Alien Nation

Serve God, Save the Planet: an Hour of Work, a Day of Rest

2011-02-15T00:00:00.000-08:00

How Do We Get Our Sabbath Skills Back?

'We confuse working with living' Matthew Sleeth pg 99.

In this chapter Matthew Sleeth writes about both the importance of physical labor and of actually observing Sabbath.

In my limited experience the American Church is terrible at Sabbath. I've suggested that the church I serve observe Sabbath by not shopping on Sunday's for a month. There were many baffled looks, quizzical looks, and some open verbal skepticism as to the practicality of such a thing. (to be honest, I too am so used to thinking about sabbath as 'day to go to church' and not 'day to be at rest and refrain from producing and even being a consumer' that the very next week I went home and ordered a pizza. What a great 'lead-by-example' guy I am!

Sabbath came up again in a recent Sermon Talk-back Session on John 5 in which Jesus asks a paralyzed man, lying by the pool of Siloam if he would like to be well. after telling the man to pick up his mat and walk, (it is Sabbath) a Sabbath controversy erupts.

So we started talking about Sabbath. The discussion was a combination longing for the rest and simplicity of a real Sabbath, tail-chasing about what we could and couldn't do if we actually were to try to observe sabbath, some confusion about Saturday Sabbath and Sunday Sabbath, and some 'spiritualizing' of sabbath, (an internal practice that doesn't necessarily connect to skills or practices put to use externally.) The sharing was honest and open and real and we learned a lot but what I learned was how confused we are about sabbath as honestly and earnestly as we want to obey God.

It seems to me that we have in a few short years since Sunday Commerce laws were relaxed, we have lost the skills to observe Sabbath. We don't even know how to begin to think about it.

I think that Matthew Sleeth begins to approach the re-establishment of Sabbath skills by putting both work and sabbath together. I sometimes wonder if on some level we have a hard time conceptualizing Sabbath because we aren't quite convinced of the value of our work. Yes, we are getting a pay-check, but what are we creating?
Perhaps we would be more clear about how to do Sabbath is we were more clear about the purpose of our labor beyond getting the bills paid and the retirement fund safely nestled for the future.

Which, by the way, is seems to be suggested by Jesus own answer to those who are angry about the healing on the sabbath. Jn 5:19 the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. I hear Jesus saying, 'God, my Father is still working, creating life, and so am I.' Perhaps if we were clearer about how our vocation fit into the on-going creating and redeeming that God is still doing, we would also be clearer about how to practice sabbath. If our vocation doesn't give us a clear connection, perhaps an avocation will.

Which is what makes the Christian's engagement in Creation Care seem absolutely vital to me. As I read Genesis 2, God created us to serve and protect the rest of creation. We were made to be engaged in the rest of creation and not alienated from it as we so obviously are. I have begun learning about, preaching about and practicing creation care, not only because of the damage I see humanity doing to God's glorious creation, but also because I think the Bible tells us that unless we are engaged in caring for creation, we are not quite fully human the way God created us to be.

So what am I gonna do with all this mental wandering and pondering?

1. As a Pastor, physical labor isn't commonly demanded of me so; come spring, we are going to do some gardening in our back-yard.
2. We are going to do some gardening in the form of trash pick-up in our neighborhood.
3. I have already stopped shopping on sundays. Instead we invite friends over for dinner or gather with extended family for dinner and game night.

How do we get our Sabbath skills back?

Will Our Children Have Faith Part 3: A More Dynamic Theology

2011-02-10T00:00:00.000-08:00

One of my continuing concerns is not being clear on what we desire to achieve through our catechetical (educational) efforts. Our aim, I suggest, is to form Christ-like communal persons and communities. This implies for me clarity of faith, of how we are to perceive God. Many people have unhealthy images of God that need to be healed. (46)

One of Westerhoff's concerns is not only the 'school paradigm' in the church's catechesis,but also the wide variety of theological options offered to church-goers today. We need 'Theological Essentials' according to Westerhoff.

Westerhoff seems to suggest a level of biblical and theological engagement on the part of every disciple (not just us 'professionals') that is rare in my experience and difficult to cultivate. To make it plain (and I say this with much love) very few adults have time or inclination to devote to study and discussion of the bible and theology. I've been a pastor for 11 years (in New England) and adult bible study/discussion opportunities have been poorly attended whenever and wherever I've been a pastor (which may say more about me than anything).

In practical terms what I think is more confusing for the average church-goer is not the wide variety of theological options that come from theological institutions; liberation, neo-orthodoxy, post-liberal, etc, but the wide variety of theological options that come from popular culture. For example,take a peek at this partial list from Brueggemann that I found here:

1. Everybody lives by a script. The script may be implicit or explicit. It may be recognized or unrecognized, but everybody has a script.

2. We get scripted. All of us get scripted through the process of nurture and formation and socialization, and it happens to us without our knowing it.

3. The dominant scripting in our society is a script of technological, therapeutic, consumer militarism that socializes us all, liberal and conservative.

4. That script (technological, therapeutic, consumer militarism) enacted through advertising and propaganda and ideology, especially on the liturgies of television, promises to make us safe and to make us happy.

5. That script has failed. That script of military consumerism cannot make us safe and it cannot make us happy. We may be the unhappiest society in the world.

Brueggemann's 'script' equals my interpretation of Westerhoff's 'theology'.

A church that is not actively engaged in learning, teaching and practicing the faith will not only be unable to 'flip the script' that is, discern its theological script in opposition to the social script, but it will also be unable to recognize the cultural idols, religions, faiths and spiritual scripts that Brueggemann suggests are forming us at every moment of every day.

In other words, we are failing to be church because we are allowing ourselves to be formed more in the image of popular culture than we are being formed by faith in God.

What to do in order to encourage a more dynamic faith?

1. Longer Sermons. Yup, I said it. 15-20 minutes a sunday will not offer enough of a script to undermine the cultural script, especially since there is little to no participation in other study/worship opportunities throughout the week.

2. sermon's as dialogue. So I am not suggesting longer lectures, I am suggesting more time spent engaging together in the Word of God. I begin with questions, open ended, and simple... What three things would you tell someone who doesn't know anything about Jesus? What five things would you say about God? What struck you as strange or curious about our scripture reading today? Did you feel challenged or threatened by the reading? What about the reading made you feel that way?

3. Devotions. I write devotions for most of my sermons. They most often follow up on the major themes or points of every sermon.

4. Action. Every sermon leads to action. Every lesson leads to action. Every Bible discussion leads to mission, ministry, action. What are we going to do with what we have discussed? What would the belief that we have discussed today look like in action?

5. Mentoring. Folks who want to join the church enter a One year mentorship that involves bible study, participation in ministries, a mission project, and classes with the pastor.

What would you do to encourage a more dynamic theology that 'flips the script?'

On My Way to a Sermon on Deuteronomy 30: God's Gonna Cut You Down

2011-02-09T18:12:00.000-08:00

'What three things would you say about God?' I asked my 9 and 7 year old sons.
He's cool,He's nice, He's loving...
I just want to say right off the bat that I try really hard to use gender non-specific language in reference to God. I refer to God as Heavenly Father AND Mother, and really try not to say 'He' too much. We even sing an inclusive language Doxology in church. So where all this 'HE' stuff is coming from I don't know.

But for today, it's the adjectives; cool, nice, loving that I'm thinking about. I'm glad they've got the idea of God as 'loving.' But 'cool' and 'nice'? Especially when we get these edgy descriptions of God, like in Deuteronomy 30 where God offers both blessing and threatens destruction. God watching and waiting to either be our best friend or our worst enemy. I knew guys like that in high school. Since I was a small guy, I liked having them on my side, and occasionally one of them would befriend and protect me in gym class. But you never knew when they were going to change their minds from the friend to the enemy. That isn't a good feeling. So you had to watch yourself around them. And you could never really relax, even when they were on your side.

Jim Wallis of Sojourners will sometimes mention the Bible he had in seminary (I think) that he cut all of the verses and stories about money out of, to show people what was left in the bible when we ignored them. What would happen if I cut out all the angry, threatening, dangerous God stories?

And don't give me that, 'That is the Old Testament God' stuff.
Mt 13:49-50 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

It's in the New Testament too. So we've got to deal with it.

I think that if we smooth off the rough edges of the Threatening God, we are left without justice, righteousness, even resurrection, which is the vindication of the wrongfully murdered faithful (at least, initially as I understand it). Without a serious and slightly menacing God, we are left with God as a grandfatherly butler therapist, waiting behind the scenes for us to need a favor, but not capable of demanding our allegiance or obedience. God without some menace is a God who we just don't need to take that seriously, and if the research reflected in Kenda Creasy Dean's Almost Christian is accurate, that is the God too many Christians worship and most American's like to think about.

So I'm gonna preach in favor of an angry God (very carefully I might add).
The questions to consider; What is dangerous about preaching a Threatening and sometimes Angry God? What is missing in our faith if we skip over these stories of God's anger, destructive power, and menacing presence?

And somehow I'm gonna work some Johnny Cash into it, because as I was reading Deut 30, this song came to mind.

"God's Gonna Cut You Down"

You can run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Sooner or later God'll cut you down
Sooner or later God'll cut you down

Well you may throw your rock and hide your hand
Workin' in the dark against your fellow man
But as sure as God made black and white
What's done in the dark will be brought to the light

Go tell that long tongue liar
Go and tell that midnight rider
Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down

Serve God Save the Planet Part 4 Chapter 6

2011-02-09T00:00:00.000-08:00

This time chapter 6 'Too Much Stuff'

On no subject is Jesus more clear than on materialism: a life focused on possessions is a poor and misguided life. Over and again, he urges us to seek a spiritual path and a life of loving one another... Real treasures do not rust, run low on power, become obsolete, clutter up closets and garages, or rack up credit card debt.

Consumer Therapy is the default faith of a good many folks who call themselves Christians. We find more solace in shopping and purchasing, and devote more time and energy to it, than to prayer, devotion, study and worship. If we were to total up hours spent in a practice of faith compared to a practice of consumerism I bet we would be shocked.

I don't say this from a position of moral superiority. I struggle with it too.

I think that what Matthew Sleeth does here is get right to the heart of true Stewardship. In the mainline church tradition we tend to think that stewardship is giving money to the church.

What I have struggled to do in year after year of ministry and sermon after sermon on money and material possessions is to suggest that the simplest stewardship decision is giving money. The challenge is re-shaping our desires so that we are not wasting money on constant consumer actions that affect the environment in production, transportation and then disposal. Our desires will not be reshaped if we are spending more time in devotion to the mall gods by listening to their television advertisements and little to no time in prayer or bible study.

I would further recommend for those interested in this a book by Luke Timothy Johnson 'Sharing Possessions'

Although I disagreed with Johnson's initial argument that Christianity was not an ethic, his exploration of the importance of material goods and biblical survey on the topic was excellent.

I would also recommend William Cavanaugh's 'Being Consumed: Economics and Christian Desire'

Sleeth challenges the American Consumer Creed which tells us that we have the right to purchase whatever we want and use our money however we desire with this simple and direct statement:

The Christian is not at liberty to do whatever he likes. Christians are constrained by conviction to think about their lives, their actions, and their responsibilities...

How much we have, how we spend, how much we spend, all of these bear greater testimony to our true faith than the God-talk we utter.

So I'm going to do three things

1. Clean out the clutter, getting rid of the stuff I just don't need (in as environmentally responsible way as possible.)
2. Learn to live with less by filling my time with things that last; reading, music, family, service to the community and Creation
3. Observe a sabbath, on consumerism, not shopping on Sundays. Instead, we are inviting folks over for a Sabbath meal, focusing the support of relationships instead of the quick satisfaction of consumerism.

What can you do you pry yourself from the hold of consumerism?

Almost Christian Review Part 3 or 3 Ways to Live Faith with our Children

2011-02-08T00:00:00.000-08:00

If teenagers lack an articulate faith, maybe it is because the faith we show them is too spineless to merit much in the way conversation. Maybe teenager' inability to talk about religion is not because the church inspires a faith too deep for words, but because the God-story that we tell is too vapid to merit more than a superficial vocabulary...

If the God of Jesus Christ is a missionary God who crosses every boundary -- life and death and space and time -- to win us, then following Jesus is bound to be anything but convenient. Jesus Christ doesn't tinker; he tears down walls, draws up new plans, makes demands... (Dean 36-7)

Jn 5:2-3
Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda…Here a great number of disabled people used to lie — the blind, the lame, the paralyzed.

Charles Campbell, in his outstanding book, The Word Before the Powers, wonders that if one of the ways the Principalities and Powers, the Systems of Domination, keep us under their thumb is by keeping us busy, tired, and diverted. Kyle Childress

My poor kids go to church every sunday (that they are with me.)
They have learned John 3:16 and 17, the 23rd Psalm, The Beatitudes in Matthew and are working on the 10 Commandments.
But aside from going to church I don't think they see me put what I believe into action enough.
How does knowing the verses and the prayers invade my normal life, make me different and challenge me to follow Christ and share the gospel.

This is one of the growing edges for my church. We have lots of outreach ministries; clothes closet, oil program that provides heating for struggling families, food closet, Summer Lunch Program, lots of really good things. But most of these things are ministries of a few. We need to find ministries for many. But it is not just a matter of participation. It is a matter, I think, of getting out of our normal routines and comfortable lives to be immersed in ministry that serves others and allows us to gain a new perspective on our own lives, ethical and spiritual.

In order to lead my church there, I've got to accept the challenge myself, so here are three challenges for me:

First a simple daily practice (outside our devotions)

We wash the dishes by hand. This gives us an opportunity to talk about conserving water, caring for creation, and pray together to the God who created all things...

Second, an occasional practice

Go through all the toys and cut them in half (at least). We will sell these in a yard sale and use the money for a ministry. Throughout we will talk about what Jesus said about possessions, being satisfied with less, the effects of the production and shipping of all these toys on the environment, a local or global ministry we want to be a part of, whether the local food closet or Kiva.org which others in our church highly recommend. The point is to interrupt the process by which my children and I are being transformed in Consumers and intentionally open ourselves to be Christians, who are transformed by a giving and sacrificing Christ.

Third, Direct Action

The boys are 9 and 7 there aren't a lot of ministries they can volunteer at. I can't take them to Rhode Island Food Bank, they can't have volunteers that young for insurance reasons. The same with many other such local missions.
But we will start, with others in our church, to clean the trash from a piece of public land in our neighborhood. Again, we can talk about caring for the earth as God's creation. We will also research some volunteer projects for the family that are fairly close to home. Although someday we might plan a 'volunteer vacation'.

Any suggestions?

Will Our Children Have Faith Part 2 No More Sunday School

2011-02-07T00:00:00.000-08:00

'There is a great difference between learning about the Bible and living as a disciple of Jesus Christ...Faith cannot be taught by any method of instruction; we can only teach religion. We can know about religion, but we can only expand in faith, act in faith, live in faith. Faith can be inspired within a community of faith, but it cannot be given to one person by another. Faith is expressed, transformed, and made meaningful by persons sharing their faith in an historical, tradition-bearing community of faith.' (Westerhoff 19)

Reading this book sometimes frustrates me. Westerhoff suggests, as noted earlier, that the current 'schooling-instructional paradigm' is simply not effective for nurturing faith in children and youth. But exactly what the alternative is, Westerhoff doesn't really explain. Except to suggest that it is the church. The church is the place not sunday school.

So I have this idea that we should completely disband the Christian Education Committee and have every other committee carefully consider and intentionally plan how its duties and responsibilities teach the Christian faith.

So Finance would start with; what do Christians believe about money? House would discuss; How do we create a hospitable space? Deacon's would talk about what communion means. And then they would discuss how what they do nurtures faith in children, youth, and new adult Christians. Everyone would do Christian Ed instead of a committee and a team of teachers.

'tradition bearing community' that is the phrase that interests me.
Sunday School leave the tradition bearing to one committee. But as Christians we believe that every member is given by the Holy Spirit gifts that make the church the body of Christ, gifts for the good of all. It takes every member for the church to be, it must take every member for the church to nurture the faith.

Now, I'm not actually disbanding Christian Ed. I can't do that.
But I am thinking that the church needs to see 'Christian Nurture' as everyone's responsibility and not the duty of one committee. Perhaps my frustration is part of the churches frustration. We just want some new answer, when what Westerhoff is trying to tell us is that there are no easy answers. Sunday School is not the easy answer to passing the faith on to our children, because there is no one easy way to do that.

So, in trying to make sense of what Westerhoff suggests about a tradition-bearing community as opposed to a sunday school:

1. Be clear about our Christian beliefs and the Christian Practices that follow from them.
2. Find the connections between these beliefs/practices and the duties and responsibilities of the committees. Which may mean that duties need to change if they don't reflect beliefs/practices.
3. Intentionally plan projects, activities, actions, that embody beliefs/practices and achieve the responsibilities of each committee, and that include children, youth, and families in a meaningful way.

What do you think?

Serve God Save the Planet Part 3 Chapter 8

2011-02-03T00:00:00.000-08:00

Television: More Real Than Real

...the average American watches 1,700 hours of television annually, while the average shcool-age child attends only nine hundred hours fo classes a year. by the time the typical person in our country reaches age seventy-one, he will have spent a solid ten waking years sitting in front of a television.

Imagine meeting God and answering the question, 'What did you do with your time on earth?' You are handed a time sheet that details the seconds and decades of this precious gift called life. (109)

Sleeth's point in devoting a chapter on television is three-fold.

First he points out that the purpose of television is to sell us things.
The more things we buy, the more impact on the environment; from the energy to produce and ship the product to the trash that goes in the land-fill, consumerism has an adverse effect on the environment.

Second he points out the amount of electricity we use in sitting in front of the television

Third he points out the spiritual damage. The time we spend watching television is time that could be spent nurturing family relationships, enjoying creation, and serving others.

We watch way to much tv in our house. We have started to turn it off more often. Instead we play games, read, and we have family devotion time that includes discussion and sharing.

Faith in God is NOT a massage: Almost Christian Review Part 2

2011-02-02T13:21:00.000-08:00

Moralistic Therapeutic Deism makes no pretense at changing lives, it is a low commitment, compartmentalized set of attitudes aimed at 'meeting my needs' and 'making me happy' rather than bending my life into a pattern of love and obedience to God. (30)

Which reminds me of a song recorded by a folk trio called Cry, Cry, Cry featuring Dar Williams called Lord I Have Made You A Place in My Heart by Greg Brown

Oh Lord, I have made you a place in my heart
Among the rags and the bones and the dirt.
There's piles of lies, the love gone from her eyes,
And old moving boxes full of hurt.
Pull up a chair by the trouble and care.
I got whiskey, you're welcome to some.
Oh Lord, I have made you a place in my heart,
But I don't reckon you're gonna come.

I've tried to fix up the place, I know it's a disgrace,
You get used to it after a while -
With the flood and the drought and old pals hanging out
With their IOU's and their smiles.
Bare naked women keep coming in
And they dance like you wouldn't believe.
Oh Lord, I have made you a place in my heart,
So take a good look - and then leave.

Oh Lord, why does the Fall get colder each year?
Lord, why can't I learn to love?
Lord, if you made me, it's easy to see
That you all make mistakes up above.
But if I open the door, you will know I'm poor
And my secrets are all that I own.
Oh Lord, I have made you a place in my heart
And I hope that you leave it alone.

I believe Almost Christian to be a dangerous book, not just for youth ministers, but for churches. It suggests that many of us who would call ourselves 'disciples' are more interested in 'feeling better' than in allowing our lives to be bent, which means we aren't really disciples at all. At best we are like Peter, hanging around for the reward and running when the following Christ costs us something. Or, as the song suggests, we will make a little guest room for Christ, but want him to leave it alone. What Christ wants to do is Extreme Home Makeover, not hanging new curtains.

In The Peaceable Kingdom, Stanley Hauerwas comments that one of central duties of the church is to teach us that we are sinners.

Almost Christian causes me to wonder if the mainline church in an effort to remain 'relevant' or at least 'successful' or well, open, has lowered significantly the bar of discipleship. There are easier and less costly ways for folks to feel better about themselves, the shelves are full of self-help books and Oprah is incredibly popular. Talking about sin and suggesting that folks are twisted out of the shape God intended for them, and that church is about bending them back into the image of God, that is dangerous. People might not come if that is what they will hear.

Almost Christian suggests to me that we aren't being the disciples Christ calls us to be and that the church has lost is mission and focus, serving the god 'feel better' instead of the living God who burns away the chaff.

I found a quote from Walter Brueggemann
'Israel (the church) under threat is never an easy 'therapeutic' community, and faith in Yahweh is not a massage. It is the embrace and practice of a destiny that make costly demands in the name of Yahweh.

(Essay: Always in the Shadow of Empire. Book: The Church as Counterculture)

What do you think

Will Our Children Have Faith: Reviewing a 'Classic'

2011-02-01T07:26:00.000-08:00

'Will Our Children Have Faith' is not a new book by John H. Westerhoff, III. It was first printed in 1976. I inherited it from a mentor and have found it a very brave critique of Sunday School Culture. You will find much that is challenging in it such as:
To be Christian is to ask: What can I bring to another? Not: What do I want that person to know or be? It means being open to learn from another person (even a child) as well as to share one's understandings and ways. To speak of schooling and instruction leads us in other directions and to other conclusions. Should we not ask: Is schooling and instruction in a Christian community necessary for education? Or is living as a Christian with others inherently educational? If we attend to being Christian with others, need we attend to to schooling and instruction? By focusing on schooling and instruction we have ignored these issues and questions that are so important for Christian faith. (17)

Westerhoff is criticizing the 'Sunday School' model for trying to take a public school model and apply it to teaching our children faith. In so doing we focus more on creating or finding curriculum, training teachers, training 'experts' in Christian Education, etc. Is applying so much attention to these matters we have placed time, energy and financial resources in a model that simply does not work. In placing so much attention on who will teach my children and what book will they buy and use we are ignoring the most important question, which leads to the most effective teaching model; how am I living my faith with my children? We do not need curricula and classrooms, we need parents and other adult Christians to devote time and effort to their own faith formation and to creating and maintaining relationships with the youth of the church, so that these youth see the adults learning, growing and practicing the faith.

We are trying this to put some of this critique to good use at my church. While we do still have the standard sunday school class on sunday mornings before worship, we are now also planning our second 'Christian Family Nurture Project'. For Lent we are going to focus on Communion in worship, in a special adult study and with the children of the church. We are going to bake bread to use in communion, and go out together to visit various church members and take communion to them. The plan is that not only will we be talking about what Communion means, but showing the children what Christians virtues it shapes in us, such as; forgiveness, generosity, and hospitality. The point is not to simply teach information, but together to practice the faith and to create strong inter-generational relationships.

What else do you think we could do to focus less on Sunday School and focused more on living the faith concretely with our children?

Serve God Save the Planet Review Part 2; Chapter 5

2011-01-31T08:03:00.000-08:00

'When asked by pollsters, 90 percent of Americans identify themselves as 'kinder than average.' If we say we care about the least in the kingdom, if we identify ourselves as 'kinder than average,' if we see ourselves as responsible stewards of nature, then we are content. Contentment does not result in change.
The content mind is one of the greatest obstacles to a rich spiritual life. The content mind is a proud mind. It has nothing to learn; it has an answer to everything and no more questions to ask.' (62)

If you are wondering what this quote has to do with Creation Care I don't blame you for the quizzical look on your face.

One of the strengths of Serve God Save the Planet is the connection that its author Matthew Sleeth makes between personal spiritual growth, discipleship and Christian Environmental Ethics. The quote above is included in chapter 5 a Sleeth addresses the gap between concern and caring and action. It includes some interesting exegesis of the parable of the good Samaritan and some compelling statistics about the affects of pollution on the respiratory health of America's children.

What I really responded too was Sleeth's call to action, a call which the Church needs to wake it from its therapeutic and emotionally malaise. We are not called to simply have beliefs and be a part of a supportive community (although these are an important component of being church together). We are called to go into all the world carrying a cross and a story of God's amazing, sacrificing love which urges us to repent and live lives of active mercy and justice. Sleeth's firm but gentle critique of a church in the rut of inaction is refreshing...

To move from thought to action, we must feel some discomfort with who we are... he says on pg 73 and he is talking about the environment but he could also be talking about poverty, human trafficking, shrinking sunday school attendance, and the list could go on and on.

I have long felt that a church that engages in learning about, practicing, teaching creation care would find that the process would challenge other areas of our lives as a church and as disciples that have atrophied. But that the practice of creation care would also inspire deeper and more authentic and intentional forms of spiritual discipline, faith formation and service.

the question that haunts me is this; how do you a grow a church that attempts to cause discomfort and not simply be comfortable and comforting?

Almost Christian Review Part 1: 3 Actions which challenge Moralistic Therapeutic Deism

2011-01-28T07:31:00.000-08:00

'Apart from 'being nice,' teenagers do not think religion influences their decisions, choice of friends, or behaviors. it does not help them obey god, work toward a common good, compose an identity, or belong to a distinctive community. Teenagers do value religion as being personally useful: in addition to helping people be nicer and feel better about themselves, religion can provide comfort amid turmoil, and support for decisions that (by and large) teenagers want to make anyway....Why do teenagers practice Moralistic Therapeutic Deism? Not because they have misunderstood what we have taught them in church. They practice it because this is what we have taught them in church

Once again I am behind the 8 ball in writing reviews on books that I'm reading, although I am a bit closer with 'Almost Christian'

What is most challenging about this book in my opinion is summarized in the phrase quoted above; 'Teenagers do value religion as being personally useful' Although it would be really fun to take a poke at Joel Osteen in my experience this is shockingly just as true a statement for the shrinking mainline (of which I am a part) as it is the burgeoning mega-church culture. Instead of the gospel challenging it is comforting, instead of the gospel calling us to action, it is warm thoughts to get us through our day, instead of re-orienting our lives to living in the kingdom, the kingdom is shoe-horned into cracks and small places between everything else we already do, prioritize and believe. And lets face it, there are much more effective sources of self-help and emotional bolstering than than church; such as Oprah and the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. So it seems ingenuous to me to preach the Gospel as being good for our self-esteem and our productivity and our happiness, when the core of the Gospel is a cross and its sacrifice.

So I've done three things to start to challenge Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. It has begun with the language I use.

1. Instead of talking about 'getting new members' I have started talking more about gathering and nurturing new disciples. We aren't here to feel better about the membership list, we are called to fish for Christ-followers.

2. Instead of talking about 'joining committees' I have started talking about igniting a passion for ministry. We don't just need people to fill a slot on a committee. We need to facilitate experiences where people can serve and make sacrifice for others and in that experience both share the love of Christ and gain experiences that challenge their world-view, assumptions, and personal idols.

3. Challenged people to stop talking about 'what church does for me' and begin to talk about what 'church has taught me about serving and sacrificing for others' and what opportunities the church has provided for me to serve and sacrifice.'

Do you think MTD is as dangerous as Dean suggests?
What needs to change in mainline church to shock us out of our self-centered faith?

Serve God Save the Planet Ch. 4 Technology, Social Networking and Babel Tower

2011-01-26T15:37:00.000-08:00

I know, I'm behind the 8 ball as usual. I don't blog on the latest publications, I'm something like 5 years behind getting to this book. Why chapter four? that is where it started to get interesting for me.

'We have forgotten that we have far more in common with the honeybee than we do with our SUV of DVD...Do you know in which direction the Milky Way traverses the sky? As the phases of the moon progress, does the light go from right to left, or left to right? Can you identify a greater number of trees or cars? If the Bible says God knows every flower and bird, why do we spend so much effort knowing the names of man-made items. Maybe we're paying attention to the wrong things.' (60-61)

Matthew Sleeth, MD

Should the church and its leaders be embracing technology, devoting time, energy and financial resource, to facebook pages, websites, twitter and worship services that feature prominently videos and images, OR, should we be presenting a respite from all this technology and an alternative way of being together. I know, I sound like a Luddite.

What I think is beautifully done in Sleeth's book is that he manages to do some really interesting exegesis, as I will show in future posts, give some really creative options for becoming more environmentally conscious, and he also tackles food ethics, consumerism and our technologically obsessed culture. And he shows quite clearly how they all are connected.

In this case our increasingly technologically focused lives are also using more and more electricity, getting less exercise and spending less time with the people and the creation God created us to relate to in order to be fully human (he says, typing on his laptop, while his kids play DS).

I think Sleeth is suggesting that all of our obsession with cell phones, social networking, video games, etc, takes our attention away from the things that really keep us connected to our humanity, such as the world that God created for us to live in. Could all of this technology, social networking, ipod-ing, Word-of-Warcrafting, be a Babel Tower we are constructing, hoping to reach the heavens, when the connection to God we need is right in the backyard?

