Archive for the ‘Emergent/Emerging Churches’ Category
Listening to Brian McLaren just before the grand opening of World Cup 2010 in South Africa. It’s always better to listen or read Brian directly. 
Since I started blogging, it’s not an uncommon experience for me nowadays to meet people whom I have only corresponded by email or interacted through blog comments. Joshua Woo is one who has made this list .
So, it’s interesting to see myself afresh through his eyes. Who is Sivin Kit? Who are we? Who were we in 2002? Who are we now in 2010? Who are we to our family? our church? our nation? our friends? our enemies? .. How have we changed? How have we remained the same? Once a while (not too much), it’s good to have a fresh take.
It was fun to meet Joshua, and he was so kind to pen down his thoughts on two encounters which I had the privilege to be one of them. He writes well and it’s not just because of the subject matter. So who is Sivin Kit to you? I’m still so tickled with the “leading Protestant pastor” bit. ROFL. Because, I’m so aware how fragile and ordinary I am.
One of the "leading Protestant pastor[s] in Kuala Lumpur," Sivin Kit, and I barely know one another though we know each other’s existence since the Agora days. At that time (late 2005 / early 2006) I was active in the Agora network and initially was suspicious of Sivin due to his connection with the Emergent movement. But who was to blame as I was worshiping Norman Geisler in those days? Then many events occurred that I gradually becoming more open to postmodern ideology. One of the events was when I attempted to woo a Roman Catholic girl.
My affection to her restrained me from condemning Roman Catholicism. (All Geisler worshipers have the tendencyto do so.) She introduced a lot of things to me that I was not aware of. There was a point in time when I was partially considering chanting the
blasphemous"Rome sweet home" mantra. Steven Sim knew about it and commented that, "Then both of you can meet in h.e.l.l." (LOL) Those were the days when we were still very much stuck to the er…….. Fundamentals.Anyway, last Sunday, I finally met up and conversed with Sivin. I went to look for him at his church, currently situated at the Lutheran Center.
I was surprised that his church was filled with young parents: A lot of young adults with babies. Actually I saw Sivin on 19 June 2007, when I attended a peaceful virgil at Dataran Merdeka for Revathi’s case. But we didn’t speak to each other at that time.
Sivin invited me for dinner in that evening. He reached my place to pick me up in his blue old Proton Wira. The car instantaneously betrayed the fact that this guy is not into ‘health & wealth’ gospel (which, by the way, is a good thing). We arrived at a nice eatery, sat on table number 56. And coincidentally, the bill was RM56. We spent about 3 hours conversing over many matters. I told him about my negative impression of one of his personal friend,Vinoth Ramachandra. In turn, Sivin shared about Vinoth’s critique on his thesis for his Th.M. Sivin has a bubbly and outspoken persona. I, on the other hand, usually appear more quiet than one expected.
We talked about the way to theologize. Sivin mentioned about his "in-between" approach. When I heard Sivin uttered the term "in-between," I thought of William Desmond’s in-between metaphysic. Anyway, Sivin mentioned about the inadequacy of theologizing on an arm-chair. He said that one’s theology is constructed differently when one has participated in public demonstrations and had been chased by the police. Sivin went through all that. I agreed in silent. If not, I wouldn’t have traveled all the way from Singapore to KL for a virgil alone. It was from such participation that one identifies with the subject one was contemplating. It is as if one wiped with one’s own hands the tears of Revathi.
Hence by "in-between" Sivin meant the space between the academy on one side and the daily struggles of fellow humans on the other side.
I also told Sivin that I used to have a negative view of him last time due to his connection with the Emergent movement. Hearing that, he demanded me to ask for absolution. I stubbornly rejected that by appealing to my innocence. Of course, humor was in the air.
I asked Sivin to give me three characteristics of a good public theologian. He gave like a dozen. I didn’t write them down. So it is better not elaborate here in case I misrepresent him. It’s better for him to share for himself. The one thing I remember vividly is his concern for a holistic approach to life. He mingles around with Christian and non-Christian people who fight for social justice. And what he finds unfortunate is that there are those within both groups who dichotomize their public life from their lives in their home. Sivin wishes that those who fight for just treatment in the society can also treat their family members with equal zeal.
