a "little Christ."  

The Gospel, on the other hand, says, "Christ is Lord." There is no more to that statement.  If the Gospel is true, then it is true.  If we believe what we say we believe, then we don't save the world by the powers of the gun, the power of the fist or any power of violence. In fact, WE don't save the world at all.  Christ saves the world.  Our job is to spread Christ's message.  That message cannot be spread by violence.  The Prince of Peace cannot be taught by the power of the gun.

So, what do we do with evil?  Obviously, we don't ignore it.  Christ never told us to stand idly by and let evil dominate.  For some reason, those who believe "Christian Realism" is the way to engage the world, often believe that those who don't share their belief live in a fantasy world.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Those who use The Gospel to engage the world live anything but a fantasy lifestyle.  They take up their cross daily.  Crosses are not pleasant - they are torture devices.  Followers of the Gospel feel the pain of those who suffer, even if those people are on the other side of the world and they do not have any personal contact with them.  

Christ told us to engage the powers.  Christ engaged the powers.  The "catch" is that Christ engaged them on his terms, not theirs.  

Over the centuries, brutal regimes have risen and done mass damage. Niebuhr used Hitler as one of his reasons for developing "Christian Realism."  I will use Hitler as well since most people are familiar with this example.  Hitler rose to power because he was allowed to rise to power.  Hitler did not meet opposition.  Hitler stayed in power because he was allowed to stay in power. It would not have taken violence to remove him from power; it would have taken civil disobedience.  The problem was that there was a lack of conviction and courage.  Would people have died in disobeying and opposing Hitler?  Absolutely! But, those who believe the Gospel know that death is not the end.  Martyrdom is not a goal, but sometimes it happens.  

As Hitler was rising to power, no one said, "No!"  No unified groups in Germany stood their ground and said that his doctrines of "racial purity" were evil.  Yes, there were small resisters here and there, but fear overtook the majority of the population, so they jumped aboard Hitler's bandwagon.  Had people not allowed fear to overtake them and they unified by saying, "No," as Hitler was rising, Hitler never would have made it to power.  Yes, violence would have been used against them, but if the Gospel is true, we don't need to fear the power of the sword.  This hypothetical first resistance could have saved millions of lives.

Today we face many challenges.  Genocides, financial meltdowns, massacres, murders, rapes, wars, crime, robberies, and the list goes on.  "Christian Realism" tells us that we must engage these problems as they are.  "Christian Realism" essentially denies that Christ is engaged already in these issues.  "Christian Realism" says that Christ is the ultimate savior, but we are to be the "mini-Christs."  That borders on Heresy.  The Gospel also realizes that these are serious issues.  But, the Gospel says that we must engage these issues on Christ's terms.  We can't let fear rule.  We can't let "what if" games run our lives.  We need to confront these problems head on, but with the power given to us by Christ.  We need to understand that confronting them will not be convenient.  But we don't need convenient.  We don't need better or more efficient weapons or systems.  We have the best weapon and system, and that is Christ.  We just have to remember that we must confront these powers on Christ's terms - not on their terms.

Why Resort to Intimidation Techniques if You are Right?

If you're a regular reader of my blog, you don't need much background information.  I've written quite a  bit concerning the humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  According to the United Nations Group of Experts Report, the M23 Militia, which attacked and overtook the Congolese city of Goma, but since has retreated pending negotiations with the Congolese Government (which, to the best of my knowledge are happening at the time of my writing this on 1/4/13), is not only supported by, but commanded by people within the Rwandan Federal Government.  There are other reports, including the Mapping Report of the Democratic Republic of the Congo from 1993-2003 accusing Rwanda's current president, Paul Kagame, who was then a military general of war crimes within Congo's borders. (If you need more information, go back and read more of my blog posts, or read news sources on these issues).

The Rwandan Government denies all of the above charges.  Please note - I am not making the charges - these come from the United Nations.