And if so, is the church really presenting an alternative to this idolatry it if follows suit by using more and more technology in worship, in ministry?

So I again I ask, should the church jump into all this technology or abstain from it? Is there a middle way?

5 Things I will Say About Jesus; Answering the Question Who do You Say I Am, On My Way to a Sermon

2011-01-26T14:39:00.000-08:00

Five Things I will Say in Telling Someone about Jesus
1. Crucifixion
2. Resurrection
3. Incarnation
4. Revelation
5. Prostitution

We played a game in our family devotions the other night. The boys, aged 8 and 6 were challenged to say 3 things about Jesus. Mom had to say five things (she is still pretty new to this Christ-follower thing.) They made me say 10 things since I'm the professional (wink, wink).

It was an interesting exercise because it showed me what I still had to teach my kids, how much Mom has learned in a few short years and how beneficial lists can be to organizing thoughts. The list above is not what I thought of that night, but the question has been haunting me ever since and I came up with my top five list (think John Cusack's High Fidelity)

1. Crucifixion: Obvious answer really. This is where Paul says to start. N.T. Wright suggests (I can't remember where to be honest) that the cross was Paul's answer for every question and problem of the early church.
I would want people to know that Crucifixion makes us look sin square in the eye. We can't hide from it.
Crucifixion also puts God's great love for us front and center.
Crucifixion challenges the power of empire and reminds us of the danger of violence in word or deed.
Jesus was God's power incarnate, but that incarnation was service and sacrifice, not violence or greed. People who think that Church or religion is about wealth, power, and controlling the masses need to hear about crucifixion.

2. Resurrection: Resurrection for me is about God honoring the faithfulness of the disciple. Resurrection gives me hope so that I can follow Christ even though it seems like a bad idea to; forgive seventy times seven, turn the other cheek, put away my sword, sell all I own and give to the poor, touch lepers, order pizza with whores, etc, etc. I wouldn't have the courage to do all this (I'm still trying to do all this) if I didn't have the hope that grief and pain I get in this life, trying to do these things wasn't the whole story, and that someday, this insignificant life would be honored with resurrection because i tried to be faithful every day. Christ was faithful and obedient to the degree of self-sacrifice. God defeated human sin symbolized in the cross and the separation it caused between Creator and creation with resurrection. God empowers us with the hope of the resurrection.

3. Incarnation: Now you will really see how poorly I did in systematic theology. I'm sure more could be said about incarnation that what follows. but to me incarnation is about presence. The fact that Jesus is not just a man, but the Word of God made flesh means that presence is important. God loved us enough to be like us, to stop calling for us to come back through the prophets and just come take us by the hand and lead us back. For me Incarnation means I have to do more than have ideas about the Trinity, I have to embody what I believe. So incarnation pushes me to do more than pray about someone or something, or write a check for someone or something, and roll my sleeves up and get dirty practicing God's love.

4. Revelation: Probably what I mean by Revelation really should be called repentance, but that would mess up my cool '-tion' thing that I got going on. Jesus words have authority. Jesus shows us how far we have fallen from being the humanity God intended us to be, and challenged us to repent of all that. But Jesus also gives us wisdom to turn and follow the way which is life in the Kingdom of God. Jesus confronts sin but also delivers the good news we are loved. Revelation challenges me to be honest with myself and others, and also to be merciful with myself and others.

5. Prostitution: I threw this in here for what I hope is a bit of a shocker! While Jesus came to call everyone, rich and poor, morally upright and morally bankrupt into a relationship with God, the Jesus I read about in the gospels spent most of his time with outcasts, expendables, the sick, the poor, the forgotten... all the wrong folks. Which reminds me of two things; I have to occasionally risk a good reputation in order to go be with the wrong people, that is what Jesus did. This discipleship thing will definitely take me out of my comfort zone and cause me to do things and be with people that society around me will not approve of, and I will not always be popular. this isn't a popularity contest, it is a faithfulness marathon.

This certainly isn't an exhaustive list. More things could be said, should be said and probably could be said better. But this is my list. What do you think? What is on your list?

Sermon John 21: Do You Love Me? Reflecting the Love of God

2011-01-24T05:22:00.000-08:00

Why does Jesus ask Peter three times about love.
I think Jesus has his doubts about Peter

This is the Peter, you recall from last weeks sermon, who didn’t want to accept Jesus call to follow by laying down his life and picking up a cross.

More importantly this is the Peter who talked a good game just before Jesus arrest; he would fight and die for Jesus. But when the soldiers showed up Peter ran and hid. And when confronted by someone who recognized him as one of Jesus’ disciples he denied knowing who Jesus was…. Three times.

Frankly I’m surprised that Jesus would sit down to breakfast with Peter.
I don’t think I would have.
Why would I open myself up to that kind of disappointment again.
Why would I trust only to run the risk of betrayal again.
I don’t need to stay up all night thinking about how Peter’s fear or distractions got the better of him
I trusted this guy to be the rock of the church,
But he was too busy fishing to get started

I don’t want the pain of being stabbed in the back again

I’m tired of stickin my neck out for this guy,
Taking his hand when he sinks in the stormy sea
Going out of my way to find him when he is lost in Galilee
Giving him a catch of fish even…
A gift he definitely doesn’t deserve
and this is the kind of thanks I get
is him saying he doesn’t even know me.

We don’t know if these thoughts ran through Jesus head as he was quizzing Peter
But they would be running through mine

And this little imaginative exercise gets us to the really uncomfortable center of this story.

The risk that God took in loving us
And the long history of disappointment.

We may operate under the assumption that God loves us because we are decent folk
But that isn’t the story the bible tells

Adam and Eve chose to listen to the advice of the serpent
And you tell me how hard it is to keep on loving someone who
Listens to the advice of a bad friend,
And insists on making bad choices and then
Calling you for consolation

Israel is freed from slavery in Egypt
God smashes their shackles
And breaks their chains
And leads them across the red sea
And how do they thank him?
By complaining about the menu in the desert
And wishing they could go back and put the chain on again

You tell me how much ingratitude hurts
Does it make you feel like being loving?

The love that is recorded in the Bible is a risky and costly king of love
It isn’t the magical and mysterious emotion that makes everything seem beautiful
It isn’t the high of dopamine washing through your brain

The love of God in the Bible is soul wrenching, gutsy work.
Love isn’t about emotions or chemicals
And it isn’t reserved for those who have earned it or deserve it
Or even return it

As Rob Bell says, God loves us just the way we are, and too much to let us stay this way

The love of God is a gift given not for who we are,
But for who we might be,
To transform us into the beautiful creation we were meant to be

From Genesis to Revelation we are given story after story of God’s great undeserved love for us
Like Jesus love for the lepers, willing to risk his own health
Like Jesus love for the woman caught in adultery,
willing to sacrifice his reputation
Like Jesus love for the Geresene Demoniac, willing to lay aside safety.
Like Jesus love for the Romans, choosing to die instead of fight back.
Like Jesus love for Peter, willing to be betrayed again
In the hope that God’s love will transform them
Into the beautiful creation they were meant to be.

It is kind of strange really,
That not only does the Bible redefine love,
From chemical reaction
And sappy emotion
To this selfless, risky choice, over and over and over again

But also, that when you stop and consider it
The Bible seems to suggest that there are lots of good reasons NOT to love
Because this kind of love costs something, perhaps everything.

The story is told that Clarence Jordan, that great Southern, social prophet, visited an integrated church in the Deep South. Jordan was surprised to find a relatively large church so thoroughly integrated, not only black and white but also rich and poor; and this was in the early sixties, too. Jordan asked the old country preacher, "How did you get the church this way?"
"What way?" the preacher asked. Jordan went on to explain his surprise at finding a church so integrated, and in the South, too.
The preacher said, "Well, when our preacher left our small church, I went to the deacons and said, 'I'll be the preacher.' The first Sunday as preacher, I opened the book and read, 'As many of you as has been baptized into Jesus has put on Jesus and there is no longer any Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, males or females, because you all is one in Jesus.'
Then I closed the book and I said, 'If you are one with Jesus, you are one with all kind of folks. And if you ain't, well, you ain't.'"
Jordan asked what happened after that. "Well," the preacher said, "the deacons took me into the back room and they told me they didn't want to hear that kind of preaching no more."
Jordan asked what he did then. "I fired them deacons," the preacher roared.
"Then what happened?" asked Jordan.
"Well," said the old hillbilly preacher, "I preached that church down to four. Not long after that, it started growing. And it grew. And I found out that revival sometimes don't mean bringin' people in but gettin' people out that don't dare to love Jesus." (As told in Hauerwas and Willimon, Where Resident Aliens Live, Nashville: Abingdon, 1996, p. 103).
That is the bad news.

But maybe it is also good news.

Maybe Jesus challenges Peter with three questions about love
Because he sees in Peter the ability to love
Yet unrealized potential, but great potential nonetheless
Perhaps he knew that the image of God
Lying dormant in Peter, was the image of risky, self-sacrificing love
That God could give Peter the power to love others
And to teach others to love
Perhaps Jesus knew that Peter could be the rock upon which the church would be built.
Perhaps it wasn’t doubt, but belief, or hope.

Belief and hope that Peter would respond to the challenge
Throw off his own fetters of fear and self-preservation
The comfort of the life he knows at the seashore
The convenience of going back to life the way it was
To go out and take the risk of carrying God’s long story of risky love to the world.

The challenging question remains,
Do we dare love Christ this much?
The inspiring promise remains
The love that protected Adam and Eve
That guided Israel in the desert
That healed the lepers
Sheltered the shamed woman
That forgave peter and embraced him
That shocking, world creating, life changing love
Is waiting for another Peter in this day and age
Looking for another disciple to say

Yes Lord, I love you
Despite the costs,
Including the risks
Because of the hope it brings
I love you

Love, Peacemaking, and Potluck: On My Way to a Sermon

2011-01-18T18:40:00.000-08:00

I used to write sermons by trying to discover itch and then the scratch of it.
For instance, one possible itch of the Parable of the Good Samaritan would be the apathy humanity can have toward those who are other, outsiders, outcasts. The scratch is that all humanity is outside of God's will for us, but still we are accepted by Christ. Therefore as outsiders welcomed into God's grace, we are called to embrace the outsider.

I suppose I still do this to an extent. But the other day I found a really interesting blog called the hardest question I really wish I'd thought of this myself. Various bloggers write posts on the coming weeks lectionary. There are lots of blogs that do this. What I think is unique is that the bloggers are highlighting the most challenging, perhaps even offensive lessons to be drawn from the readings (this is my take on it, the folks at the hardest question might want to put it differently). So this is what I am looking for as I write a sermon now. What will be the hardest thing to hear in the lesson, what will challenge us most, be the most difficult to carry out, what is the painful change being commanded of me, in this story.

So I'm on John 21 for this sunday.
Jesus makes a post resurrection appearance to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberius. He loads down their empty net with fish and then invites Peter to breakfast.
This is followed by Jesus questioning Peter's love three times.

do yo love me, feed my sheep.

I found it difficult to identify anything terribly troubling in all this.

Until I started to think about Jesus inviting Peter to breakfast when Peter had denied even knowing him less than a week before. That kind of love goes way beyond sentimentality and romance which is the popular understanding of love. It is risky and probably stupid, to trust someone who has let you down, disappointed you and stabbed you in the back.

John is closing his gospel with a picture of Jesus being reconciled with the person who hurt him the most. Love is redefined from chemical reaction in the brain or sappy emotions to a courageous act of forgiveness and the reforging of a broken relationship. We build the church on this kind of love in action. This is the foundation of the church's ministry of peace-making, to be willing to create peace, day after day, week after week with the one's we love and who sometimes let us down, hurt us, betray us.

I found this quote by Thomas Merton. I'd read it long ago, and have never forgotten it:
As long as we are on earth, the love that unites us will bring us suffering by our very contact with one another, because this love is the resetting of a Body of broken bones. Even saints cannot live with saints on this earth without some anguish, without some pain at the differences that come between them… It is principally in the suffering and sacrifice that are demanded of men to live together in peace and harmony that love is perfected in us.

What will I do with this lesson.
Start inviting more folks over for lunch after church, or dinner during the week. Not necessarily just in the case of a break in the relationship, but just to build strong relationships and in so doing to give and receive the love of Christ.

On My Way To a Sermon; Lay Down Your Life, Take up Your Cross;

2011-01-14T11:34:00.000-08:00

For What will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life?
matt 16:26 (to read the whole passage follow this link)

It seemed pretty obvious to me from the outset that these word's of Jesus were meant to challenge and inspire an apathetic faith and urge the disciples to greater depths of service and sacrifice.

But it was an uncomfortable message to try to craft for two reasons:

1. Every church has a core, some say 20%, who do all the work. Will a sermon urging more sacrifice, more service, really inspire devotion or will it instead just sound ungrateful for their efforts and inspire a feeling of 'never being good enough.' So the challenge; do not soften the challenging edges of Jesus' words, but do so in such a way that also offers grace to those who do devote great amounts of time and energy to the ministry of the church.

2. The first discomfort leads the second; that the faith Jesus intends to inspire would be perceived as effort, will, work. To me, this is the balance that is so difficult to strike when it come to teaching, not to mention living the faith. On the one hand we can become so focused on doing the right thing(s) that we forget that gift of grace which is given and not earned. this leads to Christian service which is simply self-serving. On the other hand we can become so enamored of faith as belief that we observe very few practices of the faith.
Jesus was not teaching that we had to earn grace, but that to follow him is to go where he goes and to do what he does (as best we can) So how to strike the balance.

while watching a television show about helping hoarders clean their homes, one of the home owners said, 'I thought you were coming to help me, not take away the things I love.' That seemed to me, to somehow bring this passage into focus. Christ isn't simply saying, 'do more.' Christ is saying, choose carefully what it is that commands your time, attention, passion, finance. If these are focused on things that ultimately will not deepen your relationship with God and with humanity, best to lay it down and replace it with something that will deepen one's faith and connection to those whom Jesus devoted a life to.

Something else that entered my mind as I was working on this sermon was a quote from Kenda Creasy Dean's book Practicing Passion: Youth and the Quest for a Passionate Church. 'If the church is going to make sense to adolescents, then our ministry must be predicated on passion-the passion of Christ, the passion of youth, and the passionate faith that is made possible when these two things come together.' (22).

This is what Jesus is trying to inspire, a passionate faith, in the face of a passive faith.
These words of Jesus challenge a church that is so focused on self-help and self-esteem that it has lost its true mission, which is to see God's purpose done in the world
These words of Jesus challenge a discipleship that is assumes it already knows the right answers to the doctrinal questions, but is not put into action in any intentional way
These words of jesus challenge the church that as satisfied with 'be good' and
be nice' to accept the challenge of the cross.
These words of Jesus challenge a discipleship that treats the church as ok when it is convenient, but not all that important, not something to sacrifice for, with a warning of the consequences of an apathetic faith, the loss of life.

How has this affected me?
What do I need to lay down? despite my story, I watch too much tv. So the formation of this sermon has challenged me to lay down TV and technology time. Let some of it go.
What will I pick up as a cross? To start I am going to take some of the time spent in front of TV and Computer memorizing and meditating on the beatitudes. There are other things I will do. game night with the family, reading, when the winter is gone, a walk in the woods. Ultimately it will lead to a family practice of service in the community, like cleaning trash from the side of the road and inviting others to join us.
Picking up the cross does mean service to others, but for me picking up the cross begins with time for devotion and prayer, which will strengthen me for works of service.

Sermon onConsumerism and Possessions; Material Girl

2010-08-08T10:28:00.000-07:00

Luke 12:22-34
The Spirituality of Pants II or We are Living in a Material World and I am a Material Girl.

Intro to the problem:
I’d like to begin this morning by jumping in the pop music time machine and going back to the days of my youth; the days of jelly shoes and leg warmers, up-turned collars, learning to do the Thriller dance and really bright neon colored clothing… the 80’s…
VERSE 1:
G
Some boys kiss me, some boys hug me
F G
I think they're O.K.
G
If they don't give me proper credit
F G
I just walk away
G
They can beg and they can plead
F G
But they can't see the light, that's right
G
Cause the boy with the cold hard cash
F G
Is always Mister Right, 'cause we are

CHORUS:
C D D Em
Living in a material world
C D G
And I am a material girl
G
You know that we are
C D D Em
living in a material world
C D G
And I am a material girl

[Note; Yes I did sing this... No I did not sing it well]

Our first reaction as a Christian Community is… No we are NOT materials boys and girls. We are spiritual. We do not over value possessions and we know that there is more to life than having stuff.

On the other hand we are all familiar with George Carlin’s classic rant about stuff…

Now, its funny, because we do identify with it. We do collect stuff. We throw away lots of stuff. We ease our troubled souls by shopping for more stuff. And we feel a little conflicted about our stuff and the amount of stuff we have because of Jesus’ words today….

Lk 12:22-23
"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. 23 Life is more than food, and the body more than clothes.

Lk 12:32-33
33 Sell your possessions and give to the poor.

Don’t worry about your stuff… its sound’s like Jesus is saying… Get rid of all your stuff… which sounds impossible, impractical and well, no fun at all. Like you I feel conflicted about the amount of stuff that I have collected, but I also find comfort and meaning in my stuff…

What Jesus is talking about in saying ‘don’t worry about food and clothing’ is that the pull of the security of possessions is subtle. We don’t think consciously that cars and computers, cells phones and shoes are more secure than God. But without thinking about it, we can act like it.

But what exactly does Jesus mean? What are we supposed to do with these commands to not worry about what we eat or what we wear? And wouldn’t following these commands cause us to end up on the doll waiting for a state check?

What gets complicated, I think, is that we tend to interpret what Jesus says as meaning we shouldn’t care too much for things… so we try not too… but we are also in a society where stuff is cheap, easy to get, and constantly thrown at us. And stuff can be easily discarded and replaced. How many of us call a tv repairman anymore, or go to a cobbler? So as Christians we don’t really know how to fit what Jesus is saying into our existence. We don’t over-value stuff, which is what Jesus is saying… but we also collect a lot of stuff, and discard a lot of stuff. We don’t know where it was made or if the workers were paid or treated with dignity. As long as after it has run the course of usefulness it is out of our house we tend not to think about where it is, although we have a vague sense that the world, the natural world is increasing clutter with all of our cheap plastic crap.

As a parent I see it. It causes me anxiety. I do worry about the amount of stuff that get accumulated in a house with kids…. All those toys. And on the one hand, they make the kids happy and in some cases cause enjoyment and even intellectual and physical development. On the other hand a growing pile of stuff in the basement shows me that most of the stuff doesn’t get used. The thrill was the getting and not the having and using. The high is pursuing something new and once the new has worn off, we discard it and move on to something else. And that does concern me. What is that teaching my children about living carefully in God’s creation? What is that teaching them about using money? What is that teaching them about other things like relationships? The connection may not seem obvious, but recall the story of Esther. (explain)

And I know that adult too consider these things and worry over them. We buy something, a car, a motorcycle, jewelry, clothing… because it makes us happy and we enjoy it… but we also feel a little guilty about spending when we could have used that money for someone in need or for a cause that we believe in and support.

We are bothered by what Jesus says about stuff, his warning that we place too much faith in things through our actions, but not exactly sure how to navigate through the conflict of needing, wanting, caring for others, enjoying things for ourselves…
We don’t want to keep up with the Kardashians, but neither do we want to become Amish…

What struck me about Jesus words is the fact that to my ears, he is reminding us of the creation story. I know it is subtle and scholars would probably disagree with me. But notice how Jesus encourages us not to place too much value on stuff by calling our attention to the beauty of Creation. In the midst of the anxiety we feel about our stuff Jesus reminds us of the story of God Creating.

Lk 12:24-28
24 Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! 25 Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? 26 Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?

27 "Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 28 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you,

God speaks and the constellations are cast in the heavens; God breathes and the planets flow on their courses through space. At a word from God all this exists and part of this story is the story of Adam and Eve being invited to participate. Name the animals, serve and protect creation.
It seems as if jesus is saying, God is still creating and you are invited to participate in that creating.
Come on…
That is exciting stuff…
You and I were created by God and called by God to join in the creating.
It isn’t just about getting stuff… it is about being creative…

In a world where we read stories of violence around the globe, the shooting of aid workers in Afghanistan, oil spills not just in the gulf, but in china and Michigan, surrounded by unemployment and the poverty that it spawns, it is so tempting to feel overwhelmed, to feel unimportant, to feel that we have nothing to contribute to such overwhelming and complex brokenness…
I just need to go home and forget about it all with some of my stuff…
For me that stuff is brownies and my Lord of the Rings DVD’s…

But Jesus is saying that we have a place in Creating and Redeeming all this brokenness… we are called participate creatively in the healing of the nations…

And I think that point for Christians today is that our stuff, our possessions is not outside or separate from this calling, this healing this creating… our stuff is a part of our call, a part of our message, a part of our creativity with God.

Let me ask you a question. In your high school year book under my picture was a list that summarized who I was at that point in time… a list with items like… Most prized possession…

Did you have that in your yearbook?
If you did, can you remember what your most prized possession was?
My most prized possession was my collection of Dokken tapes.
Dokken was a heavy metal hair band that was kinda popular, but not terribly popular.
It was my prized possession because of what it said about me.
I was NOT into pop music like Michael Jackson or Madonna or NKOTB…
I was into an edgier, more musically complex, slightly more esoteric type of music…

Our stuff, our possessions are important because they do say something about who we are.

I drive a Prius. Now if you think that I drive a Prius because I love it you are wrong. (I do love the gas mileage) but I do not like the size, its very cramped with three kids and the performance is lacking. I do not love stepping on and the gas and watching joggers, bicyclists and residents of Ashton court out walking their dogs pass me by as the Prius whispers up to top speed.

I have the Prius because I do believe that humanity is having a negative impact on God’s Creation and because I worship the Creator God, part of that worship means the practice of caring for Creation. The Prius means that I care about the Earth because God created the Earth and if I must sacrifice performance for loving care of what God created, so be it. The prius tells people a bit about who I am and if they ask, it is an opportunity to tell people about my faith.

Our stuff means something. Possessions are not only things that we own or have, they are an extension or an expression of who we are and what we are becoming.

I remember a moment that really made this apparent to me especially the difficulty on our consumer culture of maneuvering through the meaning of our things. I was visiting a friend at work, stopped by for lunch and he said, come out and meet one of my clients. Now I want you to look at the pin on her coat and then her vehicle. Ok. So I go out into the parking lot, shake hands, exchange pleasantries… on her coat a button that says NO FUR. So, she is taking a moral stand against the use and abuse of animals for conspicuous consumption. She was driving a Cadillac Escalade with a leather interior.

My point is that it is easy for us to think consciously that our values and beliefs are embodied in our lives by our thoughts and our ideas, but to connect that to actions and possessions, takes careful planning and thought. AND, without careful consideration and awareness we can contradict what we believe with what we have, pursue, value, own…

To best honor what Jesus is saying to us today, I think we need to embrace that we are Material boys and girls.

And instead of keeping our spiritual life separate from our stuff, we need to let the Spirit invade our stuff.

If you think about it, that is the heart of our faith. The word became flesh and dwelt among us, John says. The spirit invaded, flesh, stuff. God doesn’t want faith and stuff separate, but together, working in concert, for the renewing of Creation. We proclaim it every month when we say together, this bread is my body, this cup is a new covenant. Spirit and stuff, together creating us, recreating the world.

Over the next few weeks I’m going to start taking a spiritual inventory of my stuff and how I use my stuff. The biggest struggle for me will probably be the TV, I can so easily become entranced and addicted to TV. But I will honor both my spirit and the Creative Holy Spirit if I turn it off and have game night with the boys, or take Anna for a walk with Bert, or read a book.

Your inventory will be different. There will be different things that cloud the image of God that you were created to be, and different things that help you to realize your creative potential. The struggle will be to rid ourselves of the things that twist us, subtly out of the shape God is trying to mold us into. The challenging but hopefully redeeming practice for us as Christians embracing the spirit of our stuff, will be to pause and ask ourselves, when we are thinking of getting more stuff, is how will this stuff feed my spirit? How did its production affect the spirit of the one producing it? Will this develop the image of God within me or distort that image? Will others see my faith through my stuff?

Earth Day, A Celebration of God's Love

2010-04-13T12:18:00.000-07:00

Should Environmental Concerns be a part of the gospel proclamation of the church?

This week I am working on a sermon for Earth Day Sunday. Having done some environmental justice sermons before what most often seems to be the hurdle to jump is the political overtones. In trying to encourage Christians to think about the environment from a Biblical perspective, I often hear responses from a political perspective, from the left or the right, republican or democrat, conservative or liberal. While I must admit that my own awareness of the environmental 'movement' came after watching Al Gore's video, I very quickly began to study the bible with eyes open to what it had to say about Creation, so that the theology of the church I serve would be shaped by theology and scripture as opposed to politics.

This weeks sermon is inspired by a number of sources;

First; John 13:34-35

34 "A new command I give you: Love one another . As I have loved you, so you must love one another . 35 By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another ."

Second; Lk 12:27-28

27 "Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 28 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith!

Here is the point I am considering. We are commanded by Christ to love one another in John. The text from Luke illustrates God's love for creation by caring for creation. (I know that isn't the overall point Jesus is trying to make, but he is using God's love of creation to illustrate God's watch-care over humanity)

If we are commanded to love, to participate in the love of God as illustrated by Christ, and Christ himself refers to God's love and care for all of creation, even the lilies, are we too then, not called to love all of creation?

Three: Willis Jenkins in his book 'Ecologies of Grace' refers to the work of James Nash and summarizes Nash's thoughts with this; 'by learning to love nature, we participatively imitate God's love.

Caring for Creation then, becomes a spiritual practice in which we contemplate God's love for us through the beauty of creation. By making creation care a part of our spiritual lives, even through simple things like recycling, gardening, participating in farmer's markets, walking or biking instead of driving when we can, etc. we are imitating God's love and learning how to love more fully.

To see a previous Earth Day Sermon:
http://alienationchurch.blogspot.com/2009/06/glacier-and-grace.html

6 Prayer Steps to Healing Broken Relationships: The Painful Exercise of Building Community

2010-04-07T06:27:00.001-07:00

This is Lenten Update 9:
Ok, so first of all, I know that Lent is past.
Here is the thing. During the final three weeks of Lent I got so distracted that praying the Office, Memorizing Scripture and abstaining from TV completely fell by the way-side.
First I spent a great deal of time for a week or more at the bedside of a dear friend and member of my congregation who was dying. Lots of long days and nights in the hospital with him and his family. It was a sad time to say the least, but an honor and a privilege to be included in such a intimate time with this man and his family. I did a lot of praying, but not the Office. I don't regret it one bit, although I'm still saddened by the loss of such a wonderful man. In these times caring for others had to take priority.
After that I had two weeks of flu-fighting and frankly, I couldn't be bothered with anything but sleeping and well.... other flu connected activities that I won't describe.

So I've decided to make my Lenten Disciplines my Easter Disciplines.

So two brief notes.
First, I ran across this beautiful post by Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove

In this post he speaks about how we react to our culture by wanting community, but then want it to come instantly and easily. But Community only comes through time and effort. I have experienced this personally and more profoundly as a pastor, as my church has a wonderful track record for welcoming the un-churched and the church-damaged, but still struggles with how to hold these folks long enough for them to develop the relationships they so earnestly seek. Building community can be messy and painful. We disappoint one another. So often I have witnessed folks new to the community of church distance themselves because of tension within the community.

How to rebuild fractured relationships?
1. accept that it is not something that you alone can do. In prayer you must trust that God can speak again to the chaos and create life.
2. Meditate on God's love for you. Otherwise the dialogue with the other will seem like competition or fighting. When we are firmly rooted in God's love for us, we can accept the criticism and pain of others as a gift.
3. Be silent. Don't respond. Don't form a defense or an argument. First, just listen. Perhaps the criticism is unfair or inaccurate. but that will only be clear after.
4. More prayer. Return in prayer to God's love and then ask God to reveal the wisdom of the other's words.
5. Pray for this other person. That God will allow you to see them as God sees them. That God will allow you to remain with them a moment in their pain, even if you haven't done anything to cause it, and it is being projected at you. Perhaps you didn't cause it, but your calm loving presence might be the gift God wants to give them to allow them to heal from this pain.
6. Keep up the holy conversation. express yourself truthfully. Listen carefully. Don't give up or give in and isolate yourself, but stay open. Read Phil 2 for a guide.