The other thing that we have in common is our distrust of academic grades as the indicator of one’s intelligence. Sivin told me about someone who was previously one of the top students at Trinity Theological College, who now is somewhat disconnected. I agreed with him and brought up John Sung as another example. Sung’s average score in his theological studies at Union Theological Seminary was above 90. Yet he was warded into the Bloomingdale Hospital to receive psychopathic treatment.
Sivin Kit from Malaysia from TransFORM on Vimeo.
Thanks to Steve Knight and the folks at TransFORM for the chance to share a precious 12 minutes of as much as I could while driving around near my home Steve asked me to share from my heart to friends in the United States of America who are considering new ways of forming faith communities. So I did exactly that.
It was challenging to squeeze as much content as I could. But I guess what’s important is that ALL of us know that we are not alone. And especially in the light of the internet age, the local is indeed connected to the global and vice versa. It is in this context that we seek to participate in God’s transforming work in the world in our time and beyond.
It’s great to see be in touch with my friend in the USA Steve Knight and others get this event off the ground. Great gathering of speakers and I believe a wonderful bunch of participants too. I’ve found it a great privilege and honor to have been part of this conversation and still part of it in some way, thanks to those who are willing to listen.
I was a little too far to join Christianity 21 . but it sounds and looks great! I love what Paul Soupiset did below.
* * *
Updating the post with more of Paul’s awesome Livesketches (his illustrations are captivating!), and I love the music too!
More interesting conversations in the comments..
Good Friday opens up the chance for me to conduct the Tenebrae Service. And we did it with some adaptation with the Seven Last Words of Jesus, relevant passages with prayers tonight. We ended with Psalm 51 and dismissed quietly while singing the Taize Chant I’ll use the full outline from Upper Room Daily Reflections to jot down some thoughts.
Friday’s Reflection
THE CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS began long before he was born. It began in eternity, with a decision in the heart of God to journey from glory into poverty, from power to vulnerability, from all to nothing. The God of all the universe made a conscious decision to journey downward, to be born as a human baby in a finite world.
- Peter Storey
Listening at Golgotha: Jesus’ Words from the Cross
From p. 64 of Listening at Golgotha: Jesus’ Words from the Cross by Peter Storey. Copyright © 2004 by the author. All Rights Reserved. Used with permission of Upper Room Books. http://www.upperroom.org/bookstore/. Learn more about or purchase this book.
Today’s Question
Share your Good Friday journey. What are you thinking? Feeling? What are your reflections on today’s quote? Share your thoughts.
The day started with a good time of meditation on John chapters 18 and 19. I used the Bible Experience to help me along. Rather than reading it silently, I listened attentively, with a pen jotting down some phrases into my journal. There were quite a few which stood out for me. The most haunting one was then the chief priests shouted, “We have no king but Caesar!” There’s so much to reflect just based on that utterance. Lord have mercy!
I spent the afternoon with a Christian Fellowship group who meets in their workplace. Had lunch with them and then shared from some thoughts on how for us going through death before the resurrection redeems every single moment of pain and suffering we face. We don’t hurry from Palm Sunday and skip to Easter Sunday. We go through Good Friday! Showed them Psalm 13 and shared with them some reflections from Markus Ng’s recent departure. I thought a lot about Markus today and the whole episode around him has drawn me to appreciate Good Friday even more. Through him, I find myself drawn closer to Christ. We still miss you, Markus.
Got some needed rest before the Tenebrae service at BLC tonight. So, I found my heart quite settled and ready to embrace the final darkness symbolized by the final candle being snuffed out.
As I was driving home, I wondered it was similar wasn’t it. The most significant death in history happened on that day, and many people were still doing what they would normally do. The rippled impact of Christ death will take time to spread beyond the confines of its space and time. It’s hard to fully grasp God’s ways and his wisdom in carrying out his will. There’s so much to take in at one go.
Now, more and more I can appreciate why it was only after the resurrection and quite a while before the disciples were “getting” it right. It was a long journey to process all the experiences one has had with Christ. How different would it be for us today?
I know the Tenebrae service is not the most child-friendly as it demands much silence. Furthermore, it forces us to confront death through the symbolism of darkness – utter darkness, but like it or not, this is reality, this is life. And sooner or later, we will have to deal with it. I believe part of Christian formation for parents to children, and the rest of us as Christ-followers is to relate to this. That’s why I see Good Friday as one of the three most important services in the church year. And increasingly, it’s now become part and parcel of my own spiritual growth and maturity.
