I like the idea of being called to the vocation of being human, seems to take alot of pressure away (maybe I’ve been too focused on the whole concept of career), and that to be ‘Christian’ is not to be ‘religious’. In the section “A Lawyer’s Work”, Stringfellow talks about this and the idea that issues such as justice seemed beneath the sophistication of lawyers. That there was a process of indoctrination to make student’s conform to the stereotype deemed most beneficial to the profession and survival of the institution, its influence and prosperity. He goes further to say that this squelches intelligent opinions and creative impulses and that this demand for conformity can signal a threat of death. Although written in a different time and relating primarily to professions, I can’t help thinking there’s a lot of truth for today and perhaps even a relevance to the church. Has the ‘organisation’ in some places become more of a focus than the values it was formed to uphold? As a member of a church, do I consciously conform to the stereotype, being nicely dressed, never sad or struggling, always agreeing with sermons, opinions of those in authority rather than challenging and using the Bible as a reference point. When talking to new Christians, is there a part of me that tries to show them how to conform, be ‘religious’ instead of encouraging independant thinking, seeking answers, not always assuming the crowd is correct, looking for the truth not the myth. This has reminded me of how God has made us to be creative, to use our minds to seek and focus on him and to enjoy the relationship and adventure that takes us on both within an organised church setting and on a personal level and the important distinction between conformity and unity.