That leads me to my first question - Who is telling the truth - The United Nations? Rwanda? Both? Neither?  Obviously someone is telling the truth, at least on some level, and someone is lying, or at the very least, someone is uninformed.  Rwanda claims that they are victims of some sort of conspiracy.  Could that be true?  The United Nations says that Rwanda is guilty. Could that be true?

Right now, I'm going to discuss what happens when a person takes on issues involving the Rwandan Government.  I will speak ONLY for myself, though I know of several other people who go through similar experiences.  I will then pose questions for which I hope someone will answer.  Answer them in my comment section, or on my Twitter account.

I am going to be somewhat vague in some things, and I beg your forgiveness.  Also, if you do not know me personally, please know that I am telling the truth, and know that I am sane (Go ahead and make your sarcastic comments now...hahaha).

I know for a fact that I am or have been on a "watch list" by the Rwandan Government.  I do not know at what level this "watch list" is held.  I have proof of this, and I ask that you please just accept this.  The reason I was put on this list was due to a letter asking a US University to reconsider having President Kagame as their Commencement Speaker.

You can be assured that I am no threat to anyone.  I wish no violence upon anyone.  My only "weapon" is my Bible and my "pen" (or computer, or whatever I'm writing with that day).  Ok, I am clumsy, so if I trip and my Bible flies out of my hand and hits you on the head causing you slight irritation, that is unintentional violence.  I promise that is as bad as it will get.  Assuming I don't lose consciousness, you will get an apology from me.

I know, furthermore, that I've been monitored online.  Again, I will remain vague, but I have ways of knowing.

I have had underhanded intimidation techniques used against me.  This has happened several times.  I'm afraid these people think I am bigger than I am.  I am a blogger.  I am not an expert. I am not a government official.  I only ask that people look for a peaceful solution.  These intimidation techniques have taken several forms.

I have also had my character attacked and been called a "false preacher," an "instrument of the devil," and other such names.  None of these character attacks come with documentation proving that what I document is wrong.  Trust me - I WANT TO BE WRONG! I don't want millions of people suffering to be blamed on this government (which then implicates other governments, most likely including my own).  I WANT TO BE WRONG!  PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG!

Now, my questions:

First:  If you are right, and these reports are wrong and you are right, what is the need to resort to intimidation? I know I am not the only one.  Why are dissenters in Rwanda jailed? Why have some "disappeared?" Don't intimidate us - PROVE US WRONG! We don't want to be right! We WANT to be your friends.  You are our Brothers and Sisters.  I can only speak for myself, but instead of trying to intimidate me, have a conversation with me.  Some who disagree with me with all their heart have, and I respect them. We have open and honest conversations. We try to understand each other. In the end, we want the same thing - Peace!

Second: If you are right, why is dissension handled so forcefully? Yes, order must be kept, but if you claim to be the society you say you are, then prove it.

Third: You don't owe me or any other individual anything.  But, as a member of the United Nations, you do owe the World certain treaty based requirements.  This world will only know peace when the love of peace is loved more than the love of power.  Don't we all want peace?

You are going to do what you want to do. This is the time to identify Rwanda as a dictatorial regime or a democracy.  The ball is in your court.  I pray that you make the right choice.

What is the Peace of God - Sermon

Matthew 5:38-48

³⁸“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ ³⁹But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; ⁴⁰and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; ⁴¹and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. ⁴²Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

⁴³“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ ⁴⁴But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. ⁴⁶For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? ⁴⁷And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? ⁴⁸Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

What is the Peace of God? 

What is Peace? How are we even supposed to define it?  Does peace mean that there is no war or no violence?  That can't be the answer - or rather - that can't be the entire answer. Can it?

Even if we got rid of all physical violence - war, killing, fighting, etc., we still wouldn't have complete peace, would we?  We'd still be left with arguing, bitterness, faction forming, gossiping, and division.

Even if we got rid of the outward forms of disagreement, I still don't think we'd have peace - at least not the peace that Jesus is speaking of.  We'd have inner conflict, bad thoughts about others and even about ourselves.  That's certainly not peace!