Previously, it’s full of busyness because we’re all gearing up for Easter. And therefore, tend to bypass Lent and the Holy Week with a skip and a hop. But, since so many jump firsts, and fears later … I have found the Holy Week season and Lent as one which has slowed me down enough to Sit first, and reflect on the former and the future, with the leading of the Spirit and the guidance from Scripture.
Part of this has brought me to a place to understand maybe a little bit better what this “journey” downward” is all about. Not fully, but a little bit more.
And as a result, I find myself more open to whatever is coming from the heart of God. Remember, whatever. I trust him.
Today’s Scripture Reading
When Jesus had received the wine, he said, “It is finished.” Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.
Video of Christian Book Expo Panel (HT: Tony Jones)
I confess I was as frustrated as some of the panelists while watching this “conversation”. Perhaps the best part was when the three older speakers stated what they believed to be the Gospel at the end. I think there was value in having the younger twins on the panel but then while I appreciate their sincerity, I think they were a little out of place in the discussion.
I do think Scot is bringing out a very needed point stressed again and again, i.e. the emerging church or conversation was in my view forcefully defined more by the critics than the participants and even authors themselves to those who in the words of Kevin are concerned with what they saw as uncomfortable “trends”.
Frankly, I’ve grown tired of this discussion when people too quickly say that another person is abandoning orthodoxy just because they do not articulate their theology in the same way they do. If that is the case, a big chunk of us in Asia, Latin America and Africa are already written off.
BTW, I like Lesslie Newbigin too. And I think he and many other mission, contextual and practical theologians have already provided better directions for us in this conversations to move forward. I’ve been a little quiet on this conversation in the blogosphere for a while. But I’m still eaves dropping as I’ve done since day one, and I will chip in once a while. Seriously, after watching this video, I do think if this is how the USA Christians especially Protestant Evangelicals want to talk about the emerging church and the issues it has provoked, it’s a tiring adventure in missing the point. There must be better ways forward. The fact is some are already doing it.
Brian McLaren: Six Stages of the Emerging Church Conversation
I first read Brian McLaren and continue to read and engage his thinking because he was able to put into words beyond some polarities and categories which frustrated me. The whole emerging church conversation was more of the bonus, and maybe for some provided a label for it for all its worth.
The following six stages documented by Bob Robinson helpfully describes not only Brian’s journey but also the themes some of us have been wrestling for a long time.
STAGE ONE: He said it started out as a conversation among young, white, middle-class pastors (and him as the old guy at 42) about how to do church in order to reach 18-30 year olds outside of the church. McLaren’s book The Church on the Other Side reflects this conversation.
STAGE TWO: The emerging church conversation quickly shifted from church-focus to how to evangelize and disciple people, and McLaren’s books More Ready Than You Realize and Finding Faith reflect that stage of the conversation (Finding Faith has subsequently been repackaged as two separate books: A Search for What Makes Sense and A Search for What Is Real).STAGE THREE: The conversation shifted from reaching 18-30 year olds to the realization that the issue is less about the age of people, but the cultural milieu in which we find ourselves. This interest in the cultural milieu of the 21st Century led the conversation into the deep topic of philosophy, especially explorations into how postmodernism has affected our thinking and our ways of knowing. McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christian reflects this stage in the conversation.
STAGE FOUR: The next stage entailed the realization that the conversation was very white and male and middle classed. They began to expand the conversation into seeking to understand church history and other Christian traditions, while inviting women, mainline Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and Catholics into the discussion. This led to McLaren’s book, A Generous Orthodoxy.
STAGE FIVE: With this desire to get beyond the particularity of American Christianity, the Emerging Church conversation began listening to those outside the United States, hearing how others see the gospel as focused on Justice and Civil Issues. They discovered that The Kingdom of God is much more the center of the gospel outside of the states. McLaren’s books The Secret Message of Jesus and Everything Must Change reflect this stage.
STAGE SIX: McLaren said that the next stage he senses the conversation moving into is what he calls “Spirituality:” cultivating a deep awareness, love, and worship of God. This is reflected by his new book, Finding Our Way Again: The Return of the Ancient Practices.