Blessings

Lenten Discipline Update 8: Ps 63; dry and weary prayer

2010-03-16T08:17:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I just don't feel like praying, there I said it...

O God, you are my God, earnestly I seek you
my soul thirsts for my
my flesh faints for you
in a dry and weary land where there is no water
Ps 63

that is how prayer feels to me sometimes... like a dry and weary land. Prayer is dry and I'm weary.
That is why I haven't posted any Lenten Discipline updates... I've been in the dry and weary land of not feeling prayer.

Part of my own practice for Lent is silence and solitude in prayer, so that I can listen.
Which is that much harder when I'm not feeling like it.
When I'm doing 'talking' prayer, at least I can talk about not feeling like praying
When its silent prayer, what can I do?
so random thoughts float into my head.

What was the name of my first cat when I was a kid? Pussy-willow. Why did I name a cat pussy-willow?
Bacon, I like bacon.
which reminds me I like fruit loops too. but Michael Pollan says fruit loops aren't food because they change the color of the milk.
I bet we need milk.
DAMN! I did it again...

I fill in silent time because I want prayer time to be effective.
There must be a result, if not an instant result than a result within a reasonable amount of time, and I get to define reasonable.

That is why prayer became dry.
I wanted to define prayer,
wanted it to be what I wanted, which is effective.
I wanted there to be some result to my prayer.

Just wait

that is what I heard after I finally pieced together about five minutes of silence..
just wait.

this isn't about what you want, it isn't about results yet.

just shut up and listen

Let the thoughts go, do worry that you them, just let them float on through

Don't try to accomplish anything or learn or discover anything

Just listen and wait

That is what I got. I should wait. Prayer isn't a task to be completed or a tool for the accomplishment of some item on my agenda. Prayer is for its own sake, and therefore it takes time. It isn't about benefits and rewards. not instantly anyway... Not right now for me anyway. Right now it is about the discipline of being still and silent for no other purpose, whether I like it or not.

Haiti and Tony Campolo

2010-03-11T17:37:00.000-08:00

Tony Campolo in an essay entitled 'Making Matters Worse' suggests that the mission work done by thousands of American Christians is Haiti is the reason for the poverty of the country; 'thousands of church groups that have taken "mission teams" to Haiti to build schools and churches in Haitian villages across that little country. Yet Haiti has continued in a downward spiral into greater and greater poverty and social disorganization, not in spite of all these "good works," but in great part because of them. So much of what has been done in Haiti has disempowered Haitians and diminished their dignity by doing for them what they could have done for themselves.'

I'm all for incisive and intelligent criticism, and I think one could also make some critique of some of these mission trips. But in this case Campolo's critique is woefully lacking in any historical or political perspective. Now I'm no expert in Haitian History, but here is a sample of what I do know

Haiti was a slave plantation controlled by France. In 1804, inspired by Toussaint L’Ouverture (after whom the now barely functioning airport in Port-au-Prince is named), the slaves rebelled, founding the world’s first black republic. Under military threat from France in 1825, Haiti agreed to pay reparations to France for lost “property,” including slaves that French owners lost in the rebellion. It was either agree to pay the reparations or have France invade Haiti and reimpose slavery. Many Haitians believe that original debt, which Haiti dutifully paid through World War II, committed Haiti to a future of poverty that it has never been able to escape. (While France, as part of the deal, recognized Haiti’s sovereignty, slave-owning politicians in the United States, like Thomas Jefferson, refused to recognize the black republic, afraid it would inspire a slave revolt here. The U.S. withheld formal recognition until 1862.)

Loans from the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) imposed “structural adjustment” conditions on Haiti, opening its economy to cheap U.S. agricultural products. Farmers, unable to compete, stopped growing rice and moved to the cities to earn low wages, if they were lucky enough to get one of the scarce sweatshop jobs. People in the highlands were driven to deforest the hills, converting wood into salable charcoal, which created an ecological crisis—destabilizing hillsides, increasing the destructiveness of earthquakes and causing landslides during the rainy season.
this comes from a piece entitled 'Haiti Forgive Us' by Amy Goodman.

another essay on this issue by William Fisher In this essay Fisher says, 'Aid to Haiti has been marked by frequent interruptions, particularly in assistance from the U.S., for political and ideological reasons. Within Haiti, massive and continuing government and private corruption has siphoned off large chunks of funding and misdirected money to people who didn’t need help.'

My point is this. It is easy to blame small church groups, even though there are thousands of them, for Haiti's poverty and corruption. But what Campolo's essay does is over-simply a terribly complicated issue (more complicated than I understand I'm sure.) There is no mention of the historical injustice imposed by France or the lack of support from the U.S. There is no mention of the corruption of government which is surely not the fault of the citizens. No mention of the policies of our own government, and no mention of American consumerism, and its role in this isseu. Campolo provides smoke and mirrors to keep the public from learning of the another possibility; that governmental policies, our own governmental policies for hundreds of years, and our own ongoing interests, not to mention institutional racism have caused Haiti to find itself in poverty.

What so many of the world's poor need is for American consumers to better research their purchases to ensure that slave labor wasn't used, as well as the American consumer to stop consuming so much. If Tony Campolo challenged the U.S. government to create more just policies or American Christians to live lives of justice and generosity in solidarity with Christian sisters and brothers around the world, now that would have been radical, risky and prophetic.
But this essay falls far short of prophetic.

Glen Beck, Jim Wallis and Social Justice

2010-03-11T14:28:00.000-08:00

Glen Beck. Everybody is talking about what he said about social justice.

Its been blogged about already, I'm late to the party. I found out about Beck's rant against 'social justice' through The Huffington Post.

There have been many responses such as Rev. James Martin, Dr. Richard Beck and of course Jim Wallis .

Acknowledging that much smarter folks than I have responded, I will say a few quick things on this issue.

Leviticus 25:10And you shall hallow the fiftieth year and you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you: you shall return, every one of you, to your property and every one of you to your family. 11That fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you: you shall not sow, or reap the aftergrowth, or harvest the unpruned vines. 12For it is a jubilee; it shall be holy to you: you shall eat only what the field itself produces. 13 In this year of jubilee you shall return, every one of you, to your property.
The Entire Exodus Narrative, Matthew 5, Matthew 25, Acts 4, the list goes on and on of texts that Christians have interpreted as teaching Social Justice.

One of my favorites is 16 When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written:
18‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
19to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’
This is Luke 4:16-19 and Jesus is quoting Isaiah 61.

Language is all about context. Beck is claiming that the words 'social' and 'justice' were part of communist and nazi rhetoric. History isn't my expertise. However, to understand the meaning of words we must watch the context in which they are used. The scriptures I mentioned above provide the context for what 'social justice' means in the Church. While communists and nazi's may have used the same words (although, I doubt Beck knows history any better than theology)the context is very different. By context I mean, violence. The words 'Social Justice' IF they were used by communists and nazi's in those cases would have been used in the context of violence, imprisonment and enslavement as opposed to the Scriptural context which is peace, freedom, and prosperity.

Think about the phrase 'Shut-Up.'

Now, we don't really know what that means unless we know the context. We have to know the conversation that preceded using the phrase. We have to know the tone of voice and the facial expression. 'Shut-up' could be an expression of anger demanding that the other stop talking. 'Shut-up' could also be a friendly expression of surprise or disbelief, or even delight. It depends on the context.

Or 'He's a friend of ours.'That could be a coded way of speaking about being Mafia, OR, I could simply be introducing a friend to another group of friends. Beck is suggesting that one use of the words social and justice, one possible context, Communism and Nazi Germany, is the only possible context for understanding the words. While there is a rich biblical narrative and church history that provides a very different context for understanding the words. In this case Beck is either putting his ignorance on display or purposefully misrepresenting social justice.

But why should we care? I have read some bloggers criticize Jim Wallis for speaking out against Beck. Why bring more attention to him? Here is the thing. Recent polls have shown that fewer and fewer people attend worship or belong to a church or even claim association with any particular faith... BUT they still 'believe' in God. As if that was the point. It appears as if the predominant view of 'faith' is that it is an intellectual activity, or perhaps emotional. If I hold the 'right' idea, that there is God, and 'feel' peace because of that idea, I have faith.

But that is a very different idea of 'faith' than what Jesus himself taught when he told the disciples to take up your cross. Discipleship, or, faith, is about idea's and beliefs, but it is also about actions and practices that follow from these new ideas. Social Justice is a vital part of the Christian Tradition because it is a voice reminding us that we are not called just to think different thoughts, but engage in alternative practices, such as generosity, forgiveness, peace-making, and compassionate care. And this is why Wallis is right to do what he is doing. He will not change Beck's mind and he will not succeed in a boycott of Beck's show... but perhaps he can help re-establish the fact that Christianity is not just about a personal emotional and spiritual experience, but about living a life of justice and mercy in the world.

Social Networking: Web 2.0 vs. John 15.1 or Are Virtual Relationships Authentic Relationships

2010-03-07T14:39:00.000-08:00

Will facebook kill the church? Has it already?
This is an interesting question posed at Experimental Theology Richard Beck, who posts this blog offers much to consider. Millenials are leaving the church in droves and Beck thinks it has to do with facebook and other social networking options on the internet. Millenials, like other generations find the church annoying, but have no need of church for socializing because they have twitter, facebook and myspace.

This came up in Adult Sunday School today as we considered John 15.1:‘I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine-grower.' Particularly the bit about the pruning of the vine. Will the church really die? I don't think so. But it may change radically. If social networking via the web is the preferred way of relating for Millenials and younger generations (?) having a church building, a regular meeting site and time may not be a priority. One could simply twitter a bible study, worship, mission time and place and work with whomever gathers. Is this really relational though. In John 15 Jesus seems to suggest that the intimacy of the community of faith is integral to the working of the Holy Spirit, which is in turn integral to the presence of Christ.

John seems to present a very high ecclesiology especially in chapters 14 and 15. Jesus is one with the Father, and his glorification will enable the Paraklete or Comforter to come to the church. Where disciples gather, the spirit is present and so then is Christ. This is a slightly confusing, but strangely comforting web of relationships that promises the ongoing creative presence of God with the church, but also places a high priority on human relationship in the worshiping community. Does this Christology and Ecclesiology adapt to twitter and facebook relationships?

I am eagerly awaiting 'You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto. I'm borrowing it from a friend and from what I've read, Lanier offers an interesting critique of web 2.0 connectivity.

Right now I'm experimenting with twitter, facebook, blogs and a website for the church. But I am not as optimistic as Richard Beck seems to be in his essay about the reality of social networking relationships. Briefly, I find that fewer and fewer people know how to live in community or intimate relationship. Influenced by Hauerwas I'm sure, I'm of the opinion that twitter and facebook are an extension of the consumerization of relationships. We want to feel connected, but post-modern consumers do not seem to really want to be committed to any long-term relationship. We want to be free to buy any product we want, and to change brands if we wish, and I think we see this influencing our ability to socialize and the way in which we socialize. regardless of what Beck says, I'm not convinced that even the very best of friends that I have on facebook or twitter, would be such if we relied on internet social-networking. Facebook is a useful tool, but not legitimate replacement of life together in community, like church.

What do you think? Are Facebook, Twitter, and Myspace and YouTube the future of the church, tools for the church that cannot replace a time and place and community of worship, or a phenomena to be resisted?

The Mind of Christ: Lenten Discipline 7

2010-03-05T17:59:00.000-08:00

Which is the more valuable virtue; Certainty of our beliefs and perspectives, or, the courage to question our own opinions and willing adopt new understandings?

As a preacher I should be sure of what I believe right? I should be the one with the answers. But I don't. It frustrates me. Sometimes I can't make up my mind. I don't mean boxers or briefs by the way. I can't make up my mind about real issues.

Like music in worship. Sometimes it just seems like the traditional hymns do not speak a language that people understand; I mean, what is an 'ebenezer' and how do I raise it anyway? from the hymn 'Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing'

On the other hand, so much of modern worship music has no theological content. I don't mind if the music is simplistic, but most of these songs, understandable thought they are, don't communicate anything of value. I can't make up my mind.

Or a serious issue. Abortion. I was raised in a more biblically literal church in which abortion was always wrong. Just look at Jeremiah. God knew him while he was in the womb. Those who follow God should hinder the ongoing creation of God, ever.
Then I started to run in more 'liberal' circles, where we talked about women's rights, are pregnancy due to abusive 'relationships'. I changed my mind. But now it seems like we are doing theology more focused on 'human rights' than on the call of God, and I go back and forth, I can't make up my mind.

I just changed my mind again recently. Didn't even realize it. two conversations in a week on the same topic... two different opinions. Wasn't trying to be political for my own gain, or play games with people. I really just couldn't seem to decide where I was.

Should have been silent.
Which is the connection with my Lenten Prayer Discipline.

1 Corinthians 2.16:
‘For who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?’
But we have the mind of Christ.

I pray the Divine Office so that I can seek the mind of Christ. that is hope anyway. I'm just not as certain as Paul seems about the whole thing.
Seeking the mind of Christ means quieting my own mind, and the more I think of it, my mouth too.

Prayer as time to have my mind changed. Prayer as time to wait and listen for wisdom that just might change my opinion, my perspective. If I only get around to prayer when I have time, or when I am frightened or frustrated, might have a purpose. But I'm not sure that prayer changes me. Paul seems to think we will have the mind of Christ. That takes time, patience, silence, and a willingness to change.

Lenten Discipline Update 6

2010-03-03T09:41:00.000-08:00

The current challenge of the Divine Office is that even though I find myself in the rhythm, carving our 20 minutes four times a day for prayer, my thoughts do not always cooperate. Especially during the work week, yesterday and today for example, as I close my eyes to breath and center, and then go to the book of prayers, my mind wanders to all the other things I 'should' be doing. I find myself watching words go by as my mind is planning the activities to pursue after this brief interlude. Especially when I begin to recite Ps 63 which I am memorizing for Lent, I am bombarded with frustration at the interruptions of the day that have prohibited the work I hoped to get done, and then I begin to recite the list of things undone, the things that are important, but I can't find time to do. Then come regrets at choosing some things over others. I have been studying Paul for a bible study, but perhaps I should have been preparing the Mark study guide for new members and their mentors. Then find frustration slowly becoming anger as I imagine the people who would criticize these decisions and the use of time and it almost becomes unbearable to pray... it is a waste of time.

I came upon this reading by Nouwen that I go back to again and again...
a life without a quiet center, easily becomes destructive. When we cling to the results of our actions as our only way of self-identification, then we become possessive and defensive and tend to look at our fellow human beings more as enemies to be kept at a distance than as friends with whom we share the gifts of life.

I've been reading this during my prayer time. Prayer time is slowly changing, the list of things to-do going away. I find that I enjoy prayer because my day is no longer so much about what I must be doing so as to prove my worth to God or the church or others. My day is about this quiet time in which I am worth something just because I am. I needn't do anything to be loved and cherished by God. As a matter of fact, sometimes the work and the list of things to accomplish, inhibit this relationship... the relationship, even minstry, is more about getting things done than about growing closer to God. What am I teaching folks at church about faith, if I live a life of constant action that really doesn't accomplish the goal of the Christian life, to grow in God's love.

The benefit of this time is that the rest from planning and thinking and doing and acting has allowed me both the time to prioritize my tasks, and to find peace to respond when others might not understand this prioritizing. That is a benefit, but the ultimate gift is simply the quiet time.

Mustard Seeds

2010-03-01T12:27:00.000-08:00

Some of the things I'm reading:
A few weeks ago I shared a post by Jesus Radicals regarding Goshen College's recent decision to begin to play the National Anthem after 116 years of abstaining from this action. Sheldon C. Good recently posted a blog at God's Politics regarding this ongoing issue. What I especially appreciated about his perspective is summed up in this brief quote: So the question becomes: How might we draw on the best traditions of all three allegiances (country, world, God)? Perhaps it is through compassionate peacemaking as global citizens. Because in a violent world, Jesus, our Prince of Peace, has a message of peace that is ordinarily radical.

In my post on this topic I took a pretty weak position. Having not wanted to engage in a debate at my church about our allegiances and the presence of the American Flag in our sanctuary, I didn't offer much of a reflection. I like Good's response... see what you think.

I have recently discovered Duke's Call and Response Blog
Specifically I am enjoying thinking about two posts on this blog that engage theology and economics: One by Dan Rhodes and a response by James Howell Frankly I'm still thinking this over. While economics does need to be engaged with more theological vigor in the church, I feel more comfortable thinking in the realm of the church, and not theorizing about how banking itself should change. It is an important thing to do, I'm sure, but above my pay grade. I tend to spend more time thinking along the lines of John Howard Yoder In Body Politics Yoder highlights how the traditional practices of the church offer a political witness to the world. In the area of economics, Yoder sees Communion, the sharing of the common loaf and the common purse as a practice of alternative economics that the church lives and offers the world. Ben Witherington III has a new book on this topic that I have on my wish list, and having viewed some of his blog posts that summarize the content of this book, I think I this would be a useful read for many in this area.

I've discovered a new blog I like very much Groans from Within The latest blogs are dealing with a similar issues, ethical buying. I have been doing some reading in the area of consumerism and so find this blog really engaging and well thought out.
finally, I discovered this little gem by Shane McGowan formerly of the Poques, with Nick Cave, Johnny Depp and others. A little benefit tune for Haiti.
hope you enjoy.

Final note, at the bottom of the right side of little blog here you will see a link, 'My Music on RYM'. Rate Your Music is, obviously the musical equivalent of LibraryThing. On this you will find a listing of my music, what I own and what I covet. I know you've been dying to find out what I listen to for music, so here is your chance to peep in on my ipod.

Lenten Discipline Update 5

2010-02-27T15:30:00.000-08:00

"Our minds are always active. We analyze, reflect, daydream, or dream. There is not a moment during the day or night when we are not thinking. You might say our thinking is 'unceasing.' Sometimes we wish that we could stop thinking for a while; that would save us from many worries, guilt feelings and fears. Our ability to think is our greatest gift, but it is also the source of our greatest pain. Do we have to become victims of our unceasing thoughts?'

These words of Henri Nouwens came to mind as I became aware of the racing of my mind just a few minutes ago. A list of things going on in my mind included; I want a cigarette, the carpets needs vacuuming, I really don't like my sermon for tomorrow, I forgot to write out my work-schedule to post for next week, my oldest son is starting little league in a couple of weeks and he is going to struggle, which reminded me of how much I struggled with little league and I don't want it to be the negative experience for him that it was for me, I wish i had spent more time researching Paul for next weeks Bible study, I watched more tv than I wanted to today, I'm sick of eating chicken for dinner, I wish I could preach like Rob Bell, I really want a cigarette now...
I was spinning. I didn't even realize that I was spinning. I am grateful that my wife notices my body language and picked up right away on the fact that my mind was spinning based on my movements and facial expression. As I sit to reflect on this I notice how negative most of this is. I noticed that I'm not in the moment, and that causes me to pause and reflect on the fact without realizing it I can spin out of the sermon writing moment, spending time with the kids or my wife moment, listening to a church member during a visit moment. I don't mean to do this. I want to be present in the moment and be still in my thoughts. No wonder I forget things some times...

Nouwen goes on to say; 'Do we have to become victims of our unceasing thoughts? No, we can convert our unceasing thinking into unceasing prayer by making our inner monologue into a continuing dialogue with our God who is the source of all love.'

i appreciate what nouwen doing. Instead adding to the unceasing thoughts the added thought that we shouldn't be thinking so much, which just makes us think more. Trying not to think about something just makes you think about it more. Don't think about a pink elephant. See? you can't not think of it now can you. Nouwen encourages us to use this as the material of prayer for in denying it, we actually compound the problem, but in accepting these thoughts, and using them as prayer, they actually drift away and stillness can come. Writing helps too. or blogging in this case. Can blogging be a form of prayer?

Lenten Discipline Update 4

2010-02-27T05:52:00.000-08:00

Praying the Divine Office is a bit more of a challenge that one might expect. As I previously posted, I have added to the Divine Office short readings from C.S. Lewis and Henri Nouwen. I am finding the Nouwen readings especially fulfilling, as he reflects on prayer. It's still the time factor. as I've said before, the prayers of the Office seem to go by too quickly. But its not really the Office, its me. It is a struggle to slow the mind, (insert here any 'isn't your mind already slow enough' jokes). Seeking silence and time for contemplation takes planning and requires making choices. I have to choose not to do other things in order to take the time to pray and reflect. But there are so many other things to be done, that I have found myself charging through the Office to get back to doing other things.

I am reminded of the work of a good friend, mentor and colleague Kirk Jones and his pastoral theological work on this issue which resulted in two books, 'Rest in the Storm and Addicted to Hurry.'

It is, no doubt, important to get things done, regardless of our careers, vocations or callings. But especially as disciples of Christ in a complex society, it is also important to etch out moments of reflection so as to clearly discern exactly what it is that must be done so as to best serve Christ and bring Glory to God. I may very well be repeating myself with this post. But this is apparently what I must learn, this lent, to slow down and listen.

this morning I read this from Nouwen's work entitled 'Prayer Embraces the World'; 'To pray is to unite ourselves with Jesus and lift up the whole world through him to God in a cry for forgiveness, reconciliation, healing, and mercy. TO pray, therefore, is to connect whatever human struggle or pain we encounter - whether starvation , torture, displacement of peoples, or any form of physical or mental anguish -- with the gentle and humble heart of Jesus.'

I suppose this encapsulates my hesitation about the very popular 'Missional Church' movements and some of its proponents who suggest that worship is less important than active service. This point of view seems to be falling into our cultures desire for hurry, action, busyness. While a faith that remains inactive and cerebral is certainly offensive to the Christ who called us to take up a cross, I fear that the action of the 'church' will be in vain if it is not rooted in worship, prayer, study and discernment.

Transgendered Paul

2010-02-25T18:15:00.000-08:00

Wednesday I finished reading a new book, well new to me anyway, 'Apostle to the Conquered: Reimagining Paul's Mission' by Davina C. Lopez. Interesting read. Lopez begins by describing her intention, which is reinterpret the term 'ethne' or nations, which is found throughout Paul's work, specifically in this book in Galatians. In Lopez's reading of scholarship, 'ethne' is a term used to describe 'gentiles,' and therefore refers to the theological separation between Jews and Gentiles. Paul's work is purely a theological work. Lopez position's herself clearly in the 'Empire-critical' school of reading Paul;

In this mode of interpretation, Paul turns away from his previous life in Judaism and becomes a different kind of zealot, a politically oriented Jewish person encouraging religio-political resistance to the Roman Empire through declaring a crucified Christ as savior from the evil age. This opposition mainly manifests itself, according to Richard Horsley and similar proponents, against the Roman imperial cult, the primary religio-political system operative in Paul's context. Here the emperor was worshiped as god and called lord, benefactor, and savior. Positioning the God of Israel as the only and most powerful god, the best benefactor and law-giver, who guaranteed certain destruction of Roman-configured peace and security, constitutes the political view of Paul. Such a view positions salvation as not concerning individuals from the law or Judaism, but the whole of humanity from Caesar's world.

The first part of Lopez's project is to suggest and then prove that 'ethne' was not simply a term used by Jews to refer to Gentiles, but a term used by Romans to refer to all others. If this is true, and I find her argument compelling, then Jews, too, are 'ethne' for 'ethne' refers to all the nations that are subjigated to roman imperial power. This would suggest a significant shift in understanding Paul, for his mission would cease to be a purely theological one to gentiles, and become a political one, to all oppressed nations. So Lopez's first point is that scholarship that view's 'ethne' as purely a theological term used by Jews, has missed the larger or wider social meaning of the term.

Where Lopez seeks to explore new territory in this Empire-critical stance is in the area of sexuality and gender. Lopez goes to great lengths in the book to re-create for the reader the context in which to understand what the signifier 'ethne' would mean. She draws upon sculpture, coinage and other artwork in which the nations that have fallen under roman rule are represented and explains in detail the theology at work in showing Rome's superiority to the nations. She also draws upon literature of that same time, such as the Aeneid, to make the same point. This is where gender comes into play, because the defeated nations are described in artwork and in literature are feminized. Nations are represented as women in positions of weakness, about to be raped and/or killed. This representation continues in literature. The reason why the nations are attacked and brought under Roman rule is because of their femininity. They are weaker and lesser, and Roman rule, therefore is a gift to them.

Lopez's final point is to highlight those places where Paul feminizes himself;
Gal 4:19
19 My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you,

Ge 1:1 - 1 Th 2:7
7 but we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.

1 Co 3:1-2
3:1 Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly — mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it.

Lopez writes, 'I aim here... to begin to re-connect Paul's appearance as a woman and (single!) mother with the transformed consciousness and downward mobility among the defeated nations in the context of Roman imperial ideology. The weakness and brokenness characterizing the Paul of just a few verses earlier in Galatians is here manipulated into an act of creation. But this creation does not appear to happen the proper or natural way, that is, with a man. It is a creation out of nothing, form the bottom, by a seemingly defeated woman.' (p 142)

Lopez's point, as I see it, is that Paul uses the language of Roman Imperialism in feminizing the 'ethne' the nations, but he does so with a particular eye to the prophets who also see Jerusalem as a woman, particularly Isaiah, who see sees Jerusalem as a barren woman who will give birth and sing. But it is also in Isaiah that we read that Israel will be a house for all nations. Paul takes the Roman language of the weak, oppressed feminine and combines it with the feminine language in the prophetic tradition so as to undermine Roman political theology. Rome's way of gathering the nations is oppression and violence. God's way of gathering the nations brings life. so Paul is undermining Rome's theological and political claims. Paul is also calling the nations to a new way of living, which, under God, leaves behind the ROman way of life which is violent and oppressive. Paul calls them to join together peacefully to anticipate the world that God will create, a world of peace and not violence and oppression.

I'm still thinking about my responses to this work. A small criticism I have is that I wish Lopez has devoted as much time to carrying through on exegesis as she did setting the historical context through art and literature. Still, having read it I think that I will find her reading of Paul very interesting as I work on issues of modern slavery and human trafficking. The idea that Paul feminizes himself, becomes one of the 'raped women' that is the nations oppressed by Rome, holds a lot of potential for biblical application to the issue of slavery and sex trafficking. I am also intrigued by the potential to see Paul as a pacifist, again, become one of the oppressed instead of fighting back against rome. Paul is certainly responding, but not in a violent way.

Lopez offers a unique reading of Paul, certainly one that I have never encountered before. but I think this might be a useful new reading that especially puts a new perspective on those who find Paul misogynistic. And it also opens up new areas of current ethics in which Paul can be looked to for guidance.

Lenten Disciplines 3

2010-02-23T06:37:00.000-08:00

Quick update today. Lot's to do.

Yesterday I mentioned the fact that the Divine Office seemed to go by too quickly.
So this morning I slowed down, sang the responses to the readings. At the end of the morning, noon and afternoon office are two prayers, one the prayer for the week and one the closing prayer. In between the two I inserted brief devotional readings. I found a daily devotional book on the writings of C.S.Lewis, so I read that. I also have a book of various brief excepts of the writings of Henri Nouwen. I think I will carry that around with the Divine Office and insert a brief reading in my practice throughout the day. They are not long, but Nouwen is always good. This morning's excerpt was about prayer. 'If we live a prayerful life, then there is a growing desire to spend more time with God and God alone... the desire to pray and to spend time with God and god alone is always growing.'

Which reminds me that my work is not just labor for a paycheck, but prayer in and of itself. The studying and writing, planning, listening, study and preparing I do, are all forms of prayer. Launching into work without a time of silence and contemplation leads me to just see this as labor. Beginning with prayer reminds me that it is all a form of prayer. Perhaps I won't way this well, but instead of rushing to an end result for my labors; a sermon, a lesson, a plan, I can slowly savor these things as prayerful connection to God.

read this Nouwen quote for the noon prayers and thought I'd share; ' Spiritual disciplines are not ways to eradicate all our desires but ways to order them so that they can serve one another and together serve God. --Bread for the Journey

Lenten Practices Update 2

2010-02-22T12:47:00.000-08:00

So, for Lent I am cutting back on tv viewing, praying The Divine Office
The weekend wasn't so bad. I'm finding I don't miss television all that much. It's just second nature to turn it on, so after I turn it on without thinking, I turn it off and read. I joked with my friend theobilly on the phone today that I gave up television for lent, but am spending more time on the internet. He replied that this was like giving up beer for lent only to start drinking wine.

