關 心 別 人 若 不 是 從 愛 為 出 發 點 , 而 是 為 了 滿 足, 抒 發 自 己 的 同 情 心 ﹐ 將 一 己 看 為 美 的 意 願 強 加 於 對 方, 這 樣 的 關 心 有 點 自 我 。
同 樣, 在 教 會 團 契 群 體 中 事 奉 ﹐ 亦 不 一 定 是 從 愛 為 出 發 點。 若 為 了 達 成 自 己 的 理 想﹐ 異 象﹐ 目 標. Never mind how spiritually it sounds, 這 樣 的 堅 持 好 像 也 有 點 問 題。 哥 林 多 前 書 十 三 章 提 到 一 沒 有 愛 的 服 事 ﹐ 善 行 是 與 行 善 者 無 益 的。(當 然 ﹐ 個 中 仍 然 有 受 惠 者 。)約 翰 一 書 三 章 16 節 提 到﹐ 「主 為 我 們 捨 命 、 我 們 從 此 就 知 道 何 為 愛 ． 我 們 也 當 為 弟 兄 捨 命 。」 林 道 亮 牧 師 解 釋 「為 弟 兄 捨 命」 的 意 思 是 放 下 自 己 。
可 能 大 多 數 人 對 愛 的 認 識 是 intuitive , 但 對 我 而 言, 愛 是 一 個 很 抽 象 的 concept。 讀 哥 林 多 前 書 十 三 章, 只 覺 得 在 讀 一 堆 愛 的 「表 彰」, 而 非 實 體。 直 至 當 聽 到 林 牧 師 用「 捨 命」 即 「放 下 自 己」來 解 釋 何 為 愛, 頓 然 得 到 啟 發, 明 白 到 愛 的 實 體 意 義 在 於 放 下 自 己, 成 全, 建 立 別 人。主 耶 穌 也 是 這 樣 放 下 自 己(甚 至 捨 命)去 贖 回 我 們 的 生 命, ﹐建 立 我 們。
從 「愛= 放 下 自 己」 的 角 度 可 能 解 答 我 上 篇 blog 做 leader 的 疑 問。
6 comments:
Highly recommend Lewis Smedes' book which has a big impact on me in practising love.
Will try to get my hands on a copy. Thanks for the recommendation!
What puzzles me is that - even though love is just a fundamental need of us, I discover gradually that many people (like me) either hold a distorted view of it and don't even realize it.
I don't refer only to people who are outside church.
The postmodern worldview has confused the humanity, both Christians and non-Christians, so much that it is really not easy to differentiate. But thank our Lord that we have His word as a guiding light. At least from His word that I know love is not self-centered. So whenever I insist because it's a self-centered thing like pride or self-esteem, I give up insisting. But if I insist for the good of others, I keep insisting, but wisely understand if the opposing party is also doing the same.
Referring to practising love in teamwork, I put it like this: I tend not to insist too much in scenarios like fellowship ministries, where I believe learning, and often learning by errors, mistakes and imperfection, learning to improve, learning to compromise and tolerate, learning to give up my views and be humble like a servant... are all important, because I take fellowship is a place where we learn to grow, and the ministries are exercises facilitating that growth.
But if its some evangelical or church-wide ministries, where I treat it like spiritual battles, where a little error or overlooking can cause big casualties, I tend to insist and dominate if I'm a leader and believe in my views, and tend to submit if I'm a member no matter how different my views with the leader. Afterall, ultimately it is the Spirit's work and He needs us to function like a legion.
If I am the leader, I have to lay down the interpersonal relationship a bit, hoping to mend it on other occasions (afterall you can't avoid tension, can you?). This doesn't mean I treat people rudely like secular bosses, but I try my best to convince people by laying down the pros and cons, and utilize more on my position as the leader to mobilize people by doing most work which others don't like or agree to do. Not until the members see you doing the difficult and tiresome tasks and they're doing the easy and self-satisfying stuff, they'll realize that they need to give up their self-centeredness.