The Inquisition of Brian McLaren?
I think quite a few people would respond in the same way after meeting and hearing Brian in person.
McLaren’s morning chapel message was very good. He talked about the Kingdom of God and how that message was radical for its time in that it was in opposition to the Kingdom of Caesar. McLaren pointed out that while Caesar’s kingdom was one of peace through violence, Jesus’ kingdom was one of peace through sacrifice. Very moving and very biblical. One person I met that morning said she came expecting to hear heresy, and found nothing in the message that wasn’t solidly biblical and applicable.
Cage Match: Bryan Hollon vs. Brian McLaren (Well, Not Exactly)
Seriously Brian might be pushing the boundaries for many Christians but from a church history perspective he’s no heretic or apostate.
McLaren at Malone: My Musings on the Mêlée
I noted some interesting observations by Bob Robinson.
When the forum was opened to the audience to ask questions, the crowd at the two microphones grew quickly. The questions were mixed between those sympathetic to McLaren and those clearly hostile toward him. More than once, people in the audience asked McLaren if he believed that Jesus Christ came to die as the substitutionary atonement for sin and to save us from a literal hell so that all who believe may have eternal life. The evening ended with a pastor that is known for being the local “John MacArthur” asking about justification by faith alone, and trying to get McLaren to admit he does not believe that righteousness comes only by faith in the death of Christ. McLaren didn’t bite.
I enjoyed watching people ask their questions and then walk away shaking their heads in self-righteousness. No matter what answers they received to their questions, they had already determined not to listen or seek to understand. They were already in scoffing mode.
Some Thoughts I Scribbled Down on the Plane About the Emerging Church Conference
In some ways, in our little event a couple of years ago with Brian McLaren we experienced something small scale and similar to what I heard happened here. To me this direction is more promising from a wider church perspective.
Phyllis Tickle:
* The central question that arises each time the church goes through one of these 500 year rummage sales is “Where now is our authority?” * Another important question: What does it mean to be a human being? Descartes’ “I think therefore I am” no longer cuts it * Sola Scriptura: Luther took a flesh & blood Pope and replaced it with a paper one. Protestantism’s great gift to the world was universal literacy. It’s other gift was divisiveness * Jerusalem is good, but the energy is in Antioch. We are here to serve the Kingdom of God, not the old or the new
Brian McLaren:
* What you focus on determines what you miss * Our traditional understanding of Jesus may not have been wrong, but partial * We must learn to see Jesus through the sight lines of his ancestors rather than his descendants only * Jesus went to Galilee. It meant something. If he came today would he go to Wall Street, Hollywood, the Ninth Ward… where?
Richard Rohr:
* With dualistic thinking, someone always has to be blamed. The system caves in on itself * The sun rises on the just and unjust. You can’t form a system of exclusion on that! * Jesus did not come to change God’s mind about humanity. He came to change humanity’s mind about God * We have fly-paper minds… everything that gets close sticks. Don’t call that ‘thinking’. It is narcissistic, egocentric, needy, and fragile * “I have no doubt that the Spirit was in the works of the Reformation.” But you can’t have the need to prove the other wrong (adversarial thinking) and be the contemplative mind * We don’t want to be contemplative because we have to give up control * Belonging/belief systems have come to replace transformation. We must turn from a belief system to an inner experience. Know them, don’t believe them * Recognize that I am living inside a mind bigger than my own. Someone is loving through me, and all I am is the conduit. * Francis didn’t run off and join the Franciscans – He just did it.
Alexi Torres-Fleming:
* God doesn’t call the qualified but surely qualifies the called. * Am I a fan or a follower of Jesus? * When we pray for God to ‘fix’ a problem, maybe Jesus kneels and prays for us to go out and be the solution * Maybe we’re given a little piece of God’s heart. We couldn’t deal with the entirety of God’s sadness for His children. (Note: Maybe this is what it means to be “made in the image of God”) * If we are free, and God’s poor are not free, then we are not free. * We cannot talk about church and theology without talking about justice. * We like our poor to look a certain way. The poor come to us in many different packages, and some may not be palatable. Some are angry. We must learn to see them as Christ sees them. (Note: Otherwise it’s just about us) * We must model incarnation: You cannot redeem what you will not assume
Shane Claiborne:
* Stop explaining/complaining about the church we have experienced and work at becoming the church we dream of. * We need to be relevant to the big questions of the day while retaining our cultural peculiarity * Fascinate the world with grace! * The church needs discontent. Don’t leave the church but submit to the authority of the larger Body of Christ * You can have all the right answers and still be mean. And if you’re mean, no one will listen to you.