Somewhat more seriously, praying the hours has been more challenging than I expected. It seems a bit anti-climactic to stop what I am doing to go through these very brief prayers. it seems like there should be more. I just settle my racing mind into the moment and it is over, the prayers are said and I don't feel like I was present for the moment. I think I am reading them, and I tend to read fast. So i started singing the prayers as Phyllis Tickle suggests in her brief introduction. At first it feels funny, but I do slow down. some. I find myself singing too quickly too. and this is perhaps the lesson I am meant to learn... to slow down.Or the practice I meant to begin, slowing down, my reading, my thinking, my doing. I was just extolling the virtues of contemplation and discernment to a church member the other day, who did not feel effective or active enough.

It is a tough lesson to learn, that sometimes we serve God and others best not by a knee-jerk action, but by quietly listening, thinking, praying and learning so that when we act we act effectively and for the glory of God. Guess I need to learn it better myself. If we learn anything from the recent news about the mid-west baptists involvement in haiti it is that acting without learning leads to more harm than good

I am reminded of a line from Tolkien, 'Not all those who wander are lost.' I suppose I fear that i am loosing time for important actions if I wander in prayer. Wandering might not be such a bad thing though.

My Lent Discipline Update

2010-02-20T06:44:00.000-08:00

Quick review of my Lenten disciplines:

Discipline One: Cut back on TV. Not bad. Bit of a challenge with the Olympics on. I received some new books in the mail yesterday and so they distracted me.
1. Apostle to the Conquered: Reimaging Paul's Mission by Davina C. Lopez
2. Postmodernism, or, the Logic of Late Capitalism by Fredric Jameson
3. Up to our Steeples in Politics by Will Campbell
4. Consuming Faith: Integrating Who We are with What we Buy by Tom Beaudoin

I'm starting a thursday night bible study on Paul soon and so I dove right into the Lopez work. Already she has provided much to consider. Lopez does her theology and exegesis from the margins of feminist, queer and post-colonial theory. So I am learning much about those perspectives. So far she has spent a great deal of time discussing the coins, statues, and other various works of art of the ROman period and its political and theological implications. Her point, in the end, is to go back to Paul's use of the self-descriptive phrase 'apostle to the nations' to argue that when Paul used that word 'nations' or 'ethne' his context was wider that simply 'non-jewish' which traditional exegesis and scholarship has assumed. Instead, 'ethne' was a political term to all who were less than the Romans. Should be interesting.

Back to Practices. So I found myself very at peace having no television, or very little yesterday, just a few moments at lunch and after dinner. Amazing how little there really is on. I turned it on before starting this post, and began my usual flip through the channels, then, amazing, just gave it up as a waste of time.

Praying the Hours has been rushed at some points. Attended a lecture in Cambridge by Luis CdeBaca on 'the Fight to Abolish Modern Day Slavery'
Two interesting points, at least for me, in the lecture. One, Ambassador CdeBaca suggested some ways in which everyone could combat modern slavery; by buying cotton shirts not assembled in sweatshops, buying food not harvested by slave labor and... this was the best... buying free trade chocolate. I've dropped the chocolate line as a way to combat slavery in two recent sermons, so to hear the Ambassador mention it was affirming. Second point. Ambassador CdeBaca was asked what efforts his office was putting into combatting the sex trade in South Africa due to the upcoming World Cup Events, he replied that he was enlisting the power of the pulpit, connecting to churches and clergy in South Africa to combat the demand side of prostitution and slavery.
The lecture was interesting, but it came right at the time when I needed to be doing the vespers prayers. I did them before the lecture, in a crowded and noisy room which was not ideal. Friday's prayers were always a bit behind because I spent the day visiting the saints of the church. But I got them all in and they kept me focused all day.

Memorizing the 63rd Psalm is going ok. I've got the first three verses pretty firmly ensconced for now. It takes repetition. The phrase of the psalm, earnestly I seek you, is a constant prayer for me throughout the day. How can I seek God in the minims, the details, the normal events of my life.

Now, it is time to pray

Lent, Ashes, and Figure Skating

2010-02-18T06:27:00.000-08:00

Last night was the annual Ash Wednesday service at the church. I've tried some non-traditional things in this service, like have people come forward to plant seeds, in the hopes of symbolizing the new growth that lenten practices of prayer, study and sacrifice can bring. Last night we went fairly traditional with the imposition of ashes and partaking in communion.

I'm trying a couple of things for lenten practice, because personal discipline, as in structure, is not my strong suit. For instance, while some must finish a book that they have started before they move on, I get a little bored and move on... so that right now I think I have 5 books going. Sticking through on a plan isn't my strongest suit. So lent has always been a challenge because adding a practice or taking away a habit for 40 days really requires sticking to your plan.

So here is my plan... we'll see how it goes.
My Lenten sermon series is entitle 'God at the Center' and the first thing I will ask the congregation to do is make a map of their life patterns by answering questions about their priorities(which will lead to a discussion about who our gods really are you see); what can't they live without, what do they look forward to most, where do they spend the most time, money, energy. I did this mapping myself and was ashamed at how much time I spent in front of the TV. So I'm giving myself 1 hr of tv time a day. I think. Yeah, 1 hr. see, I'm wavering already. I'll watch TV just for the sake of watching TV. I'll watch a fishing show, and I have no interest in fishing shows, before I'll turn it off. terrible habit.

Second, I've had in my possession Phyllis Tickles 'The Divine Hours' a prayerbook for praying the Divine Hours, for years. I've used it now and again, on and off, occasionally. So for lent I am going to carry the sprintime volume with me wherever I go and follow its prayers throughout the day.

Finally I am going to work on memorizing scripture. My mom taught me to do this when I was little. I'm teaching my boys now. My Dad and I were watching the Olympics the other night, figure skating, which I don't think is a sport really, but that is a post for another time. Anyway, he remarked at how amazing it was that the skaters could remember such intricate routines. I replied that memory is like a muscle, the more you use is the stronger it gets, the less the weaker. The hypocrisy of my statement hit me. I'm not exercising my memory. Those of you who know me know that exercise isn't my favorite thing anyway. So I'm memorizing Ps 63 right now.

There you have it; cut down on TV, pray the hours, memorize Ps 63.
What are you going to do for Lent?
If you are hesitant to do anything, PLEASE read this post over at Talk With the Preacher. I met this pastor while at St. Charles Ave. Baptist Church in NOLA and this Ash Wednesday reflection is one of the most beautiful pieces I have read. I wish I'd written it and know you will enjoy. My only complaint about her blog is that she doesn't write more.
Wishing a Blessed Lent to my two faithful readers!

Tithing Resets the Center of our Lives

2010-02-16T12:35:00.000-08:00

I'm considering a special note in each monthly newsletter at the church which would accomplish three things: The readers would be able to identify the spiritual purpose of tithing, the ethical/theological purpose of tithing and the practical purpose of tithing. Below is the first note, which is largely spiritual, but also kind of ethical I guess. anyway, would you my 2 dedicated readers look this over and tell me what you think?

Tithing Sets the Center
‘The patterns in our lives form about the deep and usually unarticulated attitudes we hold toward ourselves, the world, and others. ‘ Luke Timothy Johnson

I’ve decided that instead of waiting for the fall to unload a big stewardship and tithing sermon on Berean, I’m going to write a note every month about tithing for the rest of the year. And the theme for this month is, Tithing Sets the Pattern. North American Christians live in a notoriously consumeristic culture in which we are bombarded with two confusing messages. One message tells us that the stuff we buy is of the ultimate importance. We can buy pthat ills will save our love life and our marriage. We can purchase cures for baldness that will make our careers more successful and improve our prospects for dating. We can buy a car that will make us a better parent and cause us to be admired by neighbors. We can charge some new clothes which makes us feel better. Advertisers promise that the pursuit and purchase of consumer goods will bring us the happiness, peace and satisfaction we desire.
But the competing message that we may not be conscious of, but still, I think sense, is that all this stuff is replaceable and easily discarded. As soon as you get a PC, cell-phone, ipod, and get it home, it is obsolete. A newer version has come out which is new and improved, making your version ‘old’ and ‘out of style.’ Of course I am exaggerating a bit, but you get the picture. New styles of clothing and shoes have come out as soon as the Macy’s bag with new purchases has settled in the back seat of the car outside the mall. Have you ever noticed how rare it is to get things repaired? Why bother to get the TV repaired, just replace it. Do you know if there is anyone in Rhode Island who can repair worn out shoes? It is easier to discard, producing more waste, and replace with something new, than to treasure and care for the old we already have. So the stuff we buy is of great importance for our satisfaction and well being, BUT it is easily replaceable and quickly discarded. It doesn’t last, isn’t meant too, and made to cast away. So we are caught in a cycle of pursuing, possessing, momentary satisfaction, then casting away so as to pursue again.
Is it any wonder our society suffers from anxiety and depression? We are caught in a system or a pattern, if you will, where we are promised happiness, satisfaction and safety in consumer good, but they never last and so we must constantly pursue these goods and the satisfaction they promise but can’t quite deliver. We buy it, use it, discard it and must chase it once again. No wonder our culture largely feels dissatisfied. This pattern keeps us always wanting more and trains us to place a high value on created things. Over-valuing created things is Paul’s definition of idolatry and according to Paul in Romans, is the cause of sin, the root of sin. Instead of seeking and abiding in the presence of the Creator, we spend our time seeking and abiding with created things.
This is why we tithe. One reason anyway, the spiritual reason for the tithe, because the pattern of our lives in this culture is based on putting our hopes in created things. Tithing resets our pattern. In sitting down to plan our budgets so that we offer thanksgiving to God for all God’s gifts, we are re-setting our pattern. Through the tithe we are putting our finances and the material goods they provide at the service of God first. Finance and Material Goods are brought into proper perspective through tithing, for they will be used to serve God and not as a replacement for God. Tithing reminds us that we value differently than the world around us. Well, we should value differently than the world around us. But the lack of tithing in American Churches and the conspicuous consumption that American Christians engage in makes us look just like everybody else.
Lent is a time to reset our patterns, to release practices that take us aware from centering on God and picking up practices that focus us on God as our center. Lent is a great time to reassess tithing.

Consumerism and Economics: Witherington, Luke Timothy Johnson and Esther

2010-02-16T05:06:00.000-08:00

Shouldn't Christians dress for success, strive for excellence, show the world how God has blessed them with bling??? In a word--- no, when it comes to the first and third of these things. Christians should have a conscience about how their choices affect other people in this world, particularly those who live in poverty. They need to de-enculturate themselves from the lifestyles of conspicuous consumption that are so prevalent in American culture.

I ran across this Ben Witherington quote this morning, as I meandered about the web unable to sleep at about 4 am. I don't usually follow bogs on beliefnet.com so I missed this. Witherington posts a series of blogs based on a new book entitle 'Jesus and Money:A Guide for Times of Financial Crisis'
I haven't read it, but I will say I like the post based on the quote alone.

Witherington's post reminds me of book I'm already reading 'Sharing Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith,' by Luke Timothy Johnson. In it he says; ' The way we use, own, acquire and disperse material things symbolizes and expresses our attitudes and responses to ourselves, the world around us, other people, and, most of all, God. And since there is reciprocity here, as we.., the disposition of material possessions not only expresses but effects our response to the world,other people, and God... The real mystery concerning possessions is how they relate to our sense of identity and worth as human beings. the real sin related to possessions has to do with the willful confusion of being and having. (pg. 40)

I am doing a study on the book of Esther. The opening chapter of this gem of a book narrates what both Witherington and Johnson describe. King Xerxes (or Ahasueras)sponsors an extravagant party for his political and military supporters and puts his wealth on display. When he attempts to put his wife the queen on display, and she refuses, Xerxes begins the search for a new queen. A system that gathers women from all throughout the kingdom, and filters them through the kings chambers for one night begins to grind people into objects. I wish I'd thought of this story months ago.

The National Anthem Controversy

2010-02-09T14:58:00.000-08:00

I ran across this interesting post at Jesus Radical It is centered around the recent decision at Goshen College an historically mennonite school at which the national anthem was not played, to now include the National Anthem before school sporting events.

Leads me think about these things. I have found recently that I do not say the pledge of allegiance at my boys school events. I will stand as a sign of respect, but don't say the pledge. The same said for the national anthem. I stand, but don't sing or place my hand over my heart or anything. Not that such symbolic actions matter much to others... but I've recently found them to violate the idea that upon my baptism I was pledging my allegiance to the Kingdom of God.

The American Flag still flies in the sanctuary at my church. I remove it for Advent and Lent, but have never encouraged a dialogue as to its appropriateness or inappropriateness in the worship space, cuz I don't want to start a fight. So I couldn't sign the on-line petition challenging Goshen to go back to no National Anthem, because I'm not sure I'd want that fight either.

By the way, are we violating the third commandment against taking the Lord's name in vain when we say the pledge? sing the anthem?

In Defense of Irrelevant Preaching

2010-02-06T13:19:00.000-08:00

I've been thinking about preaching some since returning from NOLA. I delivered a sermon there and then also heard Kirk Jones Preach again. To see Kirk preach is to be reminded of the joy in the gospel and the joy in preaching it. He preaches with his whole body and thoroughly savors being immersed in the Word. that is something I'd like to get back to that I think I've forgotten about lately... the joy of preaching.

But I'm also thinking about relevance. Most churches that I know of place 'relevant preaching at the top of their priority list. Every once in a while I get some feedback that a recent sermon or sermon series 'isn't speaking to me.' I take that to mean that the sermon/series hasn't addressed an issue that the person deems relevant, or has not contained information that the listener finds useful. This post isn't meant to be a response to criticism by the way. I'm not offended where I hear that criticism and I don't take it personally. Kirk Jones once told me that one of the secrets to good preaching is careful listening... so I am listening carefully and thinking about what I'm hearing.

I have some concerns about what people expect of the sermonic event and I wonder if there aren't some assumptions at play.

First, the bible text cannot be comprehended in its original context and then applied to a completely different context in the normal New England 15-20 minute time limit. I don't care what anybody says, the Bible was not created to be quickly and easily digested. It takes time to understand and apply it. I fear that when we apply time limits to the sermon we are leaving preachers in the position of speaking in bumper-sticker phrases and empty platitudes. Politicians speak in sound-bites and we are very accustomed to receiving slickly packaged information in brief commercials on tv and radio. But the Bible isn't a Swanson Hungry Man Dinner. It isn't meant to be quick easy.

Second I'm concerned about our priorities here. I wonder if those who sometimes say 'its not speaking to me' are without thinking it through placing priority in the wrong direction. The Bible wasn't created to serve us, offer us tidbits of advice. IT is a record of amazing encounters with a living God that transformed people. When God called Abraham to leave behind his homeland and follow him, that wasn't to offer Abraham support or encouragement, but a challenge. THe same could be said of the call of Moses and the Call of Jeremiah. The word of God was delivered to them to change them, inspire them and challenge them. The word of God does not serve our needs, but instead should challenge and instruct us in serving God.

So I think that sometimes the sermon must be irrelevant. We might not consider the modern phenomena of slavery or abuse of the environment relevant to our lives, but I am convinced that the Bible tells us these things are relevant to God and we had best pay attention. OR, we might find a sermon on forgiveness or generosity to be more challenging than we are ready for. It isn't that it doesn't speak to us, but it just isn't the message we wanted to hear. (a preacher should hear a message that is challenging and offensive and experience it that way, before preaching it, by the way.) OR, we may not find a sermon on the Trinity terribly relevant, but theology of the trinity stand behind much of our church practice, such as forgiveness, unity in our diversity, the cooperative efforts of a group with different gifts of the Spirit. This may not be easily applied to every-day life, but nonetheless it is vital to a life of faith.

That is the main concern I have I guess. Who is serving whom here? Is the sermon meant to serve the listener, or, is the listener meant to serve God through hearing the sermon?

This isn't to say that the preacher should go out of his way to be irrelevant, preaching in highly technical language that is difficult for the average lay person to understand, speaking about strange and arcane topics. And of course a preacher should always strive to connect even the most challenging topic, like Trinity for instance, with illustrations that help the listener understand the relevance of the concept. But I think perhaps there needs to be some dialogue in churches about sermons in general. or perhaps a return to the baptist tradition which engages the entire gathered community in the construction of the sermon.

Lord We Are Able: or Thank You SCABC

2010-02-03T18:15:00.000-08:00

My wife and I spent this past weekend in New Orleans LA. The occasion was the installation (or coronation) of my best friend as the 18th pastor of St. Charles Ave. Baptist Church. I was invited to preach at the morning worship. SCABC is a church with a progressive history and a pulpit that has welcomed the likes of Gardner Taylor and Barbara Brown Taylor and for the installation service itself Kirk Byron Jones. So I was a little intimidated.
I have been overwhelmed by the positive and affirming response. People had interesting and insightful questions after worship. the Dialogue with them was truly something to savor. I've gotten e-mails and facebook messages of appreciation. So i want to say thank you to all the folk at SCABC. It was an honor.

The point of my sermon was to inspire the church to both continue and strive to reach greater potential as the body of Christ. The refrain for the sermon was 'Lord We Are Able.' But I think I was more blessed than they in the end, for their response reminded me that I, too, am able. Not that I didn't think I was exactly. But the energy of their response has re-energized me. It takes a church to follow Christ, I'm convinced of that. The cross is too much for me to bear alone, I need a community. And I have a wonderful community at the church I serve Berean Baptist, kind, compassionate, fun and funny, and supportive, generous, tireless, I could go on with kind words for my little church. But I am truly blessed because my sense of church community has expanded and I will never forget the chance to preach at SCABC and the powerful affirmation they have offered me.

so thank you Berean Baptist for calling me... and St. Charles Ave for affirming me... together, We Are Able.

oh yeah, and .... Who Dat!

Who Dat sayin dey American Baptists?

2010-02-02T14:21:00.000-08:00

Why, oh Why did they have to be Baptists? I am of course referring to the group of Baptists from the United States who are now incarcerated in Haiti on charges of kidnapping and child-smuggling. Why did they have to be Baptists? And of course they are referred to on the television as American Baptists as a way of explaining their country of origin and not their denominational affiliation. If you do a web search of the word Baptists... you get this story. If you web search American Baptists... you get this story. One headline read, 'American Baptists defend Actions in Haiti.' (cbs4 in miami.) they aren't American Baptist as in the denomination, they are simply Baptist from the United States. I think the whole thing signals that we should change the name of our denomination. My friend Travis likes Crazy-Ass Baptist. That is my vote. instead of being a part of ABCORI (American Baptist Churches of Rhode Island) we would be CABORI (Crazy-Ass Baptists of Rhode Island). Or instead of being a part of ABC-USA (American Baptist Churches USA) we would be a part of CABUSA (Crazy-Ass Baptist's USA.) and we would have a pronunciation guide since no one know how to say ABCUSA (is that AB-KYEW-SA or AB-KOO-SA. NOPE. CABUSA. pronounced like Caboose, as in the last car on a train OR a slang term for somebodies hind end!)

We're not THAT kind of Baptist. I get tired of saying that. I feel like I say it all the time. But if we were officially Crazy-Ass Baptists, it would be fun. Are you the baptist's who hate on gays and lesbians? NO Sir... we're crazy-ass baptist and we love our gay and lesbian friends. Are you the baptist's who just got arrested in haiti? Not me! I'm a crazy-ass baptist and we don't kidnap children!

Anyway. My church is currently working on a plan which would involve creating a relationship with a city or town, in a nation that we have not yet decided, but like Haiti or El Salvador, so that we could establish a mission relationship. the purpose is for our mission involvement to go beyond sending the occasional check and also beyond the feel-good one time visit. But part of the plan, the major part of the plan is the research. Researching a town that has an association with an American Baptist missionary. (American Baptist the denomination) Creating a relationship with that missionary and learning about not only the needs of the people in that area, but what a safe and effective aid effort on our part would include. Rushing to haiti now to provide aid is like deciding to practice medicine immediately after witnessing a car accident. You do not have the skill or the knowledge to be of aid at this time, so stay out of the way!

I am currently doing some reading on Human Trafficking. From what little I know about that issue, it is no wonder Haiti's government has responded in such a manner to this debacle. Who is to say that this wasn't an effort to traffic in children and teens? I'd hate to think so... but with 1.8 million women and children trafficked yearly around the world 600,000 for the prostitution, Haiti can't take any chances and I don't blame them for the abundance of caution.

How is that for a light-hearted post after such a long absence

Can we avoid the 'Political' ?

2009-10-20T18:28:00.001-07:00

Today was a great day. My friend Malone got invited to join the Faith and Order committee of the Rhode Island Council of Churches and they were looking for another Baptist, so he invited me. (thanks pal!) Anyway, I prepared by reviewing the document they were finishing which attempted a theological approach to the 'immigration' issue. This is why I am excited, we get to really dig in and discuss theologically the social issue that face our state and nation.

Today was mostly a 'getting-to-know-you' meeting, but we did begin to discuss the parameters of the next project, which is 'Poverty'. And interesting and in my opinion time limited discussion followed. Part of this discussion lead some members of the committee to express their discomfort with getting too 'political' in terms of offering a theological critique of economic systems which allow or even cause poverty. But can we avoid politics?

Many churches say that they want the pastor to avoid politics, but in my understanding of the gospels, politics is inherent. Many NT scholars including NT Wright and Warren Carter, to just name two, make the point that the divide between political and religious is a modern phenomenon, and not something that Jesus or the gospel writers would have been familiar with. I recently read an essay by a scholar by the name of Clapp who noted that the very word 'gospel' was a term used in the political propaganda of the Roman Empire. The Good News would be proclaimed when the Caesar produced an heir ensuring the continuance of the empire, or when a battle had been won, or another country and people conquered. Mark's very use of the term 'gospel' to name his story about the life of Jesus would have automatically had political overtones to those who heard it read. Or take the phrase many of us pray every sunday liturgically, 'Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven' Kingdom is a political word. The Kingdom of God , as NT Wright explains so often was not the reward after death for the righteous, but a very real, very earthly, very political action on the part of God to free Israel from oppression. When we pray this, we are saying that the politics, the social organization that God has established in 'heaven' would become real on earth. That is political.

I think what concerned some present at the meeting was that we might get political in the sense of Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative. That kind of politics I have no interest in. Having said that, I don't think that we can avoid the politics or the social organization of the gospel. It is what we try to establish, teach and pass on to our children, in the church. Everything we do has political implication if by politics we mean, how the life of the people is organized. We have an economy of sharing and generosity, we deal with conflict through dialogue, confession and forgiveness, we speak truthfully and honestly, our 'borders' are open to all who will follow Christ, so we have a very unique way of dealing with strangers and outsiders. This is all political, not in the terms of embracing or supporting political parties or in attempting to have our faith legislated. But we cannot, I think deny, that the way that we organize the life of the people of God is meant to be an example to the wider world and we pray every sunday that we would be an example that would day lead to the coming of God's Kingdom on earth.

San Miguel School in Providence

2009-10-15T11:17:00.000-07:00

This morning I went to visit the San Miguel School in Providence, with two friends. Just have to share how impressed I was with all the young men (grades 5-8) that I met. Two took us on a tour of the school. Then we attended their opening exercises which included a time for prayer and anyone who wanted could share a prayer request, a word of the week (philanthropist) which they spelled, discussed the etymology of and then talked about philanthropists they have heard of. One young man recited a Langston Hughes poem from memory. Announcements were made for various events such as soccer, dance and other extra-curricular activities. THe announcements were made by the students themselves. Then they had a team of young men come up from the soccer team and nominate five other boys for a 'good sportsmenship' award which was given not just for succeeding, but for trying and not giving up. The school focuses on not only scholastic achievement but also peacemaking and character development. I think I shook the hand of every young man there... they just walk up and shake your hand and welcome you and say hello... no one has to remind them or prompt them. amazing!

We are hoping to get ABCORI and a number of local churches to begin to lend financial support so that more young men can attend the school.

Check out their website http://sanmiguelprov.org

I think you'll be impressed. Oh, its private, but the families only have to pay 5% of the tuition, which amounts to about $8,000 a year. Supporting this great school would be a wonderful way to promote peace and fight poverty in our state.

one more bit... they are need of adult mentors for the young men... If you live in RI, think about it, I am...

Why Worship is Important

2009-10-14T07:14:00.000-07:00

So last night I posted on a couple of things, including an article in which worship was described is not the most important thing we do as church or Christians. Here is why I feel that is not true. Aside from the theological reason, Christ is present in worship, I think that regular communal time together is vital to our mission or outreach, because it is in worship that we learn how to be the community. Together through the liturgy, we learn how it is that the church serves the community and creates community in the shape of Christ. We confess our sins in our times of prayer and then pass the peace. This teaches us the basic shape of peace-making, which the world is in need of, both locally and internationally. Confession and prayer teach us how to be honest with one another, so that we are a truthful witness in a world where honesty and authenticity are lacking. We offer tithes and share communion, both of which teach us how to share our lives, our belongings and our wealth. We hear the word of God which shows us where to direct our missional actions, to the poor, the ignored and the 'other'. Baptism shows us how to make a community out of diverse ethnic groups, gender identities and socio-economic backgrounds. Without this foundation of worship, the church is doing nothing but copying other social service agencies which probably do a better job than we do assisting others. Not to mention the fact that the church is equipped to do something that agencies cannot do. We can befriend those we aid. We do not need to keep a professional distance. We, as the body of christ, join with them in suffering and in challenge. Their lives are joined to ours in a way that secular agencies cannot reproduce.

Is the church created only to serve? Service is important and vital. But our service is part of a larger mission, which is to show the world what the Kingdom of God looks like. Perhaps we can only do this in part. Definately we cannot create the Kingdom on our own. But we are not called to create the kingdom, which I think the idea that the church is called to serve and not worship leads too, the fallacious idea that we can create the kingdom (fix the worlds problems) through our actions. we can't do that. We show the world a better way and wait faithfully for Christ to return and recreate the world.

A church that serves without worship exists to serve the world alone. A church that serves and worships exists to serve and follow christ.

Church Attendance Declining; What should we Do?

2009-10-13T18:12:00.000-07:00

So, I've been participating in this 'Missional Church' project through ABCUSA National Ministries for the past two years... me and some folks from my church, along with other churches in the state. Two weeks ago we had our last meeting and we started with a discussion of a 'church' in Florida. Well, the question was, is this a church. There were a number of different social events sponsored by an umbrella non-profit. They rented space in a high drug, low income area and offered a number of services, from counseling to theater group productions to bible studies. The question was... is this a 'missional church' or a church at all. I was skeptical. I just don't see calling theater production and stand-up comedy groups church. It may be great for the community, but it just isn't church.

Then I ran across this lovely little article at ethicsdaily.com
http://www.ethicsdaily.com/news.php?viewStory=15005

Notice, when you read that one of his points is that sunday morning worship is not the most important thing we should be doing.

What does it mean to be church? This is the question that all this 'missional church'
talk has raised for me. On the one hand I'm all for an expanded understanding of church which now includes service in the community. But for me that service is part of the church's evangelism and its witness as well as its discipleship. We feed the hungry because this is where we are told that we will find Jesus. We actively collect money and use it to help others to show the world God's economy as explained in Acts 2. The service or mission is an extension of our worship and not an alternative to worship, or a better use of our time. My point is that we engage in social action and service in unique ways that are rooted in our worship. The practice of communion leads to our unique economic practice. Baptism teaches us how to be hospitable. Without the worship our service will look just like everyone elses... and our service is meant to look like Christ. How will we reflect the image of Christ if we do not make time to experience the presence of Christ in and through worship?

Michael Sandel's Leith Lectures

2009-07-25T16:36:00.000-07:00

The vast number of you who are fans of my blog will recall that this past week, while at the Chautauqua Institute, I heard Michael Sandel lecture. I enjoyed his lecture immensely and so did some googling and found the link to the audio of his Leith Lectures. It is a series of four lectures. Scroll down to begin with the first which is entitled Markets and Morals. This is an expansion upon the lecture that I heard at Chautauqua. You can also follow the next link in this post which will direct you to the transcript of Markets and Morals. The second lecture is entitled Morality in Politics and this is a link to its transcript. Genetics and Morality is the third lecture and this is the link to its transcript. Finally, A New Politics of the Common Good and this is the link to the transcript. to avoid confusion, the audio is found at the link 'Leith Lectures' above.
I highly recommend this lectures and hope you listen and enjoy.

