Introduction
Briefly review the setting—Paul's interrupted relationship with
the Thessalonian Christians. We come now to a long section of this letter
in which Paul fills them in on what happened after he left Thessalonica.
Read 2:17-3:10. Why does he spend so much time on this?
Because he is their spiritual parent (2:7,11), he is concerned that
they not interpret his physical absence as proof that he does not care
about them. (Maybe Paul's enemies were telling them this.) There were
good reasons why he could not come back, and he has been deeply concerned
about them the whole time.
But there is another reason. He explains this because he expects them
to take up the same loving responsibility (as spiritual parents) toward
others. That's why he ends this passage by praying not only that God
will direct his way back to them (3:11), but also that they will love
others in the same way that he loves them (3:12).
This is one of the key dynamics of the New Testament church that is so
different than the traditional church model of today.
In the traditional model, the church is like a PERPETUAL SPIRITUAL
DAY-CARE CENTER. There are one or two professional spiritual caregivers
who are expected to tend to everyone else's spiritual needs, no matter
how long they have been Christians. While it is normal and healthy for
spiritual infants to be cared for, it is dysfunctional if this continues
(“arrested development”—as in the HOLIDAY INN COMMERCIALS).
The alternatives of this model are unacceptable—either stay small
or become superficial.
In the New Testament church, the church is like a GROWING & DEVELOPING
FAMILY. New children are being born into the family. The parents take
care of the young children. But as the children grow older, they are
expected to help care for the younger children, and then to get married,
have their own children—and teach their children the same model.
This is the model we are committed to in Xenos—every Christian
is to become a spiritual parent!
If you buy this, then this passage is not merely a historical insight
into Paul's relationship with the Thessalonian Christians. It becomes
valuable instruction on two of the key elements of spiritual parenting.
The priority of face-to-face relating
Let's re-read some of this passage—see if you can figure out the
first element (read 2:17-18a; 3:1-2, 6, 10-11). The first prominent element
is the priority Paul placed on face-to-face relating.
There is a great irony here. Because Paul could not see them face-to-face,
he wrote them a letter. Because he was an Apostle, this is an inspired
letter—and we are very grateful for its contents. But for Paul,
a letter (even an inspired one) was a distant second to actually being
with them. If he had access to telephone, email, video conferencing,
etc., he would undoubtedly have used them—but they would never
have replaced face-to-face relating as the primary way of imparting
God's truth and love. This is a key issue—and one that we're in
danger of losing, both in our culture and in the church.
Why is this? The answer has to do with what it means to be a human being.
We are not merely data nodes, needing only “connectivity.” We
are not products of time and chance, able to evolve to the point that
we transcend the limitations of our physical bodies. We are embodied
spirits, made in God's image—so that fully human interaction
requires bodily presence.
While Christianity values the written word greatly because of its ability
to preserve content, it values personal presence even more. God's fullest
revelation of himself to the human race is not a book dropped out of
the sky—it is that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among
us” (John 1:14). That's why Paul said 2:7-8 (read).
This is one reason why we need to think deeply and carefully about how
we use Information Technology. Don't get me wrong. I am no technophobe.
I own a cell phone, I access the internet, I send and receive email, I
watch cable TV occasionally, etc. But IT is a powerful force that is changing
the way we live and interact and think about ourselves—and many of
these changes are unhealthy. I am not talking about the obvious things
like porn on cable TV and the internet. I am talking about IT's insidious
tendency to erode essential human activities like imagination and sustained
rational thought, the ability to enjoy being alone to reflect and pray,
and the ability to build and maintain close, healthy relationships. For
all of the advantages and opportunities afforded by IT, to the extent
that we let it crowd out the priority of relating to people face to face,
it is dehumanizing and profoundly anti-spiritual in the biblical sense
of that term. I want to give two simple warnings in this regard.
“Connectivity” is not fully personal communication—regardless
of what IT companies are telling us. I recently saw in commercial in which
the IT company asserted that “Soon, it may no longer be necessary
to ever have face to face contact with anyone again.” This would
not be utopia—it would be a nightmare. The Sprint commercials in
which the trench-coat guy liberates people from being tied to their desktop
computers by giving them web-linked cell phones is not a true liberation.
It is just another way to stay linked to the web instead of relating to
people. Commercials like the ones that provide call screening so you can
spend quality time with your children or spouse reveal the extent to which
IT has intruded into face-to-face human relating. We now have to market
IT technology that block the IT technologies we're marketing!
IT may keep you connected to more people, but unless you're careful
it tends to hollow out your relational life. Not only does it tend to
take time away from face-to-face relating. It also drains us of the
energy needed for this activity, and it even conditions us to be aversive
to face-to-face relating because it's not stimulating enough.
“Human interaction at the deepest level involves at least two
participants who acknowledge and respond to each other's spoken questions,
comments, and exclamations as well as the nonverbal language of embodied
articulation—the raised eyebrow, the squinting eye, the furrowed
brow, the misty eyes, the nodding or shaking of the head. These irreducibly
personal factors and many others—such as spontaneity and humor—make
up a conversation, a dialogue, in which no machine can participate.”
