John van de Laar

Author's details

Name: John van de Laar
Date registered: March 14, 2012

Latest posts

  1. Sacredise: Allegiances — October 20, 2014
  2. Sacredise: A Contrarian God — October 17, 2014
  3. Sacredise: Brainstorming for Worship: Caesars — October 15, 2014
  4. Sacredise: Not Included — October 13, 2014
  5. Sacredise: Agreeing with God (2) — October 10, 2014

Most commented posts

  1. Sacredise: What Good Is Faith? — 2 comments
  2. Sacredise: Rev. Dr. Ross Olivier — 2 comments
  3. Sacredise: Welcome Palestine — 1 comment
  4. Sacredise: A Story of Life — 1 comment

Author's posts listings

Oct 20 2014

Sacredise: Allegiances

Original post at

There is a beautiful, poetic symmetry in the synoptic Gospels as they describe Jesus’ ministry. At the beginning Jesus faces three famous tests by the adversary, and at the end he faces three great challenges by the religious leaders. There is a strong resonance between the temptations in the wilderness and the traps set by Jesus’ opponents. And, of course, there is the wisdom and strength with which Jesus resists both the temptations and the tricks.

If you heard the Gospel reading from the Lectionary read yesterday in worship, you would have reflected on one of the three tests from the religious leaders – the one where they ask him if it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. This is a loaded question since, with Israel as an occupied nation, the issue of paying taxes had not just economic implications but political ones as well. If Jesus denounced paying taxes to Caesar as wrong, then he could be accused of stirring a revoution against Rome, and he could be put to death for treason (as others before him had been). But, if he supported paying taxes, he could be accused of being a traitor to God’s people (much like the tax collectors to whom such tax would be paid) and a blasphemer for claiming to speak for God. Either way, it was a neat trap that the religious leaders thought would finish Jesus.

However, Jesus approached the question from a characteristically surprising angle, and turned the trap around. He drove the issue into the heart and raised the question of devotion. Caesar may require taxes – it was Caesar’s currency after all – but God required a far greater sacrifice – the offering of our whole selves.

The genius in Jesus’ response is in his request that someone give him one of the coins used to pay the tax. This revealed two things – first, that Jesus did not himself carry such coins, and second, that the Pharisees did. The coins were hated by the Jews because they carried an image of Caesar (graven images were forbidden by the law) and they carried an inscription claiming Caesar to be divine (also a blasphemy). So, by revealing that he did not posses one of Caesar’s coins, Jesus revealed that he had no devotion for Caesar. But, in contrast, by revealing that the Pahrisees did have one of Caesar’s coins, Jesus revealed that they were already in Caesar’s camp. They were idolaters and hypocrites who had compromised their allegiance to God. I like to imagine that there was a gasp from the crowd when the Pharisees easily pulled one of Caesar’s coins from their money pouch, and that Jesus took it between the edge of two fingers with a look of great distaste on his face to echo the expected revulsion for this idolatrous coinage that the crowd would have felt. Before he said another word, the trap had already been rendered useless – but Jesus had not incriminated himself in any way!

So, when Jesus said they should give to Caesar what belonged to Caesar he was suggesting that idolatry and hypocrisy were fitting not for God’s Reign, but for Caesar’s Empire. Whereas what belonged to God was complete, undiluted allegiance. It’s a little like his earlier saying that no one can serve both God and money (Matthew 6:24).

Which, of course, raises the question for us of where our allegiances lie. When the values of God’s Reign call us to simplicity, not the accumulation of wealth, do we embrace simplicity as an act of allegiance to God’s Reign? Or do we excuse our materialism by calling it God’s blessing? When the values of God’s Reign call us to service and self-giving, not the quest for power and self-protection, do we embrace servanthood and selflessness as acts of allegiance to God’s Reign? Or do we excuse our quest for power and privilege as our “right” as followers of Jesus?

But, if we follow the story through – as the Gospel will in the next couple of weeks – we will discover that what really belongs to God is simply this – the love of our hearts, souls, minds and strength. And, the commitment to love our neighbours – the God-imaged, God-beloved people around us – even as we love ourselves.

If all we did, as followers of Jesus, was give to God what belongs to God, our world would be a very different place indeed. Perhaps you’d like to try it this week?

Permanent link to this article:

Oct 17 2014

Sacredise: A Contrarian God

Original post at

Over the last few weeks I’ve been exploring what it might mean to think about worship as a conversation with God. We’ve explored the various different ways that such a conversation might be initiated (Causative Voices) and what it would mean for us to agree with God and God with us (Collaborative Voices). So far so good.