Novak on Friday at Chautauqua

2009-07-24T10:51:00.000-07:00

Michael Novak was the morning lecturer. I couldn't decide whether to go or not. He was advertized as a 'theologian' here at Chautauqua; but I dispute that. He does refer to and write in a style that utilizes theology and philosophy, but I think that he is more interested in espousing and defending capitalist ideology. He is cofounder with the now deceased Neuhaus of First Things. Most recently he caused quite a furor on the blogosphere with his critique of the Pope Benedicts latest encyclical. One can often learn a lot through disagreeing and so I thought that the challenge of Novak might help me clarify my own thought. But, I didn't really want to hear another pep rally for unfettered capitalism, especially with Bible quotes. I went shopping instead to get the obligatory souvenirs for the family... which I quite enjoy really. The boys get Chautauqua caps and t-shirts, Roberta a roomy, fluffy pink Chautauqua hoody, and I gave myself a chautauqua pen and baseball hat.
Anyway, I wandered back and Novak was delivering his lecture. Luckily (for me I suppose) he didn't seem to have a clear point or objective in mind. Instead he seemed to be thinking outloud, wandering a bit cognitively searching for a thread or stream of an cogent idea... and not discovering it frankly. I was a bit disappointed on one hand, because I thought a theological defense of capitalism would be a useful foil for sharpening my own thoughts... and a bit relieved that I could go do something else. Which is what I did... Novak wasn't making any sense so Malone and I wandered off.
Finishing a sermon instead of attending the afternoon lecture. It is thundering and raining and so I'd have to stand in the rain to hear the lecture anyway.

Paul Rauschenbusch at Chautauqua

2009-07-23T14:11:00.000-07:00

Paul, Rauschenbusch, great-grandson of Walter Rauschenbusch, delivered this afternoon lecture on Ethics and Capitalism. In my humble opinion, Rev. Rauschenbusch brought to this weeks program what had been sorely missing; a clear, concise, Christian critique of Capitalism. While Michael Sadler did approach a critique of Capitalism, the other lecturers that I heard, Niskanen and Friedman specifically, simply espoused the glories of Capitalism.

Rauschenbusch entitled his lecture 'Yoking Freedom to Love'.

Rauschenbusch began by talking about how 'encompassing' Capitalism is, and anyone who had heard Sadler would recognize his point. Rauschenbusch went on to suggest that those who lived in a Capitalist society needed to practice attentiveness and engagement in capitalism as opposed to passive participation.

Rauschenbusch made some bold claims such as 'Economy should have a purpose' and the suggestion was that it should have a purpose other than simply profit, and his own suggestion was that the purpose of a capitalist economy could be creativity. In this idea Rauschenbusch's thoughts on capitalism merge and agree with Catholic thought as expressed by Cavanaugh... human being are created to be creative, which Genesis ch. 2 highlights. Rauschenbusch also connects with Friedman (and Sacks) by suggesting that Capitalism has the potential for creative good.

Rauschenbusch then criticizes the practice of Capitalism that allows the majority of profit, property and therefore power to collect in the possession of a few. Again Rauschenbusch reminded me of Cavanaugh by highlighting that this consequence (the majority left wanting of wealth, resource, or even just enough to live) diminishes their freedom... that which capitalism proposes to protect most ardently. (I was also reminded of Marx's criticism that Capitalism leads to alienation, but Rauschenbusch didn't go there, and I understand that decision)

Rauschenbusch suggests that we reclaim a theological term 'sinful' to describe the a system that alienates humans from each other and distributes power to the hands of the few. But then he suggests that Christian's can also help to move us toward a 'Morally Mature Capitalism' that values or has the purpose of connection, community and commitment.

His final movement is to suggest 1 Cor 13 as our scriptural and theological guide... to allow love to guide our economic decisions and shape our practice of capitalism.

finally rauschenbusch gave us all something to do... look for companies who practice love in their business ventures; paying living wages to workers, taking care of the environment, among other virtues. by supporting these companies and boycotting companies who do not practice love we shape the Free Market Economy with our own love.

I found Rauschenbusch's lecture to be insightful. he did not shy away from being critical, but did so constructively. I found his talk to be quite prophetic, cutting through what was ideological defense of Capitalism, with gospel truth and in a way that pointed to a resurrection after so much loss.

He was also very gracious at the booksigning and I enjoyed talking with with.

Vincent Miller and Frederic Jameson; Postmodernism and consumerism

2009-07-22T19:21:00.000-07:00

I took a break from lectures at Chautauqua. The topic of the week has to do with Ethics and Capitalism and I was hoping that we would hear a bit about the ethical weakness in current American free markets and how we might address them. But, Dionne, Niskanen and Friedman were making the case for the ethics OF Capitalism... how capitalism is ethical in and of itself (that is friedman and dionne more than niskanen) Anyway... I've been reading Vincent Millers' Consuming Religion and so I'm just putting up his summation of Frederic Jameson

The scintillating cascade of cultural symbols and practices is driven by the voaracious appetite of capitalist production, not by the dynamisms of the traditions from which they are drawn. Commodities and cultural objects are best suited to their task when their conditions of orgin are masked. Traditional resonances are welcomed only insofar as they deepen their aura of desirability. commodification drives both the postmodern circulation of cultural wares and their evisceration. It demands ever more and ever shallower things....
We consume so many things that we simply do not have the mental energy to consider their origins. this abstraction has effects that go far beyond providing 'moral insulation' for the gluttonous postmodern consumer. This abstraction of the commodity from its production simultaneously sunders consumption from production, futher reinforcing alienated passivity.'

Frederic jameson; Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism

Word for the day: Simulacrum; 1. a slight, unreal or superficial likeness. 2. an effigy, image or representation

Benjamin Friedman

2009-07-21T19:43:00.000-07:00

Today's afternoon lecture at Chatauqua was given by Harvard Prof. Benjamin Friedman and was a summation of his book The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth. Dr. Friedman's main these is that in order for there to be 'moral' progress in a particular society, say development in the areas of tolerance or fairness, there must be economic growth and development. He cites an historical time-line in America where economic growth preceded 'moral' progress and where economic decline preceded 'moral' decline. He called the potential for grow and therefore moral progress 'Good News' and stated that he chose that phrase specifically.

His argument reminded me of Jeffrey Sachs' book The End of Poverty in which Sachs highlighted some of the social benefits of economic growth. For instance, and this is my example, many young women in Thailand, who do not have the benefits of education or opportunity for work, are forced into prostitution so as to provide financially for their families. Economic growth would provide alternatives to this situation. Friedman doesn't make this specific example, but I think that Friedman does make a good point; economic growth and security is important, very important, for the moral lives of humanity. We see this same point in the Genesis and Exodus narratives where God leads Abraham and later Moses and Israel toward the prosperity of the Promised Land, a land flowing with milk and honey. God wants Israel to live as Brueggeman has summarized in his commentary on Genesis, in 'Safety, Security and Status' (at least I think those were the three 's' words that he used)

However, in Exodus and in the retelling of the Exodus events in Deuteronomy there is also a warning, that if Israel focused only on its material wealth and failed to live within an economy of trust which in practice is an economy of living with enough and sharing generously with others, this safety and security would be lost to them.

From my perspective, this is where Friedman's argument looses some momentum. For he fails to deal with the underside of the story. for instance the economic growth in early American History that went along-side slavery. Or the way in which immigrant populations or even child-labor was utilized in factories during the industrial revolution. This does not completely undermine his theory, but I would have liked to hear him address these issues. And this is what was seriously lacking. One may not want to launch into a Marxist rejection of Capitalism, but neither can one completely buy into this idea that moral progress depends of economic growth... there are also instances where such growth was concurrent with moral lapse... even in our own current economic downturn... which was preceded by much growth.

What I did find hopeful, although Friedman said little about this point, was that he at least mentioned something Niskanen avoided; that there was a societal obligation toward those who cannot avail themselves of growth in increase of living standards. Friedman called this 'Labor Market Luck' and he seemed to suggest that in times of economic growth, it is inevitable that not everyone will recieve the benefit of growth, but that the moral development should address this lack of economic luck in a responsible manner.

Deuteronomy builds this into the fabric of the story of security. It is the Jubilee practice that maintains a certain social responsibility for the unlucky. I am not so certain that a Free Market Economy automatically or consistently encourages this 'altruism'. Niskanen didn't think so... Friedman seemed to hint it might. However, what Friedman said suggested to me that Capitalism at least didn't shut the door to social resposibility and that it just might have some space to allow for charity.

William Niskanen on Capitalism

2009-07-21T12:44:00.000-07:00

This mornings post-worship lecture on the ethics of Capitalism was delivered by William Niskanen, senior economist of the Cato Institute. The title of his lecture was, 'The Undemanding Ethics of Capitalism' and it became immediatly obvious that Niskanen studied under Milton Friedman in his full throated defense of Capitalism. Niskanen was skeptical of suggestions post economic crisis that corporations should be more socially responsible. He correctly in my view saw that there were practices in the housing, particularly the mortgaging area that were major causes of the economic downturn, but offered little by way of an answer to those problems. Self-interest is assumed and even lauded, but when self-interest adversely affects the broader society, say the selling of an inadequate or even dangerous product, Niskanen didn't have much to say accept that this should be illegal. This was the major weakness I thought of his lecture. He was skeptical of Corporate ability or interest in social responsibility, but didn't address practices which endangered the public.

He was skeptical of Pope Benedicts latest encyclical Caritas in Veritate and although I have not yet read this, Niskanen seemed most skeptical of the place of charity in the macro-economic system. In this way Niskanen seems most influenced by Adam Smith who doubted that humanity could be motivated by altruism (charity) and that empirically humanity had proven itself to be motivated by self-interest. This is most likely true, but from a Christian pespective, at least THIS Christian's perspective, part of Jesus' ministry was meant to teach and encourage disciples to broaden their perspective on 'the neighbor.' Or, take the story of Zacchaeus. Was not the lesson that Zacchaues' life previous to encountering Jesus was lived with self-interest, and that his 'salvation' was his altruism? his concern for his poor neighbor, not based on self-interest? The same could be said for the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus.

Perhaps Capitalism and the Free Market Economy cannot be any more than undemanding in its ethics. Regardless of Niskanen's reaction, the church is called to practice charity. How then do we live in and work in an economic system which has little to no space for the most cherished of our virtues? How do we learn to live in a moral geography that is so different from the one we are taught in the gospels, for in free market economics based on Adam Smith, humanity cannot be expected to be 'caring' or to invest time or effort into a worthwhile project without the added value of financial reward, much less our own fianancial investment without the promise of gain. But our faith suggests that we learn to love our neighbors as ourselves, give to all who ask, and the story of Zacchaeus suggests that like him, we find salvation when we practice financial self-sacrifice for the good of our community. Do we create pockets of our own micro-economies, (As Cavanaugh has suggested) in which we can embody charity? Is the practice of tithing meant to teach us how it is that we live in this economic world of self-interest, but live not of this same world?

I ran across this quote from Vincent Miller quite by accident which offers a critique of much that Niskanen assumes. this is from his book 'Consuming Religion' pp 50-51

'The social isolation of the single-family home corresponds to narrowed practical and moral concerns. Although late-twentieth century free-market conservatism arose from a complex of historical factors, its blindness concerning the common good and its suspicion of public investment and social safety nets correspond well to the narrow concerns encouraged by the single-family home.... This results in a trucation of Aquina's ordo caritatis. We may rightly have a greater moral obligation to our immediate family members than to those less directly related to us, but this social arrangement threatens to transform that gradation of obligation into a stark distinction. Social isolation and the burdens of maintain a family in this system make it unlikely that other people's needs will ever present themselves. If and when we do encounter them, we are likely to be so preoccupied with the tasks of maintaining our immediate families that we will have little time and resources to offer'

Michael Sandel Lecture

2009-07-20T09:15:00.000-07:00

I just returned from a lecture by Michael Sandel at Chautauqua. Sandel is a Political Philosopher at Harvard. The premise of the lecture was that the United States, over the past thirty years has slowly and without question, consideration or debate, shifted from utilizing a Free Market Economy to becoming a Free Market Society.

Sandel marks the beginning of this transformation with the Reagan/Thatcher era in which Gov't was the problem and the free market was the solution. Sandel is not, however, making a partisan stand with Democrats, for he then suggests that Clinton/Blair, while perhaps making some modifications, really followed this same assumption.

The key question for Sandel is 'Should market values be applied to all questions of the Common Good?' Should we answer 'Of course not!' Sandel then highlights a number of areas in our society where Market Values are applied to Common Good questions, such as; Immigration, Health Care (for profit Hospitals), War (where in Iraq the number of private contract and therefore, for profit participants outnumber military participants) Law Enforcement (where Sandel noted the vast increase in private security compared to public law enforcement.) Education (for profit schools) and Prisons.

Sandel's major point is not necessarily that market values are always bad or wrong, but simply that we have begun to apply them to all areas of moral reasoning without considering the consequences. Market Values do not always fix the problem according to Sandel and he illustrates this basically in an instance where a pre-school was experiencing a high rate of parents being tardy in picking up their children at the close of the day. So they applied a financial fine to those who were late, which in effect is appling a market incentive to correct a negative behavior. After the fine was imposed, the phenomena of late arrival by parents increased instead of decreasing, as so many parent apparently assumed that now they were simply paying for an increase in service.

Some practices (bearing children or reading for instance) have a good that is implicite. Applying and market value, a sum of money to those practices changes not only the practice but also the way that we think about the practice itself according to Sandel. He highlights another example, which was quite controversial, about surrogate mothering. His suggestion was that applying market value to the bond between mother and child, or the use of a womb, implicitely changed the way we think about family, parenting, and even the human body (at least, this is what I heard him suggesting.) He specifically highlighted the booming industry of surrogate mothering in India, (an instance of out-sourcing, since women provide cheaper 'labor' through the renting of their wombs, in India than in the west. I will blog more later... but I have to go buy a Sandel book and have him sign it... oh, and I have to eat lunch.

What does 'Being Saved' mean?

2009-07-15T12:59:00.001-07:00

‘Baptists also should revisit their understanding of conversion as an experience with Christ, rather than the popular 20th-century transactional acceptance of a set of beliefs about Christ’

This quote comes from an on-line article at Associated Baptist Press by Robert Dilday and Ken Camp. The article summarizes a talk given by Bill Leonard, who is a Baptist Historian. Leonard describes the changes in the American landscape both around and within Baptist churches and how these changes affect the Baptist Church. Notably in his talk Leonard focused on the declining numbers of young families in Baptist churches and how it is that Baptist churches should proceed in an age when being Baptist is not as influential as it once was, when being a part of a church is no longer considered important.

I found the quote above very interesting, even though it doesn’t sound all that radical. At its heart, in its earliest inceptions, as I understand it, Baptist faith grew out of the idea that the conversion of a person involved a connection between the beliefs and practices of the believer. It was not enough to simply recite a creed and accept a certain constellation of ideas, but one also had to practice faith. On a certain level, Baptists were originally intended to be a small group of Christians who decided that they needed to gather together to show ‘the Church’ and the wider world, what life with Christ should look like… This involved an assumption that ‘the Church’ had failed to hold people accountable to following Christ, simply being satisfied if the creed or ideas were accepted. So the Baptist church was meant to be a witness to the Church and to the world of how belief should shape, influence and yes change (hence the term conversion) the practices and actions of the believer.
Which I think is an important point for us to consider as Baptists today. We tend to focus so much on ‘Soul Liberty’ the idea that each individual is free to read and interpret the bible as s/he sees fit, that our faith becomes very individual centered, or as Leonard says, focused on a ‘set of beliefs’. So that the highest ideal is that we are free to construct our own ideas about who Jesus is and what Jesus did. While soul liberty is important it is not an end or a value in and of itself. It is connected to the witness that the free individuals gathered and covenanted together, offer church and world. In other words, it is not enough to think about Christ, or ‘believe’ but a Christian will ‘follow’ or practice the life of Christ. This is how I understand Leonard’s phrase, ‘an experience with Christ’. It assumes that to know, one must have a relationship with the one known. It also assumes that if we know and are known by Christ, we will be changed. Finally it assumes that there will be something distinctive about the way Christians ‘live’ in the world. That is what I am interested in exploring… what is different or distinct about the way Baptist Christians live in the world… what looks odd or unique about our thinking and living?

the Existence of God

2009-07-15T12:18:00.000-07:00

My friend over at theological snob recently posted on the existence of God. You will find his post below...

I recently received an e-mail from one of the college students I worked with in my previous position. Without giving out all of the details, she asked me about the "epistemology" of the existence of God, i.e. how do we know that God exists. Here is a portion of my reply:

In truth, it is just as difficult to prove the existence of God as it is to disprove the existence of God. This is a basic epistemological problem for everyone - believers and non. When I took my little walk on the AT I struggled with the existence of God, accepting the very real problem that I cannot prove God exists. I ended up at the point where I recognized that I need God to exist and have to settle with that. It is not a comfortable place, but it is where I stand at this point. On the other hand those who do not believe have to decide that God does not exist - it is a choice that must be made and at that point epistemology is moot. There are some much smarter people who have contributed to this conversation - Kierkegaard is good - try the Philosophical Fragments and Either Or. Fear and Trembling is good, but focuses more on ethics. I would start with that. Ironically, I think Nietzsche is good, but I don't know enough to recommend a book. Bonhoeffer's Sanctorum Communio, especially the first chapter, makes a case for the difference between believing in God and not.As I stated, the difficultly is that we cannot prove God exists and there will always be a gap which one must jump. Either we could engage in a "reductio ad absurdium" by asking again and again "and then what," or, "what was before that," or we can find a stopping point and name it God. There are proofs for the existence of God: Aquinas - Cosmological Proof, Anselm - Ontological Proof, but they actually demonstrate the existence of God, or the nature of God.

Here is my response....more in the traditional baptist area of testimony. Believing in the existence of God, for me is ecclesiology. I believe that there is a God who loves humanity because of the church that raised me. I don't mean that they told me God existed and I've never questioned it. I mean through their acts of kindness and compassion for my family as I grew up... because of the caring and the sacrifice they showed in caring for us through difficult times of personal loss and economic struggle. I never doubted that God cared for me, because this group of people who prayed to God and sang to God cared for us. I know that isn't a foolproof argument. Churches don't always maintain this witness and they do not do so consistently. This same home church was very much against homosexuality and were I gay, I'm sure my testimony would be very different. It seems terribly irrational and illogical that the existence of God is proven through such a diverse, contradictory, and often inconsistent means as the church, but there it is... and that seems to be what the Bible says, from God's call of Israel to be a priesthood, to Christ's promise to be present with the one or two who would gather in his name, to Paul calling the church the 'body of Christ' the gathered community is the 'proof' for whatever that may be worth.

Theosnob asked what weight this 'proof' would have with 'non-believers', an excellent question
Again my response;

I think my answer to the existence of God is the only way to engage with 'non-believers'. Let's face it... you can quote all the Augustine, Aquinas or anybody else you want... but that will ahve little to no meaning to most non-believers. You can try the unmoved mover is you want to (Aristotle I believe) but I don't think that will have much weight. the only thing we really have to share with non-believers is our experience. It is not an intellectual proof, but emotional I know... but I believe in the existence of God because of a loving community that believes in God. You too non-believer, can experience that presence in my community. In my opinion, most intellectual questions of the existence of God stem from emotional issues of hurt, abandonment, disappointment, or loss. 9 times out of 10 an intellectual answer will mean very little... the promise of a loving community offers hope in a way that intellectualizing cannot. The only way to show God is to show a community that lives in the way of Christ. What more do we really have to offer?

I really appreciate Theosnob engaging me in this question, especially because it gives me something to post on my own blog.

This entire discussion really connects with something I have been thinking about quite a bit lately; what is the church (specifically the baptist church) meant to be showing the world or teaching the world through our worship, liturgy, and faith practices? I am beginning to think of church through the lense of witness. Instead of gathering to worship to have our own individual needs met... we gather to worship so that the world can see 'the way' of Christ in action, and therefore come to know this Christ and more than know, to experience life with and relationship with Christ. The connection is that our purpose in gathering for worship and discipleship is to bear witness to the existence of God. From our liturgical events, such as baptism and communion, to our practices, such as prayer and forgiveness and tithing, to the simplest supportive phone call to a sick friend... we are proclaiming the existence of God. Others will come to believe in God through the experience of God's love as ennacted by God's disciples, the gathered church.

Which leads to my word for the day: Empiricism: A theory of knowledge which asserts that knowledge arises from experience... One of several competing views about how we know... a branch of philosophy called epistemology.

And speaking of epistemology... check out this link, flyingfarther.wordpress.com, D. Stephen Long on.... you guessed it... EPISTEMOLOGY!!!! What do you think of this?

Home Again

2009-07-11T15:06:00.001-07:00

We just returned from our weeks vacation at Papoose Pond in Maine.

I completed 'Ecologies of Grace' and will be blogging about that, as well as Kavanaugh's 'Following Christ in a Consumer Society.' I started Marx's 'the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts,' but did not finish it. I completed the Strain and Dead as a Doornail, for my fun reading.
So Now I'm into 'Consuming Religion' by Vincent Miller and 'Power and Money' by Jacques Ellul.

Onto a few picture of our camping fun.

This is 'ice cream sunday night'...

Fun in the pool... I know, they look nervous there, but they are really having fun...

The boys rode their bikes all over the campground. They had a great time and we have already reserved our site for next year.

Vacation

2009-07-03T18:10:00.000-07:00

We vacation at Papoose Pond in the great state of Maine starting on the 4th. We went last year and on the second day the boys were having so much fun they asked if we could come back every summer for the rest of their lives!!! so, we're going back.

Will return on the 11th to post many pictures and thoughts on all the reading I'm going to catch up on!!!

peace

The Annual July 4th Post

2009-07-03T08:46:00.000-07:00

I regularly visit the Religionblog of the Dallas Morning News. Its tough to find papers covering matters of faith. There is Articles of Faith from the Boston Globe but that ranges as you will see if you check it out, from 'All Catholic News All the Time' to a rediculous video of someone playing Michael Jackson tunes on a church organ in an Episcopalian Church. (Just when I thought I might try to recover some connection with the Anglican Tradition, from which Baptists separated, they go and do this and I thank God for Smyth and Helwys!!!!)

Anyway this link is from Religionblog and its about Believers and the Fourth of July. As you can read the blog asks the question of the relation of religious and national allegiance and how the two interact. You will note that most of the panel of responders essentially say the same thing... that we can celebrate the blessing of the freedoms afforded us by our nation, but must always remember that our ultimate allegiance is to God and his Kingdom. Sounds good doesn't it? But here is my problem with their response and this comes from being influenced by Yoder and Hauerwas; Essentially each panelist speaks to the good that Christians and their faith can do for the Nation. In other words, our faith serves the constitution and the values of our nation. But none of them truly address what Christian's should do when faced with cultural and societal norms and customs that do subvert the basic values of our faith. They do make a few anemic nods toward the 'prophetic' nature of church, but no one ever fleshes out issues like abortion, war, capital punishment, consumerism, the history of racism and slavery. My fear is that in focusing so much on how good Christians make our nation better these panelist are implicitely doing what they say Christians should not do, which is forget our ultimate allegiance. While I am not suggesting violent uprising or even protest, as Christians, I believe, and Yoder strongly suggests that there is a peaceful revolutionary aspect of worship. We are to present an alternative which is a peaceful critique of the American Culture in which we live. Even the assumption that we are fortunate that our country affords us freedom to worship is questionable theologically. What do we mean by freedom? How does our culture define freedom and how does the Bible define freedom? Where does freedom come from and lead to according to our faith?
In seminary I did a paper on including the American Flag in worship. I studied and recorded all of the symbolism of the flag; the colors, the striped, etc. But then I suggested that in addition to the traditioning meaning of the various colors (say red for the blood of those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom) that same red also symbolized the blood of African Slaves, Native Americans, Chinese Immigrants used in the builiding of the railroad, etc, etc. My point was not that my interpretation of the symbolism of the flag was the 'real' meaning of the flag... all its symbolism is at play at once. But the symbolism of slavery and the massacre of native americans should also then be ackowledged, so that our celebration of the constructive aspects of the flags symbolism must be held in humble tension with the destructive elements. Prayers then must offered not only of thanksgiving and blessing, but also of repentance and forgiveness and redemption.
Hauerwas is definately against all forms of worship that celebrate the fourth... I agree, but in order to be both pastoral and prophetic believe that in worship we can both celebrate and critique and bind the two together in honest preaching and in confession and pardon.

Vacation Reading and More Cavanaugh

2009-07-02T15:07:00.001-07:00

Word of the Day
Instantiate: to represent (an abstraction) by a concrete instance.

Vacation Reading:
The Sookie Stackhouse aka Southern Vampire Series # 5 Dead as a Doornail by Charlaine Harris

I haven't read the first four... this was the only one in the local library, which is why I really son't get into libraries. Anway, I'm a big fan of Trueblood and so I'm reading this for fun

The Strain by Guillermo del Toro, the director of Pan's Labyrinth and HellboyII and the anxiously awaited Hobbit. Co-written by Chuck Hogan. Another vampire book. You can figure out why I read so many vampire books, I'm afraid to consider it in depth.

Ecologies of Grace; I've mentioned this on an earlier post
Karl Marx; Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture by Vincent J. Miller

I know those last two sound like work... but reading theology and philosophy relaxes me.

Cavanaugh Quote for the Day:
'Many people do not see their work as meaningful only a means to a paycheck. One's labor itself has become a commodity, a thing to be sold to the employer in exchange for the money needed to buy things...Our work was meant to be an outlet for creativity, a vocation to make our impress on the material world...Being more human means, at the same time, participating in the creative activity of God. 'The word of God's revelation is profoundly marked by the fundamental truth that man, created in the image of God, shares by his work in the activity of the Creator.' This is the true meaning of the call in Genesis to 'fill' and 'subdue' the earth, and to have 'dominion' over it (Gen 1:28).' [quoting Pope John Paul II, On Human Work; pg 39 in Cavanaugh's 'Being Consumed']

I think this will influence a sermon I'm working on about tithing. Instead of approaching tithing from a utilitarian pespective (paying the bills) or even a spiritual direction (tithing is a spiritual practice that is good for us) I am thinking about Tithing as a practice of the church meant to teach the world about the Love of God and to instantiate the Kingdom. This all inspired by the work of Yoder. Follow Cavanaugh and the Pope (sorry mom) we tithe as an action that give purpose to our work that is greater than simply earning and consuming. Tithing makes our work creative and allows us to participate in serving and protecting all of creation even if we are not working in career's normally considered 'ministry'. Through tithing, collecting garbage, accounting, computer engineering, etc are gathering into the creative work of the Kingdom of God and are a facet of our own discipleship.

just a thought

Cavanaugh and von Balthasar on Eucharist and Consumerism

2009-07-01T15:18:00.000-07:00

Word for the Day: Kenosis : a Greek word for emptiness, which is used as a theological term. The ancient Greek word κένωσις kénōsis means an "emptying", from κενός kenós "empty". The word is mainly used, however, in a Christian theological context, for example Philippians 2:7, "Jesus made himself nothing (ἐκένωσε ekénōse) ..." (NIV) or "...he emptied himself..." (NRSV), using the verb form κενόω kenóō "to empty".

In chapter 3 of Cavanaugh's 'Being Consumed' Catholic Theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar is engaged to illustrate how Christians (specifically Roman Catholic) view consumption differently from the conspicuous consumption of our culture. Cavanaugh writes; 'If in consuming the Eucharist we become the body of Christ, then we are called, in turn, to offer ourselves to be comsumed by the world. The Eucharist is wholly kenotic in its form. To consume the Eucharist is an act of anticonsumption, for here to consume is to be consumed, to be taken up into participation in something larger than the self, yet in a way in whcih the identity of the self is paradoxically secured.... the Eucharist is not a mere sign that points to Christ; this particular piece of bread is the body of Christ. (pg 84)

I believe that one of Cavanaugh's criticism's of consumerism ( and postmodernism to an extent?) is that consumerism effectively transforms everything into a symbol to be bought and sold. We are so separated from the products that we buy... we do not know the process of their creation or assembly... sometimes not even their ingredients (what is in our suntan lotion or the processes that bring them to existence(how are the cattle that will one day be our steak actually treated while alive?)... that marketers do not present the thing itself in advertising (perhaps because we will not actually need it) but a package of symbols; love, power, success for the consumer to associate with the product. We are in a constant state of manipulation by market forces, seeking satisfaction of some sort, but never given the 'life' we are promised. For Cavanaugh, Eucharist provides an alternative to this process, for in consuming, we are consumed, ushered into a life that lasts, and connection with the God does offer safety, security and satisfaction to those who exist with 'Him'. Part of this is because the Eucharist IS Christ.

But Baptists see communion very differently and in my experience of my heritage... we proudly proclaim that the bread and cup are a symbol... which Cavanaugh would, I assume, find problematic... because the bread and cup aren't anything... they are just symbols... which can be marketed and therefore manipulated.