Thank you, ablogaday, from the bottom of my heart for your sharing. I'll think about what you wrote more. You have no idea how frustrated and lost I have been.
Is it your assumption that evangelistic meeting is more a hardcore battleground than other ministries?
I may be going a little bit to the "tip of an ox horn. " But you see, I serve in the Outreach Department ... so we're evangelizing or working in that direction regardless of the format of the program. Say hypothetically, that I constantly want to witness to non-Christians around me, and I've lunch with a non-Christian friend, is it less a battleground?
> Is it your assumption that evangelistic meeting is
> more a hardcore battleground than other ministries?
Battleground A: B&S as Christians vs Satan
Battleground B: among B&S
Battleground C: me against myself
So you see activities which involve only B&S can also be battlegrounds, only it's of a different kind, very often involve B and C. And mind that Satan is also very active in B & C. They look even more hardcore (in your word) because we can't believe comrades could be enemies, and it's not easy for us to realize or admit me myself is my enemy too. We got the temptation of justifying ourselves because everybody is claiming himself or herself as doing the right thing, doing the good things, esp in church ministries -- it's like "Jihad" of the Muslims. I learned and experienced this when I acted as deacon for 10 years -- which is the most rewarding thing of being a deacon -- I learned to be even more self-aware and self-alert.
> I constantly want to witness to non-Christians around me,
> and I've lunch with a non-Christian friend, is it
> less a battleground?
You deal less with teammates (and so less with ourselves) when doing personal evangelism, so yes, I think it's less a battleground B & C, but it's still A.
To me all church activities have elements of worship, service, fellowship, teaching, ministry, and testimony, only they have a different combination of proportions. I tend to classify them according to their main target: (1) to God, (2) to the church (subdivide into church-wide, fellowship, and small groups, maybe), and (3) to the non-believers. My tolerance for mistakes in (1) and (3) is lesser than (2). For (2), the smaller the group of B&S involved, the higher the tolerance for imperfection I would give, because
1. I believe there's no way we can avoid wrong-doings, wounded interpersonal relationships, mistakes, misunderstandings and imperfections -- we're just sinful self-centered humans afterall.
2. I believe it's easier to mend for misunderstandings caused in ministry and teamwork in smaller groups. They're like Shaolin's 木人巷 to me.
3. the bigger the group of B&S is involved, we need to control the quality because I can't expect everybody to understand the "inside" situations. Someone has to seize control like in (1) and (3) to balance for efficiency.
P.S. I can't believe I would put aside work and write this much, it's an urge inside...
> I can't believe I would put aside work and write this much, it's an urge inside.
Thank you for taking the time to write down your thoughts. I appreciate the guideline and general principle you laid out. I can definitely use some as my reference framework, as I plough through my specific circumstance of serving.
My thinking of outreach covers a wide spectrum. When I plan for outreach programs for my fellowship, I gauge the readiness of brothers/sisters and the kind of outreach activities that can bring in non-Christian friends, like fun-content program that welcomes non-Christian friends' participations. The idea is to establish contact points between us Christians and the non-Christians.
Then there is the type of programs that starts off with something general and light, which then leads eventually to some serious questions about life. That includes group visitation and dinner group.
And lastly, there's the more evangelistic type, like Bible study, evangelistic meetings/camps. I tend to rely on my local church or Christian organization for the bigger events.
My conviction and personality are more on the "softer" approach (as of now). I work with a number of brothers/sisters on planning and program execution. Depending on the mixture of b/s, sometimes things are easier, sometimes things get very difficult, and sometimes things get out of control.
My #1 enemy is perhaps myself (especially myself having not enough sleep, myself serving with a wrong attitude), and this #1 enemy creates animosity between me and other brothers/sisters. If I fixed this #1 enemy, does it mean that things will be better?
Still confused ... but ploughing through ... no choice.
Post a Comment