Spiritual Gifts, Part 1

A friend of mine is a pastor of a fairly large church. For the sake of anonymity, we will call him Derik Vaun. Derik shares an opinion with me in a particular matter of taste: we both hate interpretive dance. I’m not sure if you have ever seen an interpretive dance or a mime done in a church setting. If you haven’t seen an interpretive dance, imagine a less-talented, vertigo-suffering, slightly-drunk, cirque du soleil troop (or look at this). Faces paralyzed in an “isn’t this fun?” grin, they wave streamers, they prance in leotards--all while dancing to an uncomfortably intimate Christian pop-song (sample lyric: “Your fragrance is intoxicating in the secret place.”).

If I am in a church situation where this happens, and I miss the opportunity to slip out to the bathroom for the duration of the interpretive dance shenanigans, the only hope is to sit politely, attempt to block out what is happening, and try to force a facial expression that falsely conveys that I am a patron and loyal fan of all things involving leotard and streamer. But even if I manage to fake the facial expression, I am unable to ignore the grave voice in my head: “Friend, this is where testosterone comes to die.”

Anyway, (many years ago, in a far off place that no one who is reading this knows about) I was in attendance at the church in which my friend, “Derik,” is a pastor. Again, for the sake of anonymity, we will call the church “Five Elms.” Apparently there was a member of the church who for a reason that I do not know, had taken issue with the pastoral team on a previous occasion, had approached someone about the possibility of voicing a heartfelt apology publicly during Sunday worship. Upon arrival for said apology, the young lady slipped a tape to the soundman (a la Napoleon Dynamite). Taking the stage in the minimalist but garish dress of an out-of-work Belarusian Dance Instructor, she voiced a sincere apology, which was followed by a stated desire, in the spirit of reconciliation, to present Derik with a “gift”. I didn’t see anything on stage wrapped or covered up, she was empty handed, and she did not call Pastor Vaun to the stage. What could this gift possibly be? It was too late by the time I saw the dimming of the lights. A gift is a difficult thing to define…but I think that the scene that followed missed every essential characteristic one could possibly imagine.

I will spare you the gory, choreographed details. It had all of the usual elements: pantomime butterflies with thumbs interlocked flying free from the chest, the exaggerated reenactment of being blinded by an unapproachable light, running in a non-linear pattern with tiny steps—all standard fare. Her music choice was interesting: “In your eyes” by Peter Gabriel. I quietly listened to the song I had once liked, trying to think of inconspicuous ways to gouge my eyes out. Nothing seemed like it could work. I try to talk myself through: Escape in your mind, Ben. They can’t take your imagination. It will be over soon. I try to think of what this imaginary place that I could escape to could be. What if I was Amish? Then dancing would be out of the question. Suddenly a life of renouncing worldly pleasures such as television, buttons, and musical accompaniment seemed like a small price to live in a world free of interpretive dance.

When I was at my cheese threshold, I saw the dancer assume a serene, half-bowed pose. I welcomed the tag-ending of the taped dance track. Uncertain of what to do, the congregation clapped. Shortly later the service ended. As people mingled in the aisles, I approached Derik, who appeared to be wondering what the return policy was on the gift he just had received. “How did you like your gift?” I asked.

“I would have preferred brownies.”

Wouldn’t we all.

Even though I have exaggerated this story, and inserted “color” and non-essential details to some of the areas where my memory is lapsed (okay--so it’s only about 75% true), it does show the nuanced issues of things like taste and empathy that govern the use of our “gifts” to edify the body in our life together in a Church. It also shows, in my opinion, the sometimes rather arbitrary, and often less than Biblical categories by which people determine what their spiritual gifts are. (For example, is there a spiritual gift of Dodgeball?).

I guess I am trying to get at an idea that there is an extreme way of talking about one’s spiritual gifts that puts a spiritual veneer on all of one’s abilities. While I do believe that there is a sense in which all of one’s God-given abilities can be harnessed for redemptive purpose, I see a danger in allowing “spiritual gift” to be thoughtlessly stamped on all of one’s abilities. The perceived danger, in my opinion, is that one could have an overreaching sense of authority in an area that is not a point of need for the church (locally or globally). The primary reference point is not, “What is the point of need that I can meet for the Church?” but rather, “How can I find a way to insert my area of interest into the church?” Am I saying that there is never a place to use a God-given ability at dance, or, for that matter, dodge-ball? No. But I do think that clinging to your own little domain as the only means that you will come behind God’s people at their point of need misses the boat. Just because I own a salt-mine, doesn’t mean that it is the only thing to offer someone who is dying of thirst. Just because I am a gifted butcher, it doesn’t mean that I should use my gifts to heal your appendicitis. Our gifts are not always the only means to serve or the appropriate means to serve. Obedience before ability.