But, now we come to a movement that is far less familiar and comfortable than what we’ve explored thus far. In any conversation that seeks to increase the intelligence or effectiveness of the group, there is a need for what I call the Contrary Voice. If all we do is sit around agreeing with one another, we never learn anything new, and we never have any reason to question our assumptions. This means that we become stagnant or stuck, and our responses to the world become fixed, rigid and thoughtless. Agreement is nice, but for growth to happen, we need  to be challenged, questioned, and pushed to think more deeply and carefully.

In all spiritual traditions this sense of the Contrary Voice can be found. There are the dark night of the soul moments, the via negativa (negative way) moments, or, in theology, the apophatic tradition (or negative theology). All of these various streams of thought recognise that we need moments when we are disrupted, when our assumptions are challenged, and when we are forced to go deeper, to try again, to learn more, or change direction.

At its heart, this is what repentance is all about. The Scriptures regularly reveal the prophets, the apostles, and Jesus confronting thinking, attitudes and behaviours in people that are stuck, unhelpful, or even destructive. The purpose of these confrontations is not to heap guilt on people, but to lead them into a new way of being. It is to reveal the inadequacy of people’s current patterns of living, and challenge them to seek new, better ways.

If our worship never leaves us feeling like God is a contrarian, if we never face a divine “No!”, if we are never challenged, or questioned, or disrupted, it is unlikely we will ever really be changed by anything we do in our worship gatherings. A spirituality that does nothing but make us feel comfortable is worthless. We all too easily give in to our worst selves, and we need to be held accountable. We need to be challenged, and we need to be changed so that our best selves can emerge, and so that we can be a positive influence on our corner of the world.

Which is why we should expect, fairly regularly, to experience God’s Contrary Voice in worship. We should expect – we should even seek out – opportunities to be shaken out of our complacency and self-satisfaction and be confronted with the things in us that need to be healed and transformed.

Of course, worship has always had practices that are designed to do exactly this (although we often tend to domesticate them so that they can disrupt us very little). Perhaps the primary “contrarian” practice is confession. But, we are also faced with God’s “No!” when we receive the ashes on Ash Wednesday, or when we practice the Lenten disciplines of prayer, giving and fasting, or when we meditate on the cross on Good Friday. We hear God’s “No!” when we read the prophetic Scriptures, and when we listen to the confrontational teachings of Jesus. And we hear God’s “No!” when we are forced to welcome those with whom we would prefer not to mix, or when we are forced to sing music we don’t like, or when we are encouraged to greet each other in a language that is not our own. Any time something in our worship makes us uncomfortable we have the choice either to allow the Contrary Voice of God’s Spirit to disrupt and change us, or to settle back into our rigid, self-protectiveness and complain about what we don’t like.

The amazing thing about all this is that, according to James Surowiecki (in his book The Wisdom of Crowds) studies have shown that the presence of Contrary Voices always make a group collectively more intelligent – even when those voices are wrong! So, even if we have a good theological reason for objecting to whatever upsets us, we cannot deny that the discomfort holds the potential for growth, change, and a deeper engagement with God.

So here’s the million dollar question: How willing are you to be disrupted and challenged by your worship?

Permanent link to this article:

Oct 15 2014

Sacredise: Brainstorming for Worship: Caesars

Original post at

“Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.” (Matthew 22:21)

What does God ask of us? What do we have that belongs to God which we are required to give to God? In the Gospel reading for this Sunday in the Lectionary, Jesus raises exactly this question, but I suspect that, in order to grasp what this question may have meant for Jesus, we need to hear some of the other things Jesus said about money and giving to God. And what we may find would suggest that Jesus was not talking about money at all in this encounter with the religious leaders. And, what Jesus was talking about is crucial for how we design, lead, and participate in worship – whether we may be focussing on the Lectionary or not this week.

Think about these two statements:

“No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other; you will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” (Matthew 6:24)

“Don’t store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.” (Matthew 6:19-21)

What we do with our money has to do with the state of our hearts, and where we place our allegiance. Money is not a neutral object. It is a reflection of our values. It is true that our bank statements are theological documents that reveal the priorities and values that hold the true devotion of our hearts.

So when Jesus calls us to give to God what is God’s he is speaking about our hearts and their devotion. He is calling us to find our deepest treasure, our greatest value, and the priorities that guide our lives in the purposes and priorities of God’s Reign – and not in the purposes and priorities of the Reign of any Caesar that may seek our allegiance. And if we have given our hearts to God’s Reign, this will automatically be reflected in how we use our resources, including our money. Heaven forbid we claim to be devoted to God’s Reign but use our resources only for our own comfort, pleasure, or self-protection!