So I am wondering if the Baptist understanding of Communion ultimately participates with Consumerism in its 'symbolism'... if their is an alternative understanding of communion in the Baptist tradition that would combat consumerism... or is their some other Baptist Believe/Practice/Ordinance that offers a liturgical alternative to consumerism?

Cavanaugh and Consumerism

2009-06-30T15:51:00.000-07:00

Word of the Day - Deracinate; 1. to pull up by the roots; uproot; extirpate; eradicate. 2. to isolate or alienate (a person) from a native or customary culture or environment.

I'm reading 'Being Consumed; Economics and Christian Desire' by William T. Cavanaugh.
Here is a quote that explains his work in the first chapter entitle 'Freedom and Unfreedom'

'In the ideology of the free market, freedom is conceived as the absence of interference from others. There are no common ends to which our desires are directed. In the absence of such ends, all that remains is the sheer arbitrary power of one will against another. Freedom thus gives way to the aggrandizement of power and the manipulation of will and desire by the greater power. The liberation of desire from ends, on the one hand, and the domination of impersonal power on the other, are two sides of the same coin.
If this is the case, then true freedom requires an account of the end (telos) of human life and the destination of creation.'

I am planning a two up-coming sermon series, one that will focus on Christian Practices, such as forgiveness, generosity, peacemaking connected to acts such as communion, baptism and other traditional Christian practices. The second series will focus on a Baptist response to Consumerism, and so I am reading the book quoted above (among others) to prepare for these sermons.

Recently I have begun to think about tithing not as fund-raising, duty, or even a spiritual matter, but as a practice of the church intended to teach the world how to think about and use money. We do not tithe then simply for the institutional church or for our own spiritual well being, but as a practice which is meant to be a witness to the world of what it is meant to do and be in regards to both wealth and property.

Most churches avoid the topic of money. When they do most sound dogmatic about obeying God's command or propose that tithing is good for the soul. I am interested in the ethical implications of tithing. How does the practice of tithing protect me from being influenced by consumerism and what is it meant to teach a consumer culture about the purpose of wealth as God intended.

Anyone have other reading suggestions?

Random thoughts; poetry, words, constantinianism

2009-06-29T09:32:00.000-07:00

Poem for Today; this poem accompanied sunday's sermon. I heard the idea that God's hardest work is done when we think the story is finished, that God can do no more.

Wendell Berry

What hard travail God does in death!
He strives in sleep, in our despair,
And all flesh shudders underneath
The nightmare of His sepulcher.

The earth shakes, grinding its deep stone;
All night the cold wind heaves and pries;
Creation strains sinew and bone
Against the dark door where He lies.

The stem bent, pent in see, grows straight
And stands. Pain breaks in song. Surprising
The merely dead, graves fill with light
Like opened eyes. He rests in rising.

From; A Timbered Choir; The Sabbath Poems 1979-1997

Word for the day: Terminus; a final goal; a finishing point

Thought/Quote that insterests me:

The influx into the membership of the Christian church of larger numbers of persons for whom that new affiliation is not the expression of a strong personal faith experience or commitment means that there will be a need to adjust the expectations of ethical teachers with regard to how insightful and how unselfish we can ask people to be. The conversionist ethic of a minority under pressure can expect of its members a 'heroic' level of devotion: a church of the multitudes must on the other hand be satisfied with a run-of-the-mill level of understanding and devotion.

John Howard Yoder in an essay entitled 'The Kingdom as Social Ethic' in a volume of his essays; The Priestly Kingdom.

I go to visit and consult with other American Baptist churches in the state. These churches are often experiencing the shock of declining numbers, aging membership and few families and/or children, and a financial decline as well. Often I hear a lament that 'people' that is our society or culture, are just not interested in church anymore (and sometimes this is quite a bitter expression on the part of the church). Well-intention folks, very few to be sure, want to push the church to do things to be 'more popular' or 'more relevant.' I have heard many churches saddened by the fact that 'people just don't come to church anymore.' For earlier generations, church attendance was simply a matter of good citizenship and social expectation. While many in the church pine those bygone days, I hear Yoder telling us to celebrate and be glad that the 'run-of-the-mill' level of devotion is rapidly disappearing, for this implicite popularity of the church, in the end, watered down its ethic. We sought to be popular instead of seeking to be faithful. I actually find myself both frightened by this and exhilerated. While the financial support of the institutional church is shrinking and I don't know how long many smaller churches, even my own which is generous in giving compared to many, will last. I am also hopeful in the smaller number of folks who join now, not because it is expected, but because they have seen the futility of a life without faith in our culture and who want to be a part of a community of love and generosity. Which means the small local church will continue exist, but it may have to change its structure. Already the phenomena of house church seems to be rising in popularity in some places as well as bi-vocational pastors. some seem to see this as a failure or defeat somehow. But Paul was bi-vocational too if I remember correctly.
Yoder's words suggest to me that while the shape of church may have to radically change in my generation... perhaps the shape I inherited was not not terribly effective and a radical change may be just what we need.

A New Blog Announcement

2009-06-29T08:55:00.000-07:00

Bowing to the incredible pressure applied by my pal at theologicalsnob I have created another blog for sermons. I haven't felt this kind of peer pressure since Jr. High. So, for theologican snob and for my mom, who are the only one's who really want to read my sermons anyway.... here is a new link

www.bbcsermons.blogspot.com

Hope you enjoy

Gospel of John, Ecotheology and Word of the Day

2009-06-22T15:13:00.000-07:00

Just finished this book; Tom Thatcher's Greater Than Caesr; Christology and Empire in the Fourth Gospel. Most of my studies have focused on the Synoptics so I'm trying to do some studies in John. Thatcher's basic thesis is that the Christology of the Gospel is written through 'countermemory' in which the gospel writer re-interprets key events in Jesus' career so that they do not reflect the power of Rome, but instead the power of Christ. Think specifically of the extended dialogue with Pilate.

Thatcher see's Rome's Empire in three key character's in the gospel; Caiaphas, Pilate and the Cross.

I'm still very new to Johnanine scholarship, but I thought his argument was interesting and would recommend the read.

Currently I am reading this book; Ecologies of Grace. Quite technical and I am enjoying the mental exercise. Jenkins begins with an overview of secular environmental ethics and then begins to survey Christian environmental ethics. Will write more as I go along as he raises a number of interesting questions.

For now I will offer a quote from Larry Rasmussen that Jenkings includes;

'fidelity to earth is an imitation of God' from; Earth Community, Earth Ethics.

Word of the day; paideutic: The science or art of teaching.

Special thanks to my friend Jonathan Malone for helping me to define this word. I had a difficult time finding a definition on-line so called malone. He didn't know exactly, but offered a really close educated guest and we finally found a definition on-line. Quite a brain on this guy!!! check out his blog and you can find sermons here... look in the upper right corner of the page.

finally a new website I found in the Providence Journal today. If you'd like to know how the products you buy affect your health, or the companies environmental policies and ethical record... go to this website. GoodGuide.com For instance, the Journal article explains that the site's creator investigated and discovered that the sunscreen he used on his kids contain carcinogens. Its a new site, so they might not have complete info on the product you are curious about, but it also offers connections to other websites and their info... so check it out.

a new member to our family.... Lidl... We wentto the pet store to buy filters for the fish tank and came home with her!

Oh, and I almost forgot... Oldest son completed his first triathlon

Domination and Preservation

2009-06-08T09:21:00.000-07:00

Another Environmental Sermon
Same warnings as before... some abrupt jumps and endings that I just planned in my head, didn't write down and don't now recall. As before, I didn't make copious note of where I got all my info... but i did try to attribute sources a bit more carefully.

Environmental Sermon Series
Sermon 1: Domination or Preservation?
Texts:
Domination:
Gen 1:26; ' Then God said, ' Let us make humans in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'
Gen 1:28; ' Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over he fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.'
Gen 9:2-3; 'The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your hands... Everything that lives and moves will be food for you.'

Preservation:
Gen 2:5b; '...no plant of the field had yet sprung up... there was no [human] to work the ground.'

Gen 2:15; 'The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.'

One of the basic assumptions that humanity has developed and operated under and which shapes our relationship to nature is summarized in the first chapter of Genesis... the natural world is in place to be 'ruled over.' We were placed here to have 'dominion over' In King James language all of nature. At the close of the story of Noah and the ark the human relationship to nature is phrased in even more shocking language; 'fear and dread'... nature will have fear and dread because of our dominion, our God given right to dominate.

An example of this assumption which comes from our own history is found in a letter from then President Thomas Jefferson to Andrew Jackson... informing Jackson that he must advise the Native Americans to sell their 'useless' forests and become farmers. Notice the assumption that Jefferson is operating with... the forests are useless or valueless,until farmers add value by transforming them into fields. (I believe that, philosophically, comes from Locke) Jackson later wrote, after a mission of 'advisement' which was a polite and sophisticated term for 'slaughter,' “In their places [the dead Indians] a new generation will arise who will know their duties better... the wilderness which now withers in sterility and seems to mourn the desolation which overspreads it, will blossom as a rose and become the nursery of the arts.' (Takaki, A Different Mirror pp 84, 86) A sermon on the treatment of Native Americans will have to wait for another day. For now I would suggest we focus on Jackson's assumptions. The forest withers away for lack of production. It groans in anticipation of salvation from 'the ignorant savages' and will now be reborn under the grace of farmers of European descent. Indians were not adding value to the forest and so the forests were wasted and languishing, awaiting a savior to give them value.

This assumption, one that we are perhaps, not even conscious of, shapes our modern economic system and its philosophy. Herman Daly, a former professor of Economics at LSU and former senior economist for the World Bank says; 'Human beings add utility to matter/energy. This is what we mean by production... Useful structure is added to matter/ energy by the agency of labor and capital stocks. The value of this useful structure imparted by labor and capital is what economists call 'value added.' In other words matter and energy has no value until we add value to it. Daly goes on to say 'modern economists have remarkably little to say bout that to which value is added. It is just' matter' and its properties are not very interesting (Daly in Ethics of Consumptions pp.21-22) In short, it is our dominion over nature that give nature value... Water, trees, natural gas, sunlight, fish, have no value until we, through production give it value.

This particular view of human relationship to nature has not always served us well.

One obvious example is the Dust-bowl era of the 1930's in the plains states. In the 1920's technological advances in agricultural equipment; the development of the tractor, combine, plow and truck lead to what some have called 'the great plow up.' These technological advances and the theories of leading agronomists that suggested that continued plowing of fields would lead to greater water absorption were intended to increase productivity. The amount of value that farmers could both give then receive from the land would increase. And it worked for a few years. Until a strange confluence of heavy rains and drought lead to the great dust-storms. The ecological equilibrium was disrupted by continual plowing and the anomalies in the weather patterns, which probably could have been mitigated previous to the great plowing, were left unchecked. Only 15% of land designated for crop production at that point, could actually produce anything. This lead to poverty among the people living in the plains states and a mass migration to California. Special hospitals had to be opened up to treat 'dust-pneumonia' as great numbers of people contracted respiratory diseases due to inhaling vast amounts of dust particles.

A couple of months ago I shared a story of an American billionaire, who decided to add value to the Brazilian rain forest by stripping almost 9 million acres of native flora in the Amazon to both plant new trees which could be developed for a wood pulp business and also to create an agricultural project to produce beef and rice among other crops. He imported trees better suited for pulp production from Africa and planted them on a half a million acres. Since the trees were growing outside their own ecosystem they were vulnerable to diseases that they were not accustomed too and the project failed completely. (Leonardo Boff, Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor; pp 91-92).

Now, I'm not saying that production and development is evil. I am not saying that this value adding is bad. I am well aware of the fact that without this production I would be in the state of Adam and Eve in the garden. From socks and shoes to suit and skivvies, my clothing is value-added to natural resource. Without production I wouldn't have a roof over my head or heat for my apartment. But I do believe that these stories strongly suggest that our view, our assumption that nature is valueless until dominated by us, has weaknesses. Weaknesses that can have serious and dangerous consequences not only to the natural world, but to the people who live on, in, with and depend upon the natural world for home, food, health and safety. Perhaps we should be a bit more humble about our relationship to the natural world. Perhaps we should be more aware that we always have a relationship with the natural world. (need more)

The Bible does give us an alternate view, a different model for thinking about our relationship to nature. It too is found in Genesis. In Genesis 2:5 we find a hint of a new way of living with the earth. Genesis 2:5 tells us that there was no man to work/till the ground. And in Genesis 2:15 we read that the Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden to work and care for it. Literal translations of the original Hebrew make this alternate view more clear. The word that we often read as work or till is more literally translated... serve. And the word that we often read as 'care for' is more literally translated as guard or protect. The Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden to serve and protect it...

We don't necessarily hear a lot in the Bible about human relationships to the rest of Creation. We do find it again in Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. In Exodus and Deuteronomy God gives the 10 Commandments to Moses and one of them is to observe Sabbath. Take a rest, God says to the people of Israel. Specifically in Deuteronomy God ties Sabbath to the Exodus... You observe Sabbath to be reminded that unlike the Egyptians, I value you not for what you develop or produce for me... but just because you are. Israel was treated like matter/energy without value until the Egyptians added value to them by using them for development, building, production. But to God, Israel's value was inherent... they were valuable just because of their existence. And that Sabbath applied also to... livestock, animals, they too were to have the benefit of Sabbath... they were valuable to God beyond productivity... They were valuable because they too, were created by God. In Leviticus Sabbath is expanded even to the land. Every 7 years give your crop-land a rest... God said.

This could just be good land management which would ensure good crop return in the future. But it wasn't a practical suggestion, it was a commandment. God commands you to observe Sabbath, you, your livestock and even your land... all are valuable to God.

In other words, awareness of the environment and care of the environment is a matter of faith. It is a moral as well as ethical matter commanded by God. Care of Creation, through the sabbath, becomes a spiritual practice like prayer, devotion, Bible study, and worship... When Rhonda drives her hybrid car that is a spiritual practice, caring for the earth. When people bring clothes to the clothes closet and we redistribute them, that is spiritual practice that benefits the natural world as cotton is one of the most damaging crops to the soil that grows it. When Bob and Missy support the American Chestnut fund, that is a spiritual practice... they are caring for the earth not because scientists have told them too, or politicians... not because they will receive benefit from it... but because they care about the American Chestnut for its own worth. It may not be a constant theme in the bible, it may simply be a minority report, but still, these verses make it clear... we were placed here not simply to dominate, but to guard and care for, to preserve the rest of creation. Sabbath makes it clear that care and keeping of the natural world has a spiritual dimension... when we care for the earth we are connected to God... when we ignore the earth... we are separated from God. This matter of how we interact with the earth, utilize its natural resources, clearly is a practice of connecting to God. To ignore this earth and the warning-signs of its suffering due to our domination, is to ignore God.

The earth is the Lord's, we gabbled
and the fullness thereof --
while we looted and pillaged, claiming indemnity:
the fullness thereof
given over to us, to our use--
while we preened ourselves sure of our power,
willful or ignorant, through the centuries.

Miswritten, misread, that charge:
subdue was the false, the misplaced word in the story
Surely we were to have been
earth's mind, mirror, reflective source.
Surely our task
was to have been
to love the earth,
to dress and keep it like Eden's garden.

That would have been our dominion....

Glacier and Grace

2009-06-08T09:17:00.001-07:00

I'm gonna post the polar bear sermon, but until then, I'm posting a couple of other environmental sermons for those of you who may be interested.
this is a draft as I often don't tie everything together or type up everything I plan to say to how to end... so it may seem to jump from point to point or to end abruptly, that is because I add that stuff on the fly... but I think you'll get the point. the poem at the end is not mine, but I don't recall now where it came from.

Sunday April 6, 2008
Environmental Sermon Series
Sermon 2: The Big Bang, Exploding Stars, Glaciers and Grace
Texts: Gen 1:
Ephesians 1:3-10

The Big Bang and Exploding Stars

In the beginning God created, earth and sky, trees and birds, land and sea,
and it was good.

Steven hawking explains the beginning, the good beginning,
with these words...

If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by
even one part in a hundred, thousand, million million, the universe would
have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size. If, on the other hand,
the expansion had been a little greater, one part in a million, there would
not be enough density for the formations of stars and planets and hence, life.

The numbers that Hawking uses are more than I can even comprehend. How infinitesimally minute the variables were that kept the birthing universe in balance at the point of its inception, I can hardly imagine. But what seems plain to me, is the wonder of that moment, so perfectly tuned, that started the process that lead eventually to the milky way, our sun, mars, jupiter, venus, earth, and the skies, plants, waters, amoeba, amphibians, birds, mammals and you and I, that Genesis describes as...
good.

If that does not evoke a sense of awe and wonder in you consider:

If the weak nuclear force had not held its level all hydrogen would have
turned to helium...the newly forming stars would dissolve and without
Hydrogen, life as we know it on this earth would not be possible.

If the strong nuclear force had risen by simply 1% carbon would never
have formed in the stars. Without Carbon, DNA, which stores the basic
information for the formation of life, would not have ever appeared.

If the electromagnetic force were just a little higher, the stars would turn cold.
They would not be able to explode as supernovas and such explosions would
not thereby give rise to the formation of planets, neither would the formation
of other elements be possible, elements such as nitrogen, or phosphorus,
which are crucial for the production and reproduction of life.

To ponder the fact that all the elements that make us up as we sit here right now, were formed in that initial big bang and scattered by cosmic explosions and nurtured by such finely tuned balances, with just the slightest of shifts causing them to no longer exist and hence, you and I to no longer exist... well, to me, it is just breath-taking to imagine the precision of such an event.

Glaciers

Because it is so well known, it is easy for us to brush quickly through Genesis 1. It seems like a laundry list, a repetitive litany that we can skim quickly. God speaks and creates sky, land and sea and calls them good. Plants and trees and all vegetation and calls them good. Sun, moon ans stars all named good. Sea creatures and birds, livestock and wild animals and all creatures that crawl on the ground are called good. We usually just want to skip to the 'good' part for us, where, humans are created in God's image.
But pause again to consider the research of James Lovelock a physician and biologist
who discovered that
CO2 makes up 96.5 % of the atmosphere of Venus and 98% of the atmosphere
of Mars but only 300 ppm (and climbing) of our own atmosphere here on earth.
Oxygen is completely missing from both Mars and Venus. Nitrogen, which
nourishes living organisms is only 3.5% of the atmosphere and biosphere
of Venus and 2.7% on Mars, but 79% on earth.

Mars and Venus, roughly the same size as earth, created by the same supernovas, nourished by the same sun...yet devoid of the conditions that nurture life.

Lovelock was doing this research for NASA, so as to discover models for space exploration seeking the possibility of life in space. But what he discovered... That there is a delicate balance of factors and forces that allowed life to begin on Earth and to continue on earth... lead him to focus his research not on other planets, but on this fragile and powerful system called Earth. A system dependent on
High levels of oxygen released billions of years ago by photosynthesizing bacteria
in the oceans. A system dependent on the Low levels of carbon created by the photo- synthesizing of bacteria, algae and plants. This research discovered the vast and complex connections and interactions that started life on earth and the interplay of forms of life that created an environment conducive to yet more life. 'Lovelock drew attention to how the
conditions of all those elements useful for life are maintained under relatively
steady conditions. This balance if fashioned by by the planet wide life-system itself.'

As I said before, we tend to fast forward through Genesis 1 to get to 'God created humans in his own image.' But Lovelock shows us that all those other verses aren't just a laundry list of things for us to use or abuse... seas, plants, earth and sky.. these were God's process for getting to Humans in his own image... these were to tools that in turn created the forces that God chose to utilize to get to Adam and Eve and you and I.

Grace

Now, stay with me as we make a jump here from science and Genesis to the letter of Ephesians.
The churches of Ephesus were afraid. They were afraid of the universe, the cosmos.
A group of Christians called gnostics followed Paul to Ephesus and taught these new Christians there that all things physical... all created things were bad, evil, and weak... and that God only loved and cared for the spiritual. The forces of the universe were considered evil and only the spirit was good.
This is very foreign to our way of thinking and perhaps hard to identify with so let me put it this way...
When you are watching the news or reading the paper and you hear about another shooting at a school, or a teenager killed in a drunken car crash, or a child abducted or major lay-offs in a huge company that will effect thousands... perhaps you, like me, experience a sinking feeling in your stomach, that there are just forces out there that you can't control or contend with. Which can lead to despair; how will I keep my kids safe, how will I pay my own bills, how can I hope to have a truly good life with so many forces out there that seem to explode unexpectedly to keep me from my good life? Have you felt that way? Then you know how the people in Ephesus felt. They perhaps understood the cosmic forces differently than we do... They really felt that the universe as they knew it, was against them... but the result was the same... there are forces out there that I can't control which cause trauma and pain.

To which Paul replies in the opening verses of his letter, with a great hymn of the the cosmic force of God and the cosmic plan of God. The Heavenly realms are a blessing, Paul says to us, not a curse and not against us... the cosmos is for us because God has created it. To tie it with the science that Hawking and Lovelock have described, The weak and strong nuclear forces, the electromagnet forces, gravity are created by God to be a blessing to us... they are a part of the plan of God. Photosynthesis and the myriad other biological processes that surround us... are a blessing from God and a part of God's plan.

And then Paul calls all of these cosmic forces that are not against us, but for us... 'grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. ' These cosmic forces that The Ephesian Christians feared, which you and I now, through science can begin to understand, are not evil, and they are not chance, they are the visible signs of God's grace.

Now to those of us raised in church, grace is a spiritual gift that God sent through Jesus, that forgives us of our sins and connects us to salvation and eternal life. And I am not arguing that this is no longer our understanding. What I am suggesting is that we have missed something. Grace is not limited to a spiritual force or a spiritual transaction. Paul is telling us here that grace is imparted through Jesus, who was present at and in the creation, and also imparted through the cosmic forces and the natural world that surrounds us... to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, Christ.

The plan, Paul says, was that God would provide all that we would need for a full life, for our salvation... we know salvation through Christ...who then brings all the other forces of grace together. Paul is expanding our understanding of what grace is... and giving us, in the natural world, in the creation, visible, verifiable proof of God's love and the power of God to give us life. The natural world is one aspect, a concrete facet of God's grace.

This may sound like a bit of a stretch to those of us raised in church... Because I'm not suggesting that nature is like grace... I'm saying that nature IS grace, not in full, but in part, a neglected part.
But if we look to the rest of the Bible, we see the same theme, that grace is understood and seen in and through the natural world...

Deuteronomy 33: 13-16, Moses is offering a blessing to Israel, letting them know that God will love and care for them in this new promised land, and that they will see this love this grace bursting forth in the natural world around them;

May the Lord bless his land with the precious dew from heaven above
and with the deep waters that lie below
with the best the sun brings forth and the finest the moon can yield
with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains
and the fruitfulness of the everlasting hills
with the best gifts of the earth and its fullness
and the favor of him who dwelt in the the burning bush...

the favor of God, love, grace, made known in the dew and sea, the sun and the fields...

In Psalm 136 we find another hymn to God's love and grace

to him who alone does great wonders, his love endures forever
who by his understanding made the heavens
who spread out the earth upon the waters
who made the great lights
the sun to govern the day
the moon and stars to govern the night
who gives food to every creature
Give thanks to the God of heaven his love endures forever

A song that says Israel would have proof of God's steadfast love when they looked at the sun, moon and stars...

And in Joel 2
Israel has failed... as all humans do
they have failed to stay faithful to God
they have failed to care for the poor and the impoverished
they have loved more the things they produced with their own hands
their own comfort and profit are more important than God or other people...
And God is angry
Let all who live in the land tremble, for the day of the Lord is coming
a day of darkness and gloom
a day of clouds and blackness.

But then God says,
return to me with all your heart

and if you return to me here will be the proof that I have forgiven you and still love you

Be not afraid, O land;be glad and rejoice.
Be not afraid wild animals, for the open pastures are becoming green.
The trees are bearing fruit; the fig tree and the vine yield their riches
Be glad of people of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God,
for he has given you the autumn rains in righteousness
he sends you abundant showers
both autumn and spring rains as before.
The threshing floors will be filled with grain
the vats will overflow with new wine and oil.

You will have plenty to eat until you are full

then you will know that I am in Israel,
that I am the Lord your God, and that there is no other
never again will my people be shamed.

We are the benefactors of 15 billions years of grace...
Cosmic explosions and blazing supernovas which laid the chemical foundation for life
We have received grace on this planet for the life that formed interacted
with the chemical environment changing and forming it to be
conducive to yet more life... eventually to our life...
the conditions for which; air to breath, water to drink
soil to grow food, and on and on...gracefully and patiently
held together in Christ says Ephesians...waiting for us...this is grace.

The thing about grace is that Jesus expected us to not only accept it, but to create it.
Judge not lest ye be judged
forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors
Love one another as I have loved you

Fishing

2009-06-01T13:46:00.000-07:00

My youngest and I went and bought new fishing poles, hooks and worms and went fishing in the mill-pond today. Well, he did the fishing, I was busy worming his hook, helping him cast, and rescuing the sunfish that he caught. He had a blast and Miss Roberta took pictures. This afternoon, while they were on the Wii for their aloted hour, I snuck back down to do a little fishing of my own. Which made me remember why I never used worms. You spend more time putting the little suckers on the hook than you do fishing, and with one or two hits, your bait is gone and you start all over again. gotta find better bait.

The coolest part of the whole day was that when I reel in after casting, it lights up in bright blues and oranges, like kids sneakers. I think the guy was trying to sell it to my five year old... but he got me with it. Miss Roberta's response. Is that your pimp fishing pole?

Westboro Baptist Church in Rhode Island II

2009-05-30T13:47:00.001-07:00

So here is the update on Westboro Baptist Church's appearance in RI.
I attempted to get some American Baptist Clergy to attend one or two of their 'protests'.

Let me explain that. I wasn't aiming for a 'counter-protest' as it is apparent to me that one cannot engage in a well-reasoned and respectful dialogue with this hate group. However, I thought an American Baptist presence at their protests would be an act of service to our Jewish sistes and brothers. Instead of leaving them to bear the brunt of this hate on their own, we as Baptist clergy could stand in solidarity with the jewish community and as a silent, peaceful, barrier to the hate of Westboro. I also felt that many in this state mis-understand the baptist denomination and will mistake Westboro's form of being 'baptist' for all 'baptist's'.

Not many seemed interested and leaders at the state lever, Catholic Bishop, Episcopalian Bishop, Executive of ABOCORI and a number of Rabbi's decided that ignoring Westboro's protests, responding in the following week with an ecumenical letter condemning their hate speech would be most appropriate.

I was concerned about this also. With all due respect, I feel it was a bit easy for the Catholic and Episcopalian responce to be; 'ignore them' They call themselves baptists after all and the majority of RI's are terribly ignorant of what Baptist means to begin with. There is no danger for the Catholic or Episcopalians to ignore Westboro, no one will associate their hate with those churches. But most people hear 'Baptist' and think we, like the Catholic church, all espouse the same theology. Still, I respected the decision and cancelled any further discussion of a peace barrier.

Article have filled the papers; the Rhode Island Catholic had an article as did the Providence Journal and despite the hopes of our states religious leaders, the Westboro folks were NOT ignored by the press; see ABC 6 and WPRI.

So we ignored them, but East Providence High did not, nor did others. So is the religious community conspicuous in its absence? Apart from some 'letters to the editor' of various papers, no Baptist Clergy had any skin in the game.

But given the tenor of the 'counter-protest' I'm not sure I would have wanted to be there. The Projo reports that at one point the counter-protesters errupted into obscenities. One young man is quoted as saying that 'It's anybody's right to do what they want.' Now, while I am can support one man loving another, or woman, and even support their marrying, this quote above is an example of the liberal idea of an autonomous individual that not even the most skeptical or atheistic of ethicists could support. According to the ProJo, at Brown some signs quoted the Bible back at Westboro, but the very idea of the Bible being used as a weapon is disgusting, turning it around to return fire at Westboro is no less distasteful to me.

In the end, I fear the largely hate was met with hate, where Jesus taught us to love our enemies and offer prayers for them. I don't think anyone was praying for Westboro, which would have been the point of the action I wanted to propose.

I wasn't happy to remain silent in the face of this rhetoric, but in the end, perhaps silence was the best response.

