Whose Decision?

I recently started reading the book Mother Theresa: Come Be My Light - The Private Writings of the Saint of Calcutta.  The book was in the news when it was published because of the deeply personal nature of the writings, which include the revelation that Mother Theresa suffered for many years with an extended "dark night of the soul" in which she did not seem to experience any of God's love.  This revelation, however, is only a part of the book, albeit a large part.

The first few chapters chronicle Mother Theresa's early ministry and the founding of the Missionary Sisters of Charity, the order which would make her famous.  I have found the process absolutely fascinating.  The short version is that Mother Theresa felt Christ calling her to a deeper devotion to the poor in India, which she understood to mean the foundation of a new religious order.  Mother Theresa wanted to begin immediately, but she could not.  First she had to seek the approval of her superiors within the church hierarchy - her confessor, her bishop and, ultimately, from the Pope himself.  

Obviously, we know that the approval eventually came, but the time of waiting was difficult to Mother Theresa.  The book includes several letters she wrote to her bishop trying to convince him to let her move forward, as well as the bishops responses - in which he consistently reminds her that such decisions cannot be made hastily or without much care.  He - and the church hierarchy - wanted to ensure that the decision was based on God's will and not on anything else.

I got to thinking about that, and I realized that this is one area in which the Catholic Church has a leg up on the rest of us Christians.  How many church splits and disasters could have been avoided if pastors were forced to seek larger church approval before making any major changes?  If, before a pastor comes in and starts cancelling services and changing worship styles, the denomination said, "Wait, these decisions cannot be made hastily."  Instead, in most protestant churches, the onus of responsibility lies squarely on the shoulders of one person - the senior pastor.  It is the senior pastor that initiates change and leads change and, if the change does not go well, it is often the senior pastor that faces the consequences.

In Mother Theresa's case, though, the onus of responsibility was on more than just her.  The bishop and the entire Catholic Church stood behind the decision.  So when hard times came and the decision began to look doubtful, no one could say that the decision was made hastily.  Further, when those hard times came, Mother Theresa could rely on the support of the larger church.  When decisions are made at the local level only, that support is not always there.

I don't know what it would look like, but I am fairly sure that everyone would benefit from a hierarchical decision making process.  Of course, the hierarchical structure has its problems - but in decision making, it doesn't get much better.

Questions

So I posted some time ago about the book Surprised by Hope by N.T. Wright.  In it, Wright talks about reshaping our understanding of heaven and hell and the end of days.  It is a truly revolutionary book, and I keep coming back to it and thinking more and more about the implications - especially as I am also reading Hot, Flat, and Crowded by Thomas L. Friedman, which talks about the climate/energy crisis facing our world.

Here are some of the questions I've been asking myself lately (I'd love to hear some readers' thoughts):

1. If the end of days results in a renewed heaven and a new earth, what level of responsibility do Christians have to be advocates for earth-healthy lifestyles and policies?
2. Friedman shares the following alarming statistic: Every 20 minutes, somewhere on earth, a unique species goes extinct...as in gone forever, never to be seen again.  Will we be judged for the role that we have played in such destruction of God's creation?
3. To what extent will a renewed earth and a renewed "me" resemble the current earth and the current "me?"
4. Does an understanding of heaven as a completely renewed and fulfilled earth/physical body mean that I have a responsibility to take care of my body (i.e. exercise and eat well, stop doing unhealthy things)?
5. What if the reason the Bible offers all these "rules" against unhealthy behaviors is so that we can be better prepared for the renewed creation?  What if I'm not supposed to get drunk not because it is immediately risky, but because of the damage to my body?
6. The Bible teaches that the Risen Christ - our only example of what "renewed body" means - still carried the wounds of the cross.  Does that mean that we will still carry with us the marks and wounds of this life in the new creation, but in a "redeemed" way?

I'd better stop...I'm about to drive myself crazy. : )

Off Topic: Moments in History

For my grandparents generation, the one moment that they always remember is where they were on December 7, 1941 - the day Pearl Harbor was attacked.

For my parents generation, those moments include the assassination of JFK and the Oklahoma City bombing.

For my generation, to this point, there has been but one moment that we will never forget, and it is a moment of great tragedy - the attacks on New York and the Pentagon on 9/11.  Tonight, though, we are all witness to another one of those great moments, one with a much more positive tone.  Forty years from now, I will be able to tell my grandchildren about the day that the United States officially ended the Civil Rights movement by electing an African-American President.

I generally don't get caught up in patriotic attitudes, but I have never been more proud to call myself an American than I am at this moment, this historic moment.  My prayer is that this election will be a harbinger of days in which we no longer even have to think of or talk about race as an issue again...