returning to Ukraine, i expected to discover a few things about myself. although it is not always easy to see gradual changes, going back to an ´old place´ gave me the possibility of comparing who i was when i was last there to who i am now. (and getting to ask people how i´ve changed).
most of the people i asked didn´t think i had changed that much. which kind of disappointed me (after all, i must have grown somewhat in the last three and half years!) but when i think of how i´ve changed, i realize that the biggest change has been me becoming more comfortable with myself and the calling that God has for me. so this visit, i felt like i could laugh more, be more direct, communicate better, and be okay with ´sticking out´ a bit. those aren´t huge changes in who I am – just changes in how much of myself that I show – which i expect makes it harder to notice (or maybe people remember me better than they should).
and i realized this visit that Transcarpathia Ukraine is not where i´m supposed to be for the rest of my life. that as important a part of my life this place has been (and hopefully the people will continue to be), that this is not home for me. and it´s okay if i don´t fit or belong there – and that this doesn´t mean that i love the people there any less. nor does it make me want any less to help out those who do live there.
on tuesday i met with a group of friends, and we got into a theological discussion – about infant baptism. and i know the Heidelberg Catechism well enough and have studied the reasons for it at Seminary so that i could have participated in the discussion (although it would have had to be translated). but somebody else there had also studied to be a pastor, and he was more than able to answer the questions. and i could see that he was trying to answer in a way that helped the others grow in their faith and understanding of God, even if he wasn´t always sure of all the answers. and in that moment, my role was support for the pastor – praying and agreeing with him as much as i could. and it was good role/task for me - one i am very much content with – helping others to be pastors. and hope to continue to get to do in the future.
and the last evening in Budapest, i went with Istvan and Gyula to their church. and it was great that everything was translated from hungarian to english (or vice-versa). and i loved being able to sing praise songs in Hungarian (with the english translation/version on the screen at the same time). but the sermon was about the rapture. i believe that the idea of the rapture (Jesus coming to earth, taking all the Christians with him to heaven, and then those left on earth experiencing severe hardships) is based on a poor interpretation of two or three Bible verses. and you can´t say, like the pastor did, that the section in Numbers about the trumpets explains the rapture. there have to be stronger connections between the two passages, especially with the genre and purpose of the texts in order to interpret the one in light of the other. certainly a lot of what he said was good – about God´s love for his people and how important it is to look forward to Christ´s coming (something i had been remembering during Advent). but when it was mixed with poor logic and poor interpretation, it was hard to hear – especially when he was so adament that those who don´t believe in the rapture are living mediocre Christian lives - like they don´t expect Christ to come back.
i know what was wrong in what he was saying, but what about everyone there who wouldn´t know how to test his words? and so i was deeply frustrated that a pastor could teach something to people that could cause them to focus on something that it is not important (the rapture) instead of what is important (Christ´s return). or that could cause them to dismiss Christians who don´t believe in the rapture (which is most of the Church outside of the (mainly American) fundamentalists). and i realized once again that my theological training gives me a responsibility to help those who listen to pastors – as well as helping pastors not do the kind of damage to their hearers as this person potentially could have done.
i talked to Istvan and Gyula about it afterwords. and they assured me that they thought that one couldn´t quite interpret the Bible that way. and my hope was that many others would have seen the logical problems in what was being said, even as they also heard the good news of God´s grace and his return.
(and as a side note, the whole experience gives me a greater thankfulness that i don´t understand the sermons most of the time i attend church (the sermons are in dutch). that i understand the Bible passages – because they´re written down and usually fairly familiar and the liturgy i know is more than enough for me to meet God.)
so some things do change, both for the worse and for the better. but the desire to serve God faithfully in the tasks he has given me hopefully will never change, even as i pray that i might learn more and more how to use my gifts and be willing to use them.
No comments:
Post a Comment