Westboro Baptist Church in Rhode Island

2009-05-25T14:57:00.000-07:00

Matt 5:21-22

21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool !' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

This week a hate group that markets itself as a Baptist church, ‘Westboro Baptist Church’ will be appearing in the state of RI at various sites including the State House, the Naval War College, Brown University, The Jewish Community Center and a couple of Temples in the state. You can find more information about this hate group at their website www.godhatesfags.com and the name of the website probably tells you all that you need to know about these folks. I thought for a moment I might quote them in this statement, but their words are so disgusting and evil that I couldn’t bring myself to even ‘cut and paste’ them.
Westboro Baptist Church first came to national consciousness as far as I know by picketing Matthew Shepherd’s funeral and then placing on their website a picture of Matthew Shepherd’s face bouncing on flames (suggesting his place in hell). The picket with a number of absurd and filthy signs such as; God Hates Fags, You’re Going to Hell, Fags Die God Laughs, Thank God for IED’s, Thank God for Dead Soldiers, etc. I think it is obvious, but still needs to be said, that these people do not speak with any authority on the Bible, the Christian faith, or for Baptists.

My first concern is primarily the people who will come into contact with these people and who are target of their hateful rhetoric. I am also concerned with the fact that they call themselves a Baptist church. In a state like RI, which is predominantly catholic, many of our neighbors do not understand the Baptist tradition. Many times I have had to explain to well-intentioned but uneducated Catholic neighbors that Baptists DO worship God, Do believe in Jesus, and are in fact the same religion as they are. Westoboro Baptist Church does not represent the Baptist tradition in any way shape or form. We believe in a God of love and that God made ‘himself’ known through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, whose words in Matthew I quoted above. Jesus expected that the first mark of a Christian community would be speech that is loving and patient. People would know that we follow Jesus just by listening to us talk to one another, for our words and tone would be honest and true, but loving and intended to lift up. The members of Westoboro Baptist Church, in all of their Bible quoting, have read right past the essential building block of being Christ’s body on earth, speak with honesty and love. According to what Matthew wrote, in speaking this way, they are condemning themselves through their own condemnation. The Hell that they threaten is the Hell they themselves will receive through their own hurtful, hateful speech.

Let us be in prayer that God will protect all those who are attacked by these people, and use this opportunity to explain to our RI neighbors that Baptists, specifically Berean Baptist is a place where we talk about God’s love for all humanity.

Easter Sermon

2009-04-12T08:36:00.000-07:00

The End (Period) THIS IS THE END (Question Mark ) And Then (Comma)

I don't much care for tv shows or movies that end...
leaving you wondering what the end actually is...
Some of you who were fans of the HBO show Soprano's know what I mean
The last episode after what six, seven seasons... goes dark with the possibility of the main character Tony Soprano getting
whacked in the restaraunt...
or maybe not...
but that is the end
maybe... maybe not....I don't care for that....
artsy movies that show the characters driving off into the sunset with no resolve to the story.
Give me thelma and louise... they drive off a cliff... at least you know what the end is... I'm not glad it was a cliff by the way but at least there was some closure...
And I find season finale's particularly frustrating Do you remember the 'Who shot JR' uproar in the 80's? My mother was a devoted fan of Dallas and that summer waiting to find out who shot JR
it was all anybody could talk about!

And that is kind of how I feel about Easter Morning stories in the gospel... What exactly IS... the end of the story?

In Mark (if you read the original ending) you get... Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.
We've talked about this before if you recall in the original greek it is even more disturbing and unsatisfying because the last words are 'they said nothing to no one!' Now what are we supposed to do with that!

Luke doesn't like that ending so he finds some other versions of the story of Easter Morning...It goes like thisLuke 24:13-24
13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. 14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; 16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
17 He asked them, "What are you discussing together as you walk along?"
They stood still, their faces downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?"
19 "What things?" he asked.
"About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."

Now, I like this a little better... Jesus appears But notice that the ending is still up in the air for most of this story. Cleopas and his friend are wandering on the road... perhaps feeling the way I feel... This can't be the end.... Jesus was supposed to be the one to redeem us... but we saw him die and even though Jesus is right there with them... they can't see him.... What are we supposed to do with an Easter morning story where JEsus is there... risen... but the people don't see him and just wander back to life the way it was before Jesus?

And John. Well I read John...some of John... it has two or three endings I suppose. Peter and the disciples have all gone back to fishing And in Johns version Jesus appears and they see him
but they still head back to life the way it was before Jesus..
nothing had changed...
And so Jesus chases after them and challenges Peter
Follow Me! All of the Gospels (except Matthew) have this same theme
the disciples, afraid, doubting, disappointed...
wander back to life the way it was...
and Jesus appears (or in mark an angel appears)
and the message is... follow me!
In John, Jesus even seems a bit put out by Peter and the others for going back to life the way it was... don't you love me more than this? he asks When Peter answers in the affirmative, Jesus challenges him then follow me!

And I want to ask Jesus… What did you expect? You showed them miraculous power and promised them authority. But your life ended with arrest, with abuse, with surrender, with meakness and humiliation. No wonder they went back to their fishing career. It didn’t offer the benefit of changing the world by joining the Jesus cause. But neither did it offer the disappointment of watching all your hopes and dreams for a better life for you and your family and your people ripped from your hands by a cruel empire. The most disappointment of fishing is a slow day, a torn net, low prices for your catch. No wonder they went back to what they new.
Your Follow me started with fireworks and lazer light shows and voices from heaven. But follow me ended with silence and moaning, weeping and defeat.

The first time that Jesus said to his disciples ‘Follow Me’ he took them to the synagogue to preach and a scraggly bearded, wild haired, twitching, moaning and yelling at the empty air possessed man walked up to him and Jesus threw the demon out like smelly old sneakers. The man was finally right, finally what God intended.
At the beginning of Jesus saying, ‘follow me’ to the disciples, he was teaching on a mountain, and as he strolled down through the crowds of admirers who yelled for a word from him, or grasped at his robe for a handshake or a touch, a man, pale white almost the color of death approached him; fingers missing, sores weeping, clothes tattered, ragged, stinking; saying can you heal me, no one else can, can you end this misery?And Jesus reaches out, I imagine it in a movie scene, slowly the two hands, one clean and flesh-colored and strong, the other pale and stumped and scabbed slowly meeting. And when they touch, the one, hardly a hand at all, grasps, pink and new the hand of Jesus. That was the beginning of ‘Follow Me.’
At the beginning of Jesus command to ‘Follow Me’ he and the disciples were on a boat ride crossing the lake. Jesus slept, he had a nap in the back of the boat. And the wind whipped up all of a sudden from across the mountains surrounding. Clouds rolled in and brought rain that fell in sheets and stung the face like stones. The boat tossed and bobbed and weaved and the best of the sailors among them grasped the side of the boat for dear life. And then jesus awoke and said ‘peace be still’ And there was. That was the beginning of ‘Follow Me’
But toward the end of Follow when Jesus gave the disciples the task of tossing a demon out of a man they could not do it. Toward the end of Follow me, Jesus began to explain that his ministry would end in death
toward the end of Follow Me Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor." He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. And he was amazed at their lack of faith.
Toward the end of ‘Follow Me’ Peter saw Jesus betrayed by Judas for better salary.He heard himself say that he would die for and with Jesus, but when the soldiers came to arrest him he and the other disciples ran and hid in the garden. At the end, Follow Me, meant flogging, being spat upon, struck, crowned with thorns, nailed to a cross, pierced with a sword and left to die.

The End of Jesus command, ‘Follow Me’ was very different from the beginning of ‘Follow me.’ The beginning was of healing, of eating, of sharing, of feeling connected to people and giving them home. The End of Jesus command ‘follow me’ was the danger of cold dark cells and chains, of swords and spears and pain. The beginning of follow me meant the hope of make a whole new world. The end felt hopeless, it was about loneliness and rejection and betrayal. The end of Jesus command to follow me was very different from the beginning.

Do you see what I mean by the ending... the gospels end... the screen goes blank and we are left wondering... what will the disciples do?
what has Jesus death and resurrection actually accomplished?

Instead of a nice clean close to the story a clear resolution... THE END PERIOD
We get... THIS IS THE END (QUESTION MARK)Perhaps the disciples are struggling with this same issue... Where is the end? Jesus, you were suppose to be the end, the period... no the exclamation point at the end of this story and all we got was a question mark. This is the end?
The story ends the way it began with questions... the same question...
Will you Follow Me? Let me say that again...
The Gospels end with the same question that opened them... Will you Follow Me?

and then the apostle Paul comes roaring in... Not into the gospels... but into our thoughts this morning.
Rom 6:3-123 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5 If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection.
all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death and united with him in his resurrection...

And suddenly it became very clear to me That Jesus life and death and resurrection wasn't meant to be the end period...
or even the exclamation point...We are united with him in resurrection, new life It was meant to assure us that there would never be an end period... but instead

And THEN comma

We, like the disciples, often go right up to the edge of Easter sunday glory... but not all the way...
the message of Jesus sounds too hard seems to cost too much Forgive and it will be forgiven you Turn the other cheek, Pray for your enemies
Do unto others as you would have them do to you You cannot worship God and money Sell your possessions and give to the poor Loose your life and find it
Take up your cross daily.Like the disciples we grow afraid and run away or wander with lots of questions to Emmaus where nothing ever gets done or even worse... after Easter Morning
like Peter we find we have better things to do , we are just too busy
like head back to fishing...
with nothing about us changed at all.

Like the disciple we wonder, if we give ourselves totally and fully and completely to that way of life it could mean our end... period
the end of life as we know it as we are comfortable with it... period
and it couldn't possibly work could it... to forgive to choose peace to let go of the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed and live more generously.... question mark

On Easter morning the question is answered once and for all
This Easter Morning God turned what seemed to be the period of Jesus death the question mark... how could this be... into a comma... Jesus death on the cross was merely a comma and Jesus resurrection the beginning of a whole new story... And then...

which is why Jesus has a question of his own for us this morning. NOW will you follow?

With God all ending are new beginnings With God sorrow becomes hope
anger becomes peace
disappointment becomes resolve
With God there is no more period... end of story
Only a comma, And then,

a new beginning... for those who answer Jesus call Follow Me....

Comma And Then.... the rest fo the sentence

is up to you...

A Cruciform Life

2009-03-09T09:38:00.000-07:00

I haven't posted anything for a while... busy...
anyway... this past week was the busiest preaching week of my life; At Ebenezer on Tuesday night, Berean on Sunday Morning and then at my friend Jonanthan's installation at First Baptist East Greenwich. So I'm gonna start posting some of them... just to get something up...

Below is my sermon for Ebenezer entitled 'A Cruciform Life'

2 Cor 5:20-6:10

Have you ever seriously considered putting into daily practice something that you've read in the Bible... like stoning someone? AJ Jacobs in his book The Year of Living Biblically does. He decides that for one year he will try to live the Bible literally, growing a beard, not cutting his hair, not wearing clothing of mixed fibers, observing sabbath... that kind of thing. One of the funniest moments of the book is when he tries to practice public stoning of people who work on the Sabbath. He doesn't really want to hurt anyone or even cause a scene... so he picks up some tiny pebbles in central park and tries to sneak up behind people and casually flick the pebble at their backs... but he keeps missing. So he changes his method and decides to subtly drop the pebble on peoples feet...this works a little better, but he immediately apologizes for stoning their shoes. Walking along he is approached by an elderly gentlemen who asks him why he is dressed so funny... he is wearing a robe and a prayer shawl and sandals. He explains that he is trying to live the bible literally and that he is looking for people to stone for breaking the sabbath or adultery or something. You want to stone adulterers. Well, they are really only pebbles he replies and he shows the man a handful. Well, I'm an adulterer... want to stone me? Yes please... that would be very helpful. Try to stone me and I'll punch you in the mouth and the scene erupts into a little stoning war as they throw pebbles back and forth at each other.
Trying to practice what we believe... even if it isn't stoning... is a challenge... love thy neighbor...
This is the season of Lent and we are focusing on two beliefs that are central to our faith... the crucifixion of Jesus and his resurrection on Easter Morning and we focus on how it is that we practice what we believe.
Wendell Berry in a poem entitled Manifesto: The Mad Farmer Liberation Front, writes one line , one phrase... actually... that really caught my attention when I read it... practice resurrection. before reading that poem I had never really thought of resurrection in that way... sure I believed in it but... how would one practice resurrection. How would the resurrection impact the way I practiced my faith.
But as ripe as that topic is... That is for Easter... Tonight I want to consider Crucifixion
I've been wondering about practicing crucifixion.

The church at Corinth, which Paul is exchanging correspondence with, is a bit of a mess.
There are many issues that Paul has to deal with... We find the list of problems detail in the first letter to the Corinthians.
Factions are forming around who has been baptized by whom...Peter, Paul, or in the name of whom... Jesus... cliques about whose baptism is... correct... those who baptisms are (quote unquote) correct consider themselves to be of higher status than the others.
A man is living with his father's former wife
while other groups are espousing abstinence from marital intimacy
both again based on their... enlightened faith... both those who have an anything goes view and those who have an abstinence only perspective...feeling themselves superior
there are groups fighting about meat sacrificed to idols... some say that their faith means that it does not matter where the meat has come from... others thinking that practice of eating meat sacrificed to idols is a sin... both thinking themselves better than the other.
Some speak in tongues and think themselves superior... some prophesy and think themselves better...
The wealthy members are starting communion with cocktail hour and are inebriated... with little food or drink left for the poor members to share in the agape meal... at the Lord's supper that they are supposed to share. They assume their economic status enables them special benefits that the poor members are not worthy of.
Some of you may have heard your grandmother's say in reference to someone who thought highly of themselves... a peacock struts cuz he can't fly... well there were a lot of peacocks strutting about the Corinthian church. But theologically I would say that in Corinth there is a resurrection celebration... a resurrection attitude... without the crucifixion... without the sacrifice... And a resurrection practice without a crucifixion practice leads to this superiority complex which for Paul has no place in the church of Christ.
This is what I am talking about when I say... practice crucifixion. I am not suggesting in any way shape or form that we do bodily hard to one another... that we start practicing violence against others, even those we don't like, disagree with, or who have hurt or threatened us. I don't mean we stock up on nails...
but I do think that we have witnessed in the culture around us the same phenomena that Paul saw in Corinth... the resurrection celebration without the cruciform life....
For two decades now we have witnessed an increase in the wages of those at the highest levels of business, while the working folks, the blue collar people, have not reaped these increases... our wages have stayed the same or even declined.
But we have been trying to appear as if we wealthy and blessed... haven't we..
its in the name brand on our clothes, or the size of our houses... or the size of our vehicles...
we need the right kind of shoes or the right kind computers or the latest in gadgets....the biggest tv's and the smallest cell phone
Because it makes us feel good, special... others will admire us and aspire to be like us
because of the things we own...
13 trillion dollars... that is the consumer debt in our nation right now... 13 trillion dollars owed for the right car, the right suit, the right shoes....the right stuff....
And it has even invaded the church... this idea of resurrection celebration without a cruciform life.
Go to any book store... Barnes and Noble, Border... look at the religious section and you will see Christian books that tell you how to have a successful life and more times than not that successful life is defined as the world defines it... with houses and pools and clothes and money...
status... a sense of importance... dignity
all gathered up from the things we own
especially satisfying if we can have it and others will see it and covet it... want it too...
Thomas Merton says about this...
I use up my life in the desire for pleasures and the thirst for experience, for power, honor, knowledge, and love to clothe this false self and construct its nothingness into something objectively real.
Now listen to this...
I wind experiences around myself and cover myself with pleasures and glory like bandages in order to make myself perceptible...
We are mummies wrapped in rags, trying to gather to ourselves things that give us worth... empty shells ... wrapped in rags... thinking that these rags will somehow give us worth... make us real.

It is not a bad thing to want your dignity.
It is not a bad thing to want to be respected and to be treated with worth and value.
Many of the people that comprised the church at Corinth were slaves. People who had been devalued, used, and treated as expendable... without worth. A horrendous thing that I can hardly imagine.
So before we rush to judgment on these peacocks strutting about... I can understand why they would want and need a place where they could find value... be reminded of their worth... be treated with dignity...
and that the church was that place... that is a wonderful thing.
But Paul's sees a danger in their dignity.
It comes at a price.
For they need to feel better than others... to be better than others to have this dignity
and in this way they are but reflecting the world around them. A world... a society in which I put others down so that I can lift myself up.
They are doing it with spiritual language... lifting themselves up with speaking in tongues and prophesying, those are the rags they wrap themselves up in...
but in the end, Paul sees that it is no different from the world that they are trying to escape.
It is an empty dignity.
Which is why Paul teaches them true dignity... true value when he talks about himself... what he finds pride and dignity in for himself... we are...
2 Cor 6:8-10
genuine, yet regarded as impostors; 9 known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed; 10 sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything.
Value, dignity and worth... Paul says... does not come with the things that we have... He is referring to spiritual gifts... I think it applies to our culture's focus on material wealth....
Instead, Paul tells Corinth... dignity comes in living the life of Christ... a life of service and sacrifice.
We find our value and our dignity in the cruciform life... when we let ourselves be crucified...
to go back to Thomas Merton... the cruciform life is the life of unwrapping our mummified selves from the things that we have or own that we thought gave us value and worth...
ripping off the rags that we thought gave us substance... but that instead constrain us and hold us back from the life God would have us live.

If you are still finding it hard to accept that before celebrating resurrection... we must practice crucifixion... listen to these words of Jesus...
Matt 6:25-34
25 "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life , what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?
28 "And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.
Matt 10:37-39
38 and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

I submit to you... Dr. King once said... that if a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live...

Mark 10:38-45
Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
now.. he is referring to his crucifixion....
39 "We can," they answered.
Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, ...and then he goes on to say....whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be servant of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

It seems plain to me that in all these words of Jesus one thing is clear...
He expected those who would follow him to live cruciform lives...
that they would allow themselves to die to their old life... that they would part from their dearest possessions and risk the comfort and the ease of their present lives....
that they would rip off the rags of a life they had constructed for themselves
that they would allow their own hopes and plans and desires and agenda's to be nailed to the cross
with faith in what God would resurrect in them and for them... if they would let themselves go to the cross with Christ.
This is where our value, our worth, our dignity will be found... not in spiritual gifts or in possessions gained... but in the giving of our lives to the kingdom...
in the sacrificing of our lives for the sake of others...
in the cruciform life
in practicing crucifixion....

2000 years ago... on the shores of Galilee
Jesus issued a call to Peter, James and John...
fisherman... not destitute, but certainly not wealthy
to leave everything behind... family, friends, business, comfort... to let that all go
to give that all up for the kingdom

Are ye able, said the Master,
To be crucified with Me?
Yea, the sturdy dreamers answered,
To the death we follow Thee.

Surrounded by the hungry multitude...
5000 of the hungry and the poor and the forgotten
desperate for a meal... jesus called... not to the wealthy
but to the poorest of the poor themselves...
what have you to give... a loaf of bread
a piece of fish... will you let that go... give it up... for the kingdom

Are you able to relinquish
Purple dreams of power and fame,
To go down into the Garden,
Or to die a death of shame?

In the busy streets of Jericho
crowded on market day...
the sound of vendors selling their wares
Jesus issued a call to Zacchaeus too
who lived in wealth and oppulence at the expense of the poor
will you sell it... Jesus called... will you give it up this life to which you are accustomed... for the Kingdom

Are ye able? Still the Master
Whispers down eternity,
And heroic spirits answer,
Now as then in Galilee.

2000 years later the call still echoes
to nurses and night-watchmen, to janitors and lawyers...
day-care workers and teachers....
faithful disciples all... Jesus call still rings
to you and to me in this season of lent
are ye able... the master still calls... to be crucified...
to give and not count the cost
I know its a frightening time...
with lay-offs and pay cuts and down-sizing
with no jobs and rising prices
but the master still calls... are ye able to be crucified.
Will you be crucified for the children living in poverty
for the homeless on the streets
for the woman diapering her baby in paper towels
or heating her home with the oven...
are we able, for these 40 days to show our communities... our state... our nation
the value of a heart broken for others
the worth of a meal shared
the dignity of loosing my life... for the dignity of my sister and my brother?

May Our Easter celebration at the end of these 40 days be
the time when we can say with Paul
2 Cor 6:4-8
as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; 5 in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; 6 in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; 7 in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left; 8 through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report;
NIV
2 Cor 4:8-10
8 We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. 10 We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body.
Rom 8:36-39
"For your sake we face death all day long;
we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered."
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons , neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

and then our Easter worship will be a time in which we sing with confidence
Lord, we are able. Our spirits are Thine.
Remold them, make us, like Thee, divine.
Thy guiding radiance above us shall be
A beacon to God, to love and loyalty.

Random Thoughts

2009-02-03T16:14:00.000-08:00

1. So much for change with President Obama; three of the appointees 'forgot' (wink, wink) to pay taxes. next time I'm voting Green Party... I've had it with both Democrats and Republicans
2. As much as I didn't really want to, I liked Dark Night, but Christian Bale is an ass.
3. Why is it so important for the Holy Father to guard against schism by undoing the excommunication of an obviously anti-semitic bishop, but women who are ordained stay excommunicated, just because they are women?
4. Some of the penalties in the Arizona Pittsburgh game reminded me of an elementary school playground. Highly paid bullies. I've had it with football too.
5. The latest facebook game of listing 25 Random Things about yourself should come with some minor rules such as; 'list anything but your personal hygiene regimens.' I don't want to know.
6. If you want to watch some funny TV get yourself the Vicar of Dibley, the Immaculate Collection. I spent the entire weekend laughing!
7. My son is in the first grade and I'm already having a hard time helping him with his math homework. Why homework in the first grade by the way?
8. They are threatening to raise cigarette taxes in RI. I bet I still won't quit.
9. Never eat chinese take-out for three meals in a row... trust me.

Christmas has just begun

2008-12-27T11:31:00.000-08:00

It looks like Santa Claus and his giant sack of toys have exploded in my living room; despite that fact that my wife and I try to reign in the commercial aspect of popular American Christmas celebrations by enforcing spending limits on our gift giving for the boys. She is helping one build legos and the other is playing with his Power Rangers action figures. I find myself thinking, 'I love Christmas, but I'm glad it's over.' But actually it isn't is it? Christmas has just begun and will last on the Christian Calendar until January 5th if my calculations are correct... which means two more sundays of Christmas.

Nothing makes me more aware of how influenced we are as Christians by popular culture than the Advent-Christmas season. No one goes to church on Christmas Day. I did once. A couple of years ago Christmas Day landed on a Sunday. The church wanted to continue with services... five people showed up. There were many people who didn't come to Christmas Eve services, which are usually quite popular.

So how do we practice religious devotion during Advent/Christmas? It isn't by church attendance for many. It is shopping and cooking and office parties. Many will call this their 'Holiday Celebration' completely unaware of the fact that Holiday used to mean Holy Day, a day devoted to religious observance. I feel slightly cranky and judgmental observing this and thinking some of the things that I'm thinking. Such as pondering how many people go through the season thinking that they really understand the 'reason for the season' while at the same time spending thousands of dollars on presents and never attending any sort of service or observing even private religious practices to celebrate this special season. Can we really call ourselves Christians if we go through Advent doing more to celebrate Capitalism than Christmas. So while the church is meant to be the presence of Christ to the world, in the world but not of it, St. Paul once wrote, I fear we are no more of the world than at at this season.

The thing I struggle with is, how to impress upon folks this point without sounding bitter or angry or (horror of horrors!) preachy.

I've given some thought lately to how it is that I will teach my children the meaning of Christmas. We read the Christmas story during the Advent season and we decorate the Christmas tree with hand made decorations that symbolize the Christian Christmas story... Angels, stars, crowns. We limit our own spending on them and engage them in shopping for the families that we adopt through our church. But now I must think about how to celebrate Christmas with them for the next two weeks, so that they learn that the season is not over, but has just begun. And then, do I mention any of this in church? or do I remain silent and let people enjoy a joyful season?

Dignitas Personae Cont

2008-12-20T18:04:00.000-08:00

It is with great pleasure that I share a couple of comments from my good friend 'Theological Snob' regarding my posting on Dignitas Personae.

Darin,I'm assuming that you are agreeing with the Catholic Church that the main purpose of sex and of marriage is to have children.

No, I am not saying I agree with the Catholic Church that the main purpose of sex is to have children. I think that sex is meant to deepen and strengthen the emotional ties in marriage and be a catalyst for the emotional grouth of the two partners. Sex has a vital and important role in marriage regardless of procreation. So while I would not agree that the main 'purpose' of sex is children, I do think that the Catholic Church offers an important and necessary alternative to the purely recreational view of sex that is predominant in our culture. In my humble opinion this 'recreational view' leave sex devoid of any meaning or purpose but pleasure itself. 'Recreational Sex' is not primarily interested in a deep and intimate experience with another, but in personal happiness and satisfaction, which, in my opinion, leads to a culture which makes the sex partner, an object for the self's pleasure and which leads to the commodification of sex. In everyday life this looks like unwanted pregnancy, disease, marital infidelity and divorce in my experience (not personal experience, by the way) So while I do not necessarily agree with every conclusion the Catholic Church draws as a result of calling procreation a mystery in which humanity co-creates with God, I do think it is the best alternative to 'recreational' ethic of popular culture.

On another point, and this is where I struggle, ideally the community should come together and help the single mom (or dad) to raise the child. Somone once said, "it takes a village..." but as Ian remarked above, the reality is that churches do not have their sh-- together enough to provide that community and some people are left in a no-win choice...You can take the idealist approach and say that all abortions are wrong in every case, but how does that minister to the mother in the impossible situtation? The danger with such an idealism is that it leads to a critical legalism of categorical oughts and shoulds.

Theological Snob raises an important critique of the idea that the church should be the alternative family for single mothers who feel ill-prepared and unready to raise a child. First, the practical application of that idea, that the church becomes a global adoption agency, is unrealistic. I'm not sure I want to go that far and this is where I ready admit I 'punk out' on my own ideas. I am not suggesting that the church becomes a social service agency. I am suggesting that the churches stance should be clear. We are a community for which abortion is not a viable option. In this way we stand as a prophetic voice to culture, offering a critique to the practice of abortion and showing an alternative way to deal with the 'no-win' situations that Theological Snob mentions. (in this area I am admitedly very influenced by Hauerwas).

As for Theological Snobs concern, that such a view becomes critical legalism, I think that is an excellent point. The alternative, however, leaves us no ground upon which to do pastoral care, which TS is concerned about. If the church does not have a clear and concise theological understanding of what marriage is, sex and procreation... if we do not clearly state that procreation is participation in the creativity of God, that children are such a high value that they should be created in the state of marriage and that abortion is a violation of who God is and how God acts in the world (which by the way the church is meant to be, the ebodiment of a Creative and Grace-full God) than what how do we determine our pastoral counsel? My fear is that if we refuse to have a clear statement about abortion, we have no ground for our pastoral care. If our pastoral care is not grounded on theology, than I fear we end up sliding towards the view expressed in the Nation, where the best way we can serve an un-wed mother ill-prepared and frightened, is to take up a collection for her abortion. Haven't we then ceased to be the church? In other words, how do we do pastoral care if we don't take a definite theological stand for life? If we do not offer a theological or spiritual view of the matter we are nothing but very poorly trained social workers.

While some may use a clear and concise theological statement regarding marriage, sex, procreation, and abortion in a legalistic manner, to throw away a uniquely biblical and theological view of a complex situation simply because some misuse it, is to throw the baby out with the bathwater (in a what is not an attempt at a clever pun). So while there is danger to 'idealism' I think the Liberal Christian church has discovered the danger of 'pragmatism' which is silence and apathy in regards to the issue of life, abortion and human sexuality.

My main concern (I think, because this is all just a theological thought experiment right now) is that the liberal church has failed to be a witness to its faith in regards to this issue. I am not trying to find a way to set social policy, but to return the church to its calling, which is to bear witness to the powerful presence of a living God. How can we do that if we remain so wishy-washy about a topic like Life?