Here lies one of the struggles I face with the way we often do worship. As an example: In the last week, I was offfered complementary tickets to a worship gathering in which two well-known British worship leaders would be leading. In other words, there was an entrance fee being charged for a worship event. But the Bible is clear that there can be no gatekeepers for worship. The place of worship is to be kept wide open for the poor, the marginalised and the least to be welcomed in. Surely to exclude the poor from worship (by charging an entrance fee) is a contradiction of the Gospel? Surely this is failing to “give to God what belongs to God”? Yet, it is a common practice that regularly happens in churches – but which is aligned more to the values of Caesar than of God, in my opinion.

In what other ways may our worship be more aligned to the values of Caesar? Perhaps when we value numbers of worshippers in pews over the impact of the congregation on their local community? Perhaps when we measure success by the financial wealth of our churches, rather than by the levels of sacrifical service offered by the members? Perhaps when we make decisions about music choices based more on what is popular on the radio, or on which “famous worship leader” (a contradiction in terms for me, by the way) wrote the music? Perhaps when we seek to be comforted and encouraged in our quest for worldy success, influence and material objects, rather than be challenged to give up these things for the sake of eternal values?

Remember that this encounter with the religious leaders happened in the Temple, the place of worship. Jesus’ statement is a direct challenge to the values we bring into the sanctuary – both as worship leaders and as worshippers.

So, how can you plan and particpate in worship in such a way as to give to God what is God’s this week? And how can you leave what belongs to Caesar out of the equation? It’s time we stopped making the sanctuary a place that reflects more of what belongs to Caesar than of what belongs to God, don’t you think?

Permanent link to this article:

Oct 13 2014

Sacredise: Not Included

Original post at

I have been known to say that I wouldn never close the doors of the church to anyone. But, that’s not completely true. If an abused woman was sitting inside, and her violent partner came to drag her out, I would close the doors on him. If a politician came to my church demanding to use the pulpit for party political ends, I would close the doors on him or her. If someone sought to be part of the church in order to win the trust of children so that he or she could mistreat them, I would certainly shut that person out.

There is no question in my mind that the Gospel of Christ offers the widest, most extravagant and all-embracing invitation we could ever imagine. When Richard Rohr says “everyone belongs” I agree with him. But, this is not to deny that the Gospel is also a message of confrontation. To use the language of Matthew Fox  the Gospel calls us to nurture and celebrate biophilia - the love of life. But it also calls us to stand against necrophilia - the love of death. These are the two main paths of our faith – the call to celebration (or mysticism in Fox’s scheme) and the call to activism (or the prophetic in Fox’s scheme).

The teachings of Jesus, like the Parable of the Wedding Feast from yesterday’s Lectionary, proclaim both of these aspects of the Gospel. Christ invites us to follow him, and assures us that God’s grace welcomes us into God’s family, no matter who we are or what we’ve done. But, Christ also confronts the brokenness, destructiveness, self-protection, and lovelessness in our hearts. The message of Jesus is one of love, yes. But it is also one of justice. Which means that, the invitation is to be welcomed freely and unconditioanlly by God, but it is also to be changed by the grace and love of God into our best, most loving and just selves.

So, while everyone is welcome, not everything we may do, think, say or believe is welcome. To use the metaphor of the above parable, unless we’re willing to wear the appropriate clothing for God’s wedding feast, we will never be at home in God’s Reign.

Flowing from this, here are some questions: What invitiation is God offering you this week? And what might God be seeking to confront in you? What invitation is God asking you to share with those around you? And what might you need to confront in your part of the world?

It’s good to remember that God’s love and grace extends to all. But, God is always biased towards protection of the poorest, the most vulnerable, and those whom Jesus calls the least among us. And some stuff is just not included in the kingdom of God.


Permanent link to this article:

Oct 10 2014

Sacredise: Agreeing with God (2)

Original post at

After last week’s call to agree with God  in worship, we need to explore this question from another angle. As we refelct on worship as a conversation it may be tempting to think of the conversation solely in terms of God intiating and us responding in agreement. But, a conversation like that is so one sided as to hardly be a conversation at all. If worship really is a conversation with God, then it must genuinely be a two-way engagement. A couple of weeks ago we explored what it might mean for us to take the role of initiators (Causative Voices) in our communion with God. But, surely, if we are to initiate, it is right for us to expect a response from God? And, surely it is also right that we should expect God’s response, at least some of the time, to be in agreement with us (a Collaborative Voice)?

It should not be surprising how often in the Bible we encounter God affirming, supporting, celebrating, and agreeing with women and men. From the very beginning God always seems to be looking for ways to speak a resounding “Yes” to our humanity – and perhaps the most profound “Yes” is seen in the incarnation of God in the man, Jesus.