·      

Is Peace even Possible?  Jesus is sure talking like it is, but when he spoke these words did he know of the evil people we'd be dealing with?  Did he know we may be attacked?  What about self-defense?  We don't want to appear weak, do we?  We don't want people to take advantage of us, do we? Certainly, if we are peaceful in the way Jesus is speaking, those things will happen, right?  We'll be punching bags for others, we'll have a virtual "sign" on our forehead saying how anyone can walk all over us...right?  

Let's explore all this.  I'm sure that Jesus knew what he was talking about.  He was, after all, a Jew in the middle of Roman occupation.  He knew what it was to be oppressed.  People came to him all the time asking for something from him - usually a miracle - and in scripture, he most always gave it to them.  He knew what it was like to be "used."  People insulted Jesus all the time.  They tried to kill him (before the cross), and he never retaliated.  He knew what it meant to turn the other cheek.  And he was God in the flesh - so, the words he spoke were informed!

·    

Thomas Merton, a Catholic priest and monk gave the following quote: “We can’t be at peace with each other because we’re not at peace with ourselves.  We’re not at peace with ourselves because we’re not at peace with God."

What does Jesus say about being at peace with each other? Jesus tells us to, "turn the other cheek," – Now what does that mean?  Does he really mean that if someone slaps you that you are to really let them slap your other cheek?  Maybe.  But more importantly, think about what it means to turn your cheek.  If you do it with your head down and with fear in your eyes, yes, you are saying, "I'm your punching bag."  But, if you do it with your head up and trust in Christ, as you turn your head, you have to look the other person in the eyes, and that is a sign of power.  Now, don't take that too literally - this isn't about eye contact - it's about power and peace.  When you turn the other cheek, you're telling the offender that you too are human; you too are as worthy of respect and dignity as they are; you too are equal to them.  You are also saying that the offender may hurt your body, but they can never get to your soul. Yes, your body is important - it is the temple of the Holy Spirit. But one day, this body will die - and one day we will be reunited with this body, though in a "heavenly" form. When you turn your cheek, you send a message that you have God's peace within you and that you are willing to be at peace even with the offender.

·    

But is this even possible?  Yes, but only if we’re at peace with ourselves and with God.

How do we find peace with ourselves? Jesus says, "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵so that you may be children of your Father in heaven." We don’t love our enemies and pray for our persecutors just for their sake – we also do it for our sakes so WE can be God’s children. Turning things over to God brings peace to ourselves. Realizing we aren’t God is the best realization of peace with ourselves we can make – we can’t fix everything - it's just not possible.  As God's people, we have an important job, don't forget that, but our job is not as important as God's! Our job is to love others, plant seeds, show the way, after that, it’s up to the other people to make the choices and God to work in their hearts.

Think of a farmer before the days of modern machinery. The farmer would plant a seed.  The farmer watered the seed, nurtured the seed, made sure it had the ability to get enough light, water, fertilizer, but after that, the farmer couldn't do anything else to make the seed grow.  It was up to God.  God controlled the weather. God made the seed burst out of the soil.  The farmer still had to nurture the new plant, but God kept it growing.

    If you are at peace with yourself, you don’t have to worry about being good enough, smart enough, good looking enough, or whatever – Success as the world defines it is really nothing – Faithfulness is everything!  But first, we have to be at peace with God.

What does it mean to be at peace with God? Jesus says “⁴⁸Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

·      Does he mean, “perfect?” Can we be perfect? John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Movement and now Methodist Church and other branches, said that over time we can reach perfection in love of God and neighbor.  That DOES NOT mean that we can be perfect like God is perfect - we won't stop sinning, we won't know things like God knows things, we won't be God.  It DOES mean that our love will grow so that we love God and love others more perfectly - but even that is always in a state of growing.

·      As we approach perfection,we acknowledge who God is and who we aren’t. This only comes through faithful practice and faithful obedience. When we let God be God and come to be at peace with that fact we come to be at peace with God.

  Only then - When we are at peace with others, ourselves, and God, do we really know the peace that God wants us to know and experience.  Let us all seek that peace, not only for ourselves, but for our world!