There is another approach to spiritual gifts that is more pragmatic in nature. “Finding your spiritual gifts” is somewhat of a Christian cottage industry. There are several surveys that can supposedly help determine what your areas of giftedness are. In some circumstances a mega-church will use it in their “assimilation” programs—somewhat akin to a C.E.O of a large corporation giving a new hire the Myers-Briggs. Today, I went to an internet site that “takes inventory” of such gifts (you can find it here). In slightly over a half hour, I answered 108 questions that whittled away at what my areas of “task-oriented” spiritual giftedness are. Each question was essentially a statement for which you could choose, “almost never”, “sometimes”, or “almost always.”

During the whole exercise, I oscillated between narcissism and guilt. The only questions to which I could state “almost always” were of the more inane variety. Among them was the statement, “Pronouncing words correctly is very important to me.” I was happy to be able to dimple the righteous, “almost always” chad. That’s right. Some people build the body up with giving, mercy, and exhortation. I do it through my intuitive phonological sense of the English language. The guilt kicked in for more difficult questions, like, “I am willing to try impossible things for God.” I suppose on the best of days I would go to the lion’s den. But is that something that I am looking for opportunities to sign up for? Slightly padding my stats, I selected "occasionally." I had to remind myself of the preface given on the survey stating that it is merely an instrument to find, “[one’s] dominant ‘task-oriented’ gift.” Implication: it's not about what is right, just what I am good at.

After finishing the test, the web site generated an itemized report gauging my perceived areas of “Spiritual Giftedness.” It looked a lot like the reports of aptitude tests that one would take in school, listing spiritual gifts on a vertical axis, and giving a number and a proportionately-sized horizontal bar next to each of the gifts, going from left to right. As I looked at the shape of the bar graph, I saw an inordinate amount of whitespace to the right. If the test was akin to an aptitude test, my results looked something like the aptitude someone who had undergone a full lobotomy. I had a moment of dread. I just failed a Spiritual Gifts Test.

Maybe it’s that I’m a right-brain kind of guy, maybe it’s that I just failed the test, but, somehow, get the sense that the quantitative analysis approach does not work for something of the nature of spiritual gifts. It is not just that it is a reductionism for something rather complex, but it is also the fragmentation of something that should be whole. Perhaps you should seek opportunities to serve in your areas of “task-oriented” giftedness, but isn’t it also true that God’s “power is made perfect in weakness”? Doesn’t it seem to follow the general story-line of the Bible that to be chosen is precisely to be thrown into our area of weakness in order to show His strength? Speaking of God’s strength, hasn’t that been conspicuously absent in our conversation thus far?

But in looking at these two extremes, what I really see is the same problem. If ability is the starting point of our action, then what becomes of faith? Surely, for Jesus to be "tempted in every way as we were" involved being pushed to the very threshold of his human abilities. To gratefully acknowledge “the measure of God’s grace” poured out in our respective areas of giftedness is important. But it is a base-line in a pretty dynamic spiritual journey where God seems to be pretty clear that he is going to stretch, refine, discipline, and transform us. It is not like membership in some sort of spiritual labor union that absolves you from all work outside of the collective bargaining agreement.

• So how do we begin to speak about gifts in a way that is God-centered? I’ve probably created more questions than answers, but I think that it is important that from the outset of this discussion we begin with how spiritual gifts are understood, and then diligently search for what Scripture actually teaches. In moving towards our discussion, think about these questions:
• What are the essential qualities of a Spiritual Gift?
• What is the difference between a Spiritual gift, and a mere ability or talents.
• When should knowing my spiritual gifts be a factor in the choices that I make?
• What do you perceive your areas of giftedness to be? How are you using them to help others?
• Why are Spiritual gifts brought up in the context of these three main passages (1 Corinthians 12, I Peter 4, Ephesians 4)?
• Also, if you have a free devotional time take a look (or a listen) to this sermon.

Also, to preview, I’ll throw out some of my initial opinions that I hope to discuss later.
Spiritual gifts are not…

• Exhaustively listed in the New Testament (either in the central passages or combined between them)
• The governing factor in our day-to-day decisions.
• An excuse for disobedience in our areas “outside of” your giftedness.The same as “talents” or “abilities.”
  

Spiritual Gifts are…

• Fluid and able to change throughout one’s lifetime.
• Things that God’s grace can refine or our disobedience can marginalize.
• Sometimes in the area of “signs” (of the miraculous, charismatic type).
• Able to be abused (even though they are legitimate gifts, given by God).
• Often coupled with certain propensities and weaknesses that God often helps through their Spiritual Gift.
• Given by God, through the person possessing the gift, to his church as a whole.