Which means that, when we gather for worship, bringing all of our joys and sorrows, our struggles and our victories, our laughter and our tears to God, we do not have to feel that we must lay these things aside and “forget about ourselves” as one song says. We do not have to pretend that we’re either righteously happy, or suitably sad and repentant. We can come as we are, expressing our true selves to God. After all, if we’re not bringing ourselves into worship, it’s not really worship is it?

And, as we come, honestly, authentically, openly and vulnerably into these moments of encounter with God, we can expect to hear God’s resounding “Yes” spoken over us. As we initiate by bringing our real selves to the act of worship, so God collaborates by proclaiming once again, “It is very good!” This is not to imply that there are not areas of brokenness in us, or things that need to change. Of course there are. But, any conviction, challenge or confrontation that God’s Spirit might seek to engage in with us, is always in the context of God’s grace, God’s affirmation and God’s love – God’s resounding Collaborative Voice.

With this in mind:

  • How might you prepare yourself to enter the worship space as honestly and vulnerably as possible this Sunday?
  • How might you lay aside any fear that you have to become something else – somehow more “spiritual” or “good” – in order to worship God?
  • How might you listen for God’s “Yes” in your own life, and find in it the courage and the confidence to live more vibrantly, creatively, and compassionately?

I’d love to hear your thoughts!

Permanent link to this article:

Oct 08 2014

Sacredise: Brainstorming for Worship: Call and Response

Original post at

If you’ve been following my Worship as a Conversation series, it might be helpful to see how you might begin to use these ideas in your own worship experience and/or planning. This week, if you’re following the Lectionary, the main stories are Jesus’ parable of the Wedding Banquet and the Golden Calf incident with the Israelites at Mount Sinai. While these two stories seem to be disconnected there are actually some interesting points of contact between them. (Of course, if you follow the “rules” of Lectionary usage, they aren’t meant to be used together, but as alternatives for this period in the Church Year).

Jesus’ parable is about how those who were invited to the wedding feast of the king’s son refused to attend, which then led the king to welcome in those who would not usually have been invited. But, one guest, who failed to wear wedding attire, was thrown out. The parable is one of a series in which Jesus challenged the religious leaders about their refusal to accept God’s invitation into the Reign of God – the inclusive, compassionate, gracious, just way of being that Jesus proclaimed. The man who was thrown out reflects those who claim to accept God’s invitation, but fail to live by the gracious and loving values and priorities of God’s reign. The Golden Calf incident was a moment in the life of the newly liberated Israel in which the people, frightened by Moses’ long absence, and the glory of God that they had witnessed, began to seek other gods to make them feel more secure. Aaron, who of course should have known better, felt the pressure of the crowds, and submitted to their desire. Again, the issue here is about stepping into relationship with God and living by God’s values and priorities, or choosing a different way.

In terms of the Worship Conversation discussion, these two stories both reveal something of God’s Causative Voice  calling God’s people to particular way of being. The people, then, have a choice about how to respond. In both stories, the people choose to ignore or reject God’s call and seek their own way. They do not agree with God, and they face the destructive consequences. These two stories illustrate one of the significant tasks of our worship this and every week – whether we’re using one of these readings or not.

There is a challenge for every worshipper: We have the privilege of constantly receiving God’s call, but we also have the freedom to accept or reject it. As we prepare for worship this Sunday, we do well to ask ourselves what God has said to us in the last few days, weeks or months, and how we are choosing to respond. We do well to ask ourselves how we can enter worship this week with the intention to respond with agreement, with commitment and with openness to God’s empowering Spirit as we seek to collaborate with God. How can our worship ensure that we do not turn away and follow the Golden Calf, or try to attend the wedding feast in the wrong clothing? How can our worship lead us deeper into alignment with God’s Reign?

For worship leaders, the challenge is to create an environment in which God’s call can be heard again, and in which our response can be made. The challenge is to create moments for real encounter with God’s Spirit, in which we can receive the strength and courage we need to answer God’s call, and to live by God’s values and priorities through the coming week.

So, it might be helpful to create moments of silence in which we can invoke the presence and power of God’s Spirit. In the time of response, it might be helpful to have some sort of altar call, or a time of praying for one another to receive God’s call and God’s empowering. It may be good to identify the Golden Calves (temptations) which seek to draw us away from God’s call, and the clothing (attitudes, values and priorities) that do not fit at God’s Wedding Feast. As you prepare your heart for worship and/or prepare the liturgy, perhaps you can think about what language, symbols and rituals will help us hear what God is saying and respond with heartfelt agreement.

If you are following the Lectionary, check out these resources for worship, and this deeper reflection on the Gospel reading.

Permanent link to this article:

Older posts «