I’ve always loved the word “conversation”. I prefer it over other words like “dialogue” or “movement” (depending on which end of the spectrum one is in whether activism or quietism or whatever pole one chooses.
Happy Birthday Bangsar Lutheran Church! It’s fascinating after all these years, I find myself returning to the basic questions and ongoing reflections that landed me here in the first place.
Someone asked me the other day, “Do you think a lot?” Well, I guess I do. But the thinking and the doing – the reflection and action process is not far from each other. It’s more like a unending spiral which is ongoing. Apart from my own personal journal, this blog has served the purpose of documenting some of the results of those reflections or simply the process of asking fresh questions again (and again . and again).
I stumbled on this book by Anthony B. Robinson the other day. Changing the conversation: a third way for congregations doesn’t come across with an impressive cover or a hip presentation, but somehow the words, “changing”, “conversation”, “third way” leaped out for me.
I’ve never managed to do a series of blog posts through a book. But as a Birthday present to Bangsar Lutheran Church, I would give it a try . ok! It’s more than a try, it’s training myself to walk through a book and sharing my reflections with others based on my own conversation with the author of the book. This has been my practice for years, i.e. seeing reading a book more like a conversation with the author over a mere acquisition of skill or knowledge.
So here goes.
Changing the culture of organizations, groups, and institutions – and even societies – is about changing the conversation. Those leading change use new language (or rediscover older language), introduce different topics, formulate new agendas, and offer alternative ways of framing issues and situations. One might understand the Christian faith itself as, in important ways, an ongoing effort at changing the conversation and thus changing the way we understand our lives and the way we live in the world. (p.1)
I recall my first attempt in this was in my wrestling with the whole “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and “speaking in tongues” piece in my journey. I was never comfortable with the term even as a teenager who experienced the phenomena and speak in tongues(perhaps the Lutheran DNA was stronger than I thought). I was also never sold on the idea that everyone must speak in tongues whether as an initial sign or a symbol of spiritual advancement. And yet, I did not and still do not deny the powerful experience this was for me personally, and the helpfulness of the spiritual language during a phase of my own spiritual walk.
It was John Wimber and authors linked with the Vineyard movement which provided some new way of “framing” the experience, and reading some Lutheran Charismatics which helped me out. In a way, I wonder whether that small step itself was already an experiment in learning to use new language in one’s faith journey?
Another highlight was of course my three favorite courses in Seminari Theoloji Malaysia, i.e. Church History, Christian Theology and Christian Spirituality (I’d throw in Christian education too as a bonus!). Apart of introducing me to the how wide and deep our Christian heritage at its best was, it was fascinating to discover how those who have gone before us have understood and practiced what it means to follow Jesus in their time and age. This was when I began to understand what words like “Ecumenical”, “Evangelical”, “Catholic”, “Pentecostal”, “Charismatic” means in their historical context, and also my horizons on what are the nuances for today. Of course, most of us in Malaysia are more muddled when it comes to these terms, and some might even feel what’s the point of knowing all this. But for me, it expanded my vocabulary and in a strange way, I believe made me more open and yet discerning at the same time.
One more which I think moves one more to the future. I believe credit must be give to the “Emergent”/”Emerging” conversation which to me helped to connect the more personal struggles between polarities, as well as theological wrestlings with the church and world realities. Brian McLaren and Todd Hunter were and still are wonderful models whom I’m tremendously grateful for. And the main thing I learnt from them was the importance of stepping back, explore the possibility of reframing the questions before us, and in conversation with others experiment with new ways of working out what we intuitively and imaginatively are talking about.
In Malaysia, the proximity between mainline denominations (of which I’m part of through the Lutheran Church in Malaysia), Mega-churches, and Independent Charismatic churches as well as those who are under Pentecostal denominations are much closer. In fact, I think the reality is most Christians in Malaysia would fall more under the Evangelical-Charismatic spectrum (for lack of better terminology). The fact that I’m using such language demonstrates how trapped we are by these categories.