In the same way, in-depth spiritual instruction and transfer of spiritual
values requires close relationship—which requires personal presence.
This is what Paul says in 3:2, 10 and Rom. 1:11-12, and John says that
same thing in 3 John 1:13-14.
“ . . . the kind of community required for
the resuscitation of (spiritual) life requires the grace that comes
through the human touch, the human voice, the human gaze. Genuine community
shines through the human presence of truth expressed personally. Cyberspace
can only mimic or mirror these things (however convincingly); it cannot
create them. It can, however, beguile us into mistaking connectivity
for community, data for wisdom, and efficiency for excellence. If cyberspace
is kept closely fastened to the real world, and if we refuse its temptations
to exchange the virtual for the literal, it can be our servant. Otherwise
it will become a demanding and all-consuming media monster.”
What does all this have to do with being a spiritual parent? Lots! Here
are just a few:
Are you prioritizing this with your children (REGULAR ALONE TIME;
FOCUSED LISTENING; EYE-CONTACT; MEANINGFUL TOUCH)? Are you modeling
it in your relationship with your spouse? Or are you letting TV, internet,
video games, etc. crowd this out? My kids have asked many times for
cable TV and unlimited internet access. I always tell them I'll do it
if they can refute this logic: If we get it and don't use it a lot,
we're wasting our money; if we get it and do use it a lot, we're wasting
our time. This is why I have opted for the 3-hour-per-month AOL internet
access.
Do you prioritize this in your own efforts to grow spiritually (HOME
GROUP INVOLVEMENT; CORPORATE PRAYER; ONE-ON-ONE TIME)? Or are you
trying to get by on chat-rooms, web-sites, tapes, books, email, etc.?
While these things can augment spiritual instruction, the notion of
online churches or cyber-seminaries is a contradiction in terms.
Do you prioritize this in your efforts to impact others for Christ
(FRIENDSHIP EVANGELISM; PERSONAL DISCIPLESHIP)? Or are you trying
to get by on chat-rooms, phone calls, tapes, videos, email, etc.?
I think this is going to become a bigger and bigger challenge to us,
as the world speeds up and the tidal wave of information continues to
crash over us. But it will also be one of our greatest witnesses to the
world . . .
Willingness to be emotionally affected by others'
spiritual health
Let's look at another aspect of Paul's spiritual parenting. See if you
can identify it from these verses (re-read 2:19-20; 3:5-9). Notice the
way that Paul's emotional state is affected by their spiritual state.
What was his emotional state while their spiritual welfare was imperiled?
He was so anguished that he “could endure it no longer” without
sending someone to check on them (3:5). He speaks of this same kind
of anguish for his spiritual children in 2 Corinthians 11:28-29 and
Galatians 4:19-20—and agony (agwn) even for Christians whom
he has never met (Colossians 2:1)!
Conversely, what was his emotional state when he learned that they
were safe and moving forward spiritually? He was comforted in spite
of the persecution he was experiencing, he “really lives,”
he is overflowing with thanks and rejoicing to God.
How different this is from our models of spiritual and emotional health
today! We are caught between two equally errant and damaging extremes.
We talk a lot about our need for psychological "space"--by
which we mean we don't want to let others get close enough to us that
that they can affect us emotionally.
People talk increasingly about relationships as similar to financial
investments—stick when the emotional benefit is good, sell when
the emotional cost is too high. This “commodification of relationships”
is horrible!
We have TV models like Jerry Seinfeld, who is completely cynical and
detached. He is “together” because he is never emotionally
affected by the defeats and victories of his friends. Even his “empathy”
is bemused mockery.
I have talked with many senior pastors who tell me that they can't
afford to get close to any of the people in their churches, that their
best friends are people they went to seminary with, now hundreds of
miles away. How would Paul respond to this?
“This is neurotic! This is codependency!” Neurotic, codependent
relationships (parenting as well as romantic) are unhealthy—but
there are crucial differences between codependency and what Paul is describing.
In codependent relationships, my identity and security are based on
whether you like me, how you make me look. In Christ-centered relationships,
my identity and security are rooted ultimately in how Christ views me
and in his unwavering love for me. This is why a better word for codependent
relationships is “idolatrous.”
In codependent relationships, I am completely dependent emotionally
on how you treat me. Thus the extreme “roller-coaster” effect.
In Christ-centered relationships, I can lay hold of his comfort and
peace even in the midst of relational pain.
In codependent relationships, I am unable to discipline because I am
dependent on the above. In Christ-centered relationships, I may weep
while I do it—but I am willing and able to take a stand for truth
and even jeopardize the relationship over what God says is true and
right and therefore for your good.
How about you? Are you involved and invested enough in other people's
spiritual lives that your emotional life is affected by them? When was
the last time you wept over someone's choice to turn away from the Lord?
When was the last time you felt great joy over someone's choice to come
to Christ and/or grow in him? I have to regularly ask God to give me this
heart . . .
Don't get the cart before the horse! Progress here begins with establishing
a personal relationship with God by receiving Christ (Revelations 3:20)
. . .
Footnotes
Copyright
2000 Gary DeLashmutt