But hopefully, as a student of history I’m smart enough to not ignore that reality. But as one who seeks to move forward, I’m not satisfied with being imprisoned by framing our spiritual journeys, and faith communities, and common witness in this way. Good for understanding, but there must be a better way.
That was at the heart and most central (apart form 101 other factors) to why officially BLC started on April 1, 2000, and on the day Sunday April 2, the small worship gathering started in our living room at No. 4A, Jalan Utara, Petaling Jaya.
Last night, I was asked if I had a choice to go back in time or continue where I am going now, which would I choose? The answer was obvious, I would never go back even though there were many fond memories, precious lessons, and treasured friendships. It’s never been easy, and there has been substantial grief as well in the process of taking baby steps forward. In short, the experience of the promise of freedom is mixed with heartfelt pain. Even the experience of the lows are part and parcel of what changing the conversation involves. Moving towards a third way can be lonely at times.
But one is never really alone.
It’s been a while since I’ve commented on the conversation. There’s a lot of rubbish rhetorical critique on this subject which is boring and tiring. Usually, it’s rehashing straw man arguments and ignores what’s going on beyond the USA (whether we call it emergent/emerging church or not) .
Dion Forster is one voice from South Africa who is worth the time and has insights with global implications. Listen carefully to what he has to say. It’s not only better, more informed (inclusive of what one sees in the USA), more importantly, it’s forward looking and energizing!
The emergent movement has sought to encounter this misshapen popular ecclesiology through placing a strong emphasis on ‘missional living’.
Participants in this movement assert that the incarnation of Christ informs their theology, believing that as God entered the world in human form, adherents enter (individually and communally) into the context around them, aiming to transform that culture through local involvement in it. This holistic involvement may take many forms, including social activism, hospitality, and acts of kindness.[1]
This emphasis has often led to criticism from evangelical Christians since it shifts the emphasis of the gospel towards social and temporal issues rather than ‘eternal salvation’. Many emergent Christians, such as myself, consider themselves evangelical, but not in the narrow sense of the term as it has been used in contemporary North American Christianity. These emergent Christians are fundamentally committed to the transformation of individuals AND society by bringing the Gospel of Christ to bear on the sin that enslaves individuals, as well as the structural sins that enslave groups, nations and the world. As a result of the influences of post-modernism on the emergent conversation non-propositional approaches to evangelism are preferred. These include acts of mercy and justice, addressing the felt needs and social concerns of communities and individuals before attempting to proclaim the propositional truths of the Gospel[2]. Among these groupings are the so-called ‘red letter Christians’, such as Jim Wallace and Tony Campolo. The name, red letter Christian, comes from the fact that they place a strong emphasis on living the direct teaching of Jesus (which was always printed in red letters in older printings of the Christian Bible). It is remarkable to see that when one studies the so-called ‘red letter’ sections of the New Testament they focus heavily on issues of social justice, structural and societal transformation, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God.
As such emergent faith groupings frequently encourage their members to enter into politics, the economic realm, and education – seeing such work as a vocation that can transform and renew society and the structures of society. I have recently encountered a number of business persons who believe themselves to be ‘ordained’ for societal transformation through using their business as a ministry to establish God’s Kingdom and transform society. Some go so far as to consider themselves ordained as ‘marketplace ministers’.
The end result of mission and evangelism for the emergent Christian is to restore all of existence (the whole of the cosmos, including human persons and the environment) to state of harmony with God[3]. One can thus see that the missional emphasis is not upon building up the numerical adherence of the Christian faith, or bringing persons into Church communities, but rather to seek to infiltrate all spheres of society in order to establish the values and aims of God’s Kingdom throughout the whole of the structure of society.
- Emerging Church / conversation… Is the Church dying or just changing?
[1] Griffiths, S. An Incarnational Missiology for the Emerging Church, in Rev Dr. Steve Griffiths speaks about the Emerging Church and how they view and approach missions. http://www.opensourcetheology.net/node/1116. Retrieved on 5 April 2009, 14.43.
[2] A superb example of this approach is to be found in the Luke-10-Transformation approach to evangelism that is currently gaining a great deal of support in Southern African Churches and Christian groupings.
[3] See Brian Mclaren’s book, Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope (Thomas Nelson, 2007).