Dignitas Personae

2008-12-13T12:28:00.000-08:00

It may seem strange that an American Baptist pastor would place a link to a Roman Catholic Document. But I have long felt that Catholicism offers the most clear and concise thought available in regards to bio-ethics especially in the area of Abortion. The document 'Dignitas Personae' offers an excellent summation of Catholic thought in regards to these bio-ethical issues. Note especially under the heading 'Faith and human dignity' the statement; 'God has created every human being in his own image, and his Son has made it possible for us to become children of God.' Nothing new I suppose, but profound when compared to a recent post on 'The Nation' which is meant to lend a 'down to earth' approach to thinking about abortion. While in Dignitas Personae the unborn child bears the image of God and is therefore to be highly valued, in the Nation, the unborn child is a 'threat.'

the problem with the argument that Katha Pollit offers is two-fold, the first of which is the subject for today. First of all she vastly over-simplifies the perspective of those who are 'anti-choice'. Notice how she describes the perspectives of those who disagree with her in negative terms. The perspective of those of us who feel that abortion is the ultimate violation of the image of God that the unborn infant is created in, do NOT think that this child is 'one of life's little challenges.' As a matter of fact Dignitas Personae takes the conception and birth of a child in the most serious of terms. Under the heading 'The two fundamental principles' we read' 'The origin of human life has its authentic context in marriage and in the family, where it is generated through an act which expresses the reciprocal love between a man and a woman. Procreation which is truly responsible vis-a-vis the child to be born must be the fruit of marriage.' The child is not a slight inconvenience, but a gift that is to be treated with the utmost respect, care and responsibility. Under 'Faith and married life' we read; 'God, who is love and life, has inscribed in man and woman the vocation to share in a special way in his mystery of personal communion and in his work as Creator and Father...' Nothing could be taken more serious than the birth of a child for it is a mysterious cooperation between humanity and God in the process of creation.

I think that protestants could learn a thing or two from this Catholic document. That a man and woman are cooperating with God's creativity through conception may not be very romantic, but it does lend theological clarity to the sexual act, a necessary corrective to the 'purely recreational' view of sexuality that is rampant in our culture. And it reminds us that there is something sacred in every child. Every child bears the mark of the Creator, whether its life is viable outside the womb or not.

If you read Pollit's article carefully you find the second problem with her thought process. There a young woman, pregnant, who stands the very real risk of physical abuse from family, should she return home as an unwed mother. Pollit is admittedly a 'pro-choice' thinker. Being 'pro-choice' means assuming that sexuality is the choice of the individual, as is procreation and giving birth. Pollit hopes that we will support this womans personal choice to have an abortion. But her argument for abortion shows the weakness of the whole idea that ther is anything personal about sex, conception and birth. It requires the concent of a community, whether that is the community of father and mother in the act of conception, or the concent of the family is helping to raise the child. A child is not the choice of the individual, but the responsibility of a community, parents, family and yes, God. The family does not consent to this child, and so Pollit offers us an illustration of the weakness of her perspective. having a child is NOT an idividual choice.

Pollit offers the support of a community in her article... a community that will pay for an abortion. This is where the church must be more active in my opinion. It is not enough for us to be simply against abortion, but to be for the family, even the mother and unborn child that has no supportive family. We have to offer our consent to life by offering support, safety, home, and help to this mother who is in such danger. I am particularly reminded of Mary. We do not know exactly how her own parents felt about her pregnancy. We do know that her husband, despite some doubts and fear, consented to the child in her womb... and then the Holy Spirit created a supportive community around her; her cousin Elizabeth, the shepherds, the Magi. I see in the gospels the creation of an alternative family for the Holy Family that would support them in birthing and raising an unexpected child.

God Against Religion

2008-12-03T05:49:00.000-08:00

My friend theobilly and I went to the Paulist Center in Boston yesterday to hear Matthew Myer Boulton, currently associate professor at Harvard, formerly of my own school, Andover Newton, give a short lecture based on his new book 'God Against Religion; Rethinking Christian Theology Through Worship'. I have NOT read the book, so this is a short review of his lecture. To be honest my initial reaction was that Boulton's argument was thin... but upon more reflection I think that was more because he had 45 minutes to summarize the argument of an entire book.

This morning I am having a different reaction. In the lecture Boulton begin by referencing the second creation story of Genesis where humanity is created to serve, protect and enjoy the earth. He notes that no mention is made of worship of God in the purpose of humanities creation and existence. This part of the lecture I did not find helpful to his argument. He went on the story of Cain and Abel, and his reading of this story I found interesting. He notes that this is the first act of worship in the Bible and notes (something I have never notices) that this appears to have been completely the initiative of Cain and Abel... in other words, God did not ask for this or command it. Boulton asserts that this story serves as a warning about religion. The details of why Abel is 'regarded' or 'noticed' by God in this act of worship and Cain is not are non-existent. Genesis does not explain why. The point is that Cain reacts with anger and violence and we witness the first murder. Boulton reads this as a critique of self-centered religion and relatedly, worship. Cain was more interested in gaining God's favor than in truly making an offering of love to God. His religion and worship was self-centered, not God centered and this leads to violence. Boulton also notes that God speaks to Cain and reminds him in his anger (previous to the murder) that if he 'does well' he will be accepted. Boulton ties this 'doing well' to prophetic texts that voice God's rejection of Israel's worship because their lives outside of worship are not lived well; they do not live ethically. Boulton notes Amos 5:21-24, Micah 6:6-8, and Hosea 6:4-6 as prophetic expression of God's rejection of religion through the emptiness of worship. Worship is focused, as Cain was, upon gaining God's favor... but does not lead to acts of justice and kindness, and so offends God and does not please God. Boulton does not intend this to be a critique of Judaism or Israel, but a mytho-poetic story about all religion and all worship. All Worship and religion holds the dangerous potential to be more about the worshipper and his/her comfort, than about the God we worship and the righteousness and justice God expects.

I think that Boulton's work may be very important and I intend to buy and read this book. The very idea that God could 'be against' anything, is revolutionary in this day and age. Since so many think of God as a largely non-intrusive idea that can be largely ignored until times are tough and we want some comfort (think Cain) the idea that God is much more invested in the daily living of our lives an the trajectory of our values (toward or away from justice) is an important addition to discourse on God.

And I also think this offers interesting potential for a clear discussion of popular Christian worship in Christianity in America. While we are busily arguing, one way or another, for praise bands, praise choruses, fancy projection tech, etc. Boulton may indeed be offering us a theologically clear star upon which to fix our journey through troubling waters... justice. Is our worship focused on justice and does it inspire us to live just lives? This is what I hope Boulton gets to in the book... his lecture inspired me to think more clearly along these lines. If you are interested on some other thoughts I have had on worship and justice click the link to Tradition, Progression and Justice in Worship

Would Jesus Shop on Black Friday

2008-11-30T12:53:00.000-08:00

CNNMoney.com has an interesting little article on Black Friday spending. Unless you live in a cave or spent Thanksgiving under a rock you couldn't miss all of the dire economic predictions for this years Christmas season. But now that the totals are in Black Friday spending was up 3% to over 10 billion dollars. Which leads to a prediction of a 2.2% increase in total holiday spending, totalling 470 billion dollars.
Just for some perspective Bread for the World has projected that $4Billion dollars would cut world hunger by 50%. something to consider as we light the advent candles.

Also in the same article is the mention of shootings and other violent tragedies as shoppers rushed about trying to get the best deals on Black Friday. A friend told me that while waiting outside for a store to open a woman in front of her in line felt that a man had tried to cut in front of her so she grabbed him by the throat and wouldn't let go until the police got there.

Here is the thing. Churchy folk, we like shake our heads and click our tongues at this thought. But very few of us would abstain from shopping on Black Friday altogether. And perhaps we should. It seems to be getting particularly dangerous. You could get choked or shot. And it is particularly dangerous for the rest of the world... we would rather spend 470 billion dollars on video games than 4 billion on world hunger.

Today marks the first day of preparation forthe birth of Jesus. This same Jesus would warn us that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. I wonder if Jesus would want us to celebrate his birthday this way? Maybe he would just tell us to quit and start over.

The Existence of God and my Experience

2008-11-27T19:24:00.000-08:00

Is it possible to convince someone of the existence of God if they are already predisposed to doubt?
This question has begun to haunt me recently as I've been doing some studying. I've been reading two book simultaneously; Christian Theology, An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks edited by Peter C. Hodgson and Robert H. King, and Essentials of Christian Theology Edited by William C Placher. I like to review the basics of theology occasionally. I learned some French in High School, but didn't keep up with it and so its gone. So I review the basics of theology now and again to stay 'sharp'. In 'Essentials' an essay is included by John B. Cobb Jr. entitled 'Does it make sense to talk about God' in which we addresses some of the doubt and skepticism regarding a belief in God in our age. Interestingly enough I have been encountering this same skepticism recently. Cobb addresses the skepticism of those who trust only in experience in order to believe. Since they have not experienced God in a direct way, the idea of God cannot be accepted or trusted. Cobb makes an astute but simple argument to this skepticism by showing the logical progression of this line of thinking. If we can only trust in that we have directly experienced, then history does not exist.
Since I did not meet George Washington, I should be skeptical of his existence. Since I did not witness the Holocaust with my own two eyes I should be skeptical of its reality, and so on. (Cobb doesn't say that specifically, that is my example, and I don't believe it... this is just an example. Just to explain, there are photographs from WWII but not of Jesus... yes, but photographs can be faked. When I explain my trust in the Biblical witness this is the nature of the argument... it could have been faked. A fanciful myth that I cannot trust. Could we not wonder this about a number of things? including our own birth-certificates?) Personal experience, he posits, cannot be the sole authority for belief since it would mean that history would no longer have any bearing on our present or future.
I think he makes an excellent argument. But I wonder if it would hold any influence 'on the ground' so to speak. I could offer that argument to those skeptics that I have met recently, but I wonder if they would find that argument compelling.
So my questions are...
is a sound theological or philosophical argument for the existence of God compelling? If not, what will be?
given Cobb's argument re: Experience, isn't the Bible a collection of personal experiences of the living God? So isn't the Bible itself built upon experience and the telling and re-telling of personal experiences?
Should there be room in church for skeptics... people who have doubts about the existence of God or the divinity of Christ? How do we make that room for those who are seeking or open, but still doubtful... or for those who are comfortable doubting frankly, but who want to be a part of a community of integrity, honest, compassion and generosity?
My next few posts will follow this line of consideration and I look forward to your input.

A Rose By An Other Name

2008-11-13T19:48:00.000-08:00

Lately I've been viewing some 'evangelical' blogs such as Jonathan Merritt's. He is a young Southern Baptist very interested in among many things, I am sure, the environment. I was raised evangelical, biblically literal, actually. I am grateful that my mom raised me to be a follower of Christ, but I found the evangelical, biblically literal mindset very constricting. As much as I love the Bible, I cannot accept the idea tha the earth was literally created in six days despite what Genesis says.
Upon moving to Rhode Island and attending Andover Newton I found a home in Liberal theology and felt very comfortable there. Recently, due to study (reading Hauerwas) and conversations with pastor friends I have found the idea of being identified as 'liberal' wanting and so I have dabbled in the 'evangelical' blogosphere to see if there might be a place for me to feel comfortable.
But nope, I can't do it. Jonathan Merritt's most recent post sealed it for me. As intelligent at he is (much moreso than I) and as much as I admire his work for the environment, his latest post addressed the issue of women in ministry in the Southern Baptist Church. while he was being critical of the SBC, he stated that he remained undecided about women being in ministry. I can't do it, be associated with a group that is stuck on this issue. It's absurd.
so here I sit not liking the options; evangelical won't work, but neither will liberal. Post-liberal gets thrown around by some but it sounds too jargony to me. Even Baptist is problematic, as proud as I am to be Baptist. but it is problematic because so many assume that because I am Baptist I am against women in ministry, (just one example of the assumptions people will make).
So what am I exactly? What name will explain briefly to people where I stand in Christendom?
Does it really matter that much

On Voting

2008-10-09T19:38:00.000-07:00

On Theolog Christopher Benson reflects upon whether or not a Christian should vote. He draws upon Nietzsche who had such a poor view of politics that he wrote suggesting that one should simply, could simply not participate. I quote Benson below...
I face an existential dilemma: endure the “great frescoes of stupidity” painted by the political parties or vacate the voting booth. As this presidential campaign draws closer to Election Day, with sludge flying, I am seriously considering Nietzsche’s proposal “to keep out of politics and stand aside a little,” as he did.
When too many people are speaking, as in our bloviating 24-hour cable news and blogosphere, Nietzsche advises silence. He says that for the few conscientious objectors, “seriousness lies elsewhere; they have embraced a different concept of happiness; their goal cannot be embraced by any clumsy hand with just five fingers.”
G. Scott Becker concurs in an essay in Electing Not to Vote, saying there will be circumstances when “a sudden, widespread Christian abstention from the electoral process could serve to expose the hypocrisy that has seeped in it.”
Which is the great dilemma is it not? Paul spoke of it when he wrote that Christians should live in the world but not be of the world. But how is it exactly that we think about the world we live in? Is it good as Genesis tells us, or, is it fallen as is also told? As Christians are we to tend toward the ascetic, as Benson seems to suggest, monastics set apart from the electoral process which Benson accurately sees is fraught with problems? Or are we to engage fully in the process, knowing the danger that Paul suggests, that by being in, we become of... instead of influencing we become influenced?
Although I find myself sympathetic to Benson's dilemma about participating in the electoral process and agreeing with the reason's for this dilemma, I cannot agree with his answer to the dilemma, which is simply to abstain.
The issue is that whether or not I vote, I receive the benefit of the policies set by the President, Congress etc. As a pastor I depend upon the members of the church to tithe, so that I can provide for my wife and children. But in turn, these members depend upon their employers, who depend upon the demand of customers, all of which is tied, in greater complexity that I can fully understand, to the economic policies set by the President and the President's economic advisors. Whether I like the electoral process all the time or not, I depend on it, it affects me, and it affects Benson and Becker too. Although infrastructure such as paved roads, oil to heat my home, police to quiet my neighbors or search for my children when they are missing (God forbid), are largely provided by local and state government, still, federal government provides policies, guidelines, and finances indirectly that make these things possible. My education, which enables me to work is in large part due to federal loans. The taxes I pay fund many programs, some I like, such as relief and assistance programs and some I don't like, such as funding weapons for war. My point being that my tax money contributes to a greater good, and also in some cases to that which is not in keeping with my faith. But I cannot simply choose not to pay, not simply because the IRS would imprison me, but because there are people who depend on federal dollars, that I provide.
So in the end I find the idea that I can get a paycheck, call the police, get loans for an education, buy oil, and then either naively or condescendingly choose not to participate in the system that provides so much, well, frankly foolish. I then become a leech on society. Oh so elite because I can criticize the establishment, but still tied to it in so many ways and dependent upon it for many benefits that I would miss should I move to Central America or Africa for instance.
As to exposing the hypocrisy of the system, well, that is a bit optimistic. To think that if Christians stopped voting that suddenly Congress would collectively sit up and slap their foreheads in sudden epiphany is laughable. Nietzsche may describe eloquently the problem, but his solution simply sounds elitist and offers no solution. A bit like my two-year-old holding his breath so as to get his way.
Having said all that, what would the life of Jesus as recorded in the gospels say to us about Christian voting. Voting obviously wasn't even an option in his culture and society. Jesus did overturn the tables in the temple which N.T. Wright has suggested was an implicit suggestion that the system of connection between humanity and God that the Temple both symbolized and offered was broken beyond repair and replaced by his presence. Should this be our example when dealing with the electoral process? It is a broken system promising what it cannot deliver? We replace the electoral system by abstaining until it is 'overturned?'
On the other hand, would it be reasonable to present the preaching, teaching and miracle working of Jesus was both a criticism of the exercise of power by the elites and the creation of alternative communities which would embody power in service, sacrifice, generosity, honesty, and forgiveness? Could we then say that Jesus didn't simply abstain from the a culture and society that was broken, but stayed engaged so as to be critical with the intention of creating Kingdom. Is is possible to see Jesus' ministry not as asceticism, but the kind of 'in but not of' that Paul speaks of. Is that not the point of incarnation, that creation can only be returned to the goodness that God initially intended only when God engages with what is broken, instead of remaining separated?
Should we not then stay engaged in the process as Christians, in the world, incarnating our hope and faith in the Kingdom as we vote. But not of the world, placing our trust completely in this electoral system, voting to be critical of its weaknesses, but also grateful for its strengths?

Let's talk about...Sin?

2008-09-28T13:49:00.000-07:00

Over the past week I have been listening faithfully to NPR to try to get a better handle on the current economic 'crisis'. I noted something interesting about these discussions that I mentioned in the adult Sunday School Class this morning and the subsequent discussion was quite interesting.

I am no economist. I'm not even terribly good at balancing my own check-book.
Listening to one economist explaining one facet of the current economic downturn, I noticed that as clear as he was in describing the problems, when pressed by the interviewer to pinpoint responsibility, he was very hesitant. He had just finished describing behaviors that have led to foreclosures, homelessness, etc. but he would not even describe the choices and decisions of those involved as 'wrong' or 'bad'. He actually said he didn't want to say that these were 'bad' people. Something suddenly seemed very wrong to me and that was the idea that our culture has lost its language for clearly describing (and therefore clearly teaching our children about ) right and wrong. He would say that many were caught up in a 'mass hysteria' but that seemed very unsatisfactory to me... it seems to remove responsibility from the equation.

Another show, 'This American Life' broadcast a simple explanation that I did understand (I think). The host also shared some listener feedback to the show. One of the listeners appreciated the fact that despite the severity of this issue and the fallout which adversely affected so many and will continue to affect so many, the lister appreciated the fact that 'no blame was assigned' in the show.

Sin has never been my favorite word, my favorite theological topic or my favorite sermon subject. Largely I suppose because I recall the use of the word sin in the church I grew up in. I was used so 'liberally' that it produced anxiety, guilt, and fear in many people. My first years as a pastor in church I experienced an interesting phenomena. I didn't use the word sin very much (still don't). Because I tend to focus my sermons and prayers on God's love, grace and forgiveness... those who had escaped church because of the fetish with sin language, could come back. Its not that I don't preach about sin by the way. Its just that I don't use the word.

Anyway, without a language to describe sin, or wrong, in our culture, how can we ever really recover from this economic crisis with any justice and any assurance that we will not repeat the same 'sins' over and over to the detriment most often to the poor. As much as I have found both energy and solace theologically in justice themes, I am more and more convinced that we cannot talk about justice without also talking about sin. If we cannot describe what has caused injustice and clearly give words to why it is injustice, how can we ever move through to redemption or healing or forgiveness?

Unfortunately sin has been used, in my experience, in abusive ways. It has been used to oppress peoples and cultures and as a tool of the ruling of one people over others, one culture over others. It has been used to establish and maintain the power of elites. This, of course isn't just my experience, it is a description from the gospels of the religious elites in and around Jerusalem. I, of course, understand that there are many legitimate arguments against viewing historical pharisees through the lense of the gospels, the description of the powerful elites using the word and concept of sin to establish and maintain control is convincing to me.

so, for now, I think that moderate to liberal churches like mine need to recover the use of the word sin, rehabilitating it from abuse, fear and guilt. but if we cannot talk about sin, we cannot talk about justice for the oppressed and redemption for the oppressor

the Truth about Obama and Revelations

2008-09-25T14:25:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I received this forwarded e-mail from my dad.
This will make you re-think: A Trivia question in Sunday School:How long is the beast allowed to have authority in Revelations?
Revelations Chapter 13 tells us it is 42 months, and you knowwhat that is. Almost a four-year term of a Presidency.All I can say is 'Lord, Have mercy on us!'According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is: The anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive thenations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....theprophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hopeand world peace,and when he is in power, will des troy everything..Do we recognize this description??I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to post this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet..do it!I refuse to take a chance on this unknown candidate who came out of nowhere.
Do be perfectly fair to my dad, he often sends me the most outrageous stuff he finds on the web that he can because he likes to get a rise out of me. It is an on-going joke between the two of us.
This e-mail causes me to wonder if the people who created it, or others that are similar, actually believe this, or, are they more like cyber-graffiti artists who like to start these forwards to see how far they go? I would assume the latter if two interesting things hadn't happened in conjunction with this e-mail. My wife receive the same e-mail from her uncle in Georgia. Then, today on NPR, during a discussion of politics and the web, a man who monitors peoples web-searches and from that data attempts to discover what these searches might suggest about peoples feelings and assumptions about politics and the economy, mentioned the mass popularity of this e-mail. This suggested to me that maybe this isn't simply a joke, or it may be a joke with more influence that I had hoped.
My response to my father was quite simple:
1. It is the book of Revelation, not Revelations. A small detail no doubt, but one that causes me to question the depth of thought that the author of this e-mail utilized in its creation.
2. Revelation Ch. 13 makes no reference to a man in his 40's or of a man of Muslim descent. If my history is correct Islam didn't come to exist until about 500 years after the composition of Revelation.
My father responded with a question, 'why should he trust my OPINION about the meaning of Rev 13 over someone else?'
Which provides the long story of the whole point of this post... the Truth.
Christians generally proclaim that the Bible is the inspired word of God and as such authoritative in guiding Christian life and faith. Now I am a Biblical Liberal. Which is a short-hand way of saying that although I do believe that the Bible is inspired by God and the authority for my life and faith, I also see humanity involved in the creation of the Bible, so that the Bible also contains human inspiration along with divine. So I would not read Genesis chapters 1 and 2 literally for instance.
But still, if we are talking about the authority of the Bible, are we then not also talking about Truth. The Bible is the inspired word of God, a revelation of God's Truth. In our discussion of the Bible then, we are discerning truth and from the Bible we are being lead to truth. It isn't a matter simply of opinion.
This isn't terribly easy for me to write because as a Biblical Liberal and a child of the post-modern era, Truth is a difficult word to write. I am well aware that there is a wide diversity of cultures in the world and religions also. I am well aware that there is wide diversity of morals and ethics which are influenced by these diverse cultures, and that even within just one culture there is a variety of opinions on any given subject. We cannot speak about Christianity in a certain sense, but Christianities, for my experience of faith is very different from my Roman Catholic Priest friend's experience and from my fundamentalist mother's experience as well. Certainly there is more in common than that which separates, but still, our practice of faith and our concept even of who God is, what salvation is, and what Heaven or the End will be are all very different.
So I have tended to stay away from 'Truth' statements because 'truth' is largely a matter of one's perspective. And truth has often been used for oppressive and imperialistic ends.
More recently however I have come to reconsider the importance of truth while watching Stanley Hauerwas deliver an essay on Bonhoeffer's political theology. Hauerwas observed that Bonhoeffer was disappointed by the Ecumenical Movement in Europe in the 30's and in his seminary education in the US, largely because there was no dialog or debate about the truth. His feeling, according to Hauerwas, was that this lack of Truth, eventually lead to the rise of Hitler in Germany and the church's collusion in his program of genocide. The church did not know how to speak the truth because they had not been trained in the truth.
This has caused me to re-think 'truth' especially the truth of the Bible, the Gospel and Christ. While as a child of the post-modern I am unable to claim possession of the full truth, am I not still obligated as a disciple to discern the truth as best I am able? Should I not hold myself to a higher standard of discerning the Truth as the Gospel proclaims it and to think carefully about how the gospel illuminates the truth?
As foolish as this e-mail about Obama and the book of Revelation is, I think it exemplifies the cynicism that our culture feels about Truth. So cynical that either we purposefully spread lies either as a joke or to bolster our rhetorical position or we refuse to push ourselves to discuss truth because we do not want to seem judgmental or imperialist. Both of those are legitimate concerns when using the word Truth, which means that our approach to truth must be done carefully and thoroughly and that our use of truth must be humble. But if I cannot say that Rev 13 says nothing about Obama and that such a view is not a matter of opinion but truth, how can I then proclaim other Christian truths, such as the evil of war or the sin of greed? If we have no voice willing to sound the truth, even in part if not in full, what kind of witness will the church have or be? “without a church willing to proclaim truth, what kind of nation will we become?

Anniversary Thoughts

2008-09-13T06:06:00.000-07:00

I'm stealing this idea from another blogger frankly, not only because it is my 1st anniversary to my wife this week, but also because I have been thinking about marriage and vows a lot lately.

this is a fairly random collection of thoughts, so watch out. Something that has always influenced the way I think about marriage came from C.S. Lewis. I remember (correctly I hope) reading Lewis reflecting on emotion and wedding vows. He suggested that while a relationship begins with a rush of emotion, love and passion, but these emotions, like any other, wane. And they need to. To live on a constant high of passion would not only be exhausting, but distracting. If we governed our lives totally on passion the basic necessities of life, like washing dishes, doing laundry and going to work, would not get done. Which is why, Lewis suggested, we have marriage vows. The give us a sense of stability for that time when our emotions and passions have subsided. While love is an emotion and therefore can blossom and fade as an emotion, Lewis suggests the love of a christian marriage is an action, the willingness to serve and sacrifice and remain faithful to another, always with compassion and respect, even when we don't feel emotinally like behaving that way, all of which provide the foundation for that passionate emotion to blossom again. (this is how I remember what Lewis said in Mere Christianity. Lewis scholars might differ with me and someone borrowed my copy so I can't really check.)

'My guts are full of shit!'
If you haven't had the pleasure of seeing the movie 'High Fidelity' with John Cusack, his sister Joan, and Jack Black in the funniest and strongest performance of his movie career, please go find it somewhere. It is brilliant and funny and poetic and poignant.

John Cusack's character has just experience another breakup with another girlfriend as the movie opens. He goes on a quest, finding all of the other girlfriends who have dumped him to find out why his is destined to be single. He finds out that largely it is his own fault, because while in one relationship he allows himself to wonder if a better one might be out there, and fantasizing about how much better it could be. His emotions were his guide in other words and he finally states his discovery of the mess his emotions have got him in by saying, 'I've been following my gut all these years and recently I have come to the conclusion that my guts are full of shit!'

Notice the commone theme. Emotions are not the best guide for our decisions and behaviors, especially in marriage. I'm not trying to describe some victorian novel marriage based on convenience and economic and social standing, but I think I have come to the conclusion that emotions do not always lead us toward happiness.

In my first year of marriage (well, my second marriage, her first) I have learned how to manage my emotions in the safe container which is my wedding vows. I have been happy and angry, exstatic and sad, passionate and exhausted, calm and stressed, whimsical and cranky and I have learned that largely that all of these emotions come from within me and not from my lovely wife. I say that because I have worked with some men in my ministry who were unhappy and who decided that their unhappiness was largely because of their wife and their marriage. But once they left and divorced, they were no happier!!! I have worked with married men and women married who met someone else who made them 'happier.' Happier until that relationship became less of a hobby and more of a career if you catch my meaning. When it ceased to be a fun distraction and became the prime focus, it wasn't any happier anymore.

so I have learned that emotions don't guide me well. My wedding vows protect me from my emotional highs and lows. We work out our emotions together, manage them as a team and speak honestly about them, because we know they are not the only thing holding us together, our wedding vows are too.

Kids these days (in worship)

2008-09-10T10:35:00.000-07:00

I haven't had any more responses to my thoughts on worship, but doggedly onward I go.

Marx once suggested that religion was the opiate of the masses, (or something close to that phrase). A recent conversation with a person in their twenties quoted this to me and it made me think about worship. Could twenty-somethings be offering some guidance to our worship and discipleship conundrum by quoting this phrase. Because this person quoted also believes in God and does not consider Atheism or Agnosticism an adequate descriptor of their particular relationship to God. It isn't God that is the opiate, but church. But notice what this person is implying they want. They don't want to be distracted or coddled or entertained by church/worship, they want to be challenged. At least, that is how I interpret this.

Could it be that there are some twenty-year-olds out there who would be just as dissatisfied with praise bands and hymns as they are with a tradition they don't understand because both are opiates, because neither option is challenging the participant to live just, robust and meaningful lives, but simply molifying them through life and making them feel a little better about death?

What surprised me about this conversation was that the twenty-something person enjoyed the traditional aspects of service, passing the peace, reciting the lords prayer etc, because they were done with passion and integrity. During the passing of the peace, people really did renew relationships and affirm their devotion to and love for one another. They meant it, in other words. And the Lord's prayer, which calls for faith, justice and a commitment to the poor and needy is recited so as to strengthen the body for a life of discipleship, which is discussed in the sermon. The sermons are challenging, this person said. Did you hear it? they liked a challenge and they appreciated a liturgy that put the challenge into practice and strengthened the body to go out and live that challenge.

Perhaps what young folks, (some anyway) want more than entertainment is to be challenged to do and be more. Perhaps they want a weekly practice that reminds them of the more they are created to be and do and a community that reminds them that they are God's children created to live lives of peace and justice and supports them in those endeavors.

I was amazed at the depth of insight shared with me by this twenty-something.
And I was given hope. Hope that we don't need to entertain younger generations to attract them to church. Hope that the church doesn't need to mirror a fairly shallow and disposable culture in order to reach people for Christ.

2008-09-09T14:37:00.000-07:00

My friend Jonathan wrote

I think we need to constantly ask ourselves about the purpose of worship. To a degree it is an "insider" event for those who profess a faith and claim to be a part of the story. Yet at the same time an element of worship needs to reach out to other, to be "seeker" oriented. Currently we seem to be stuck in an either/or dialetic. Where is the both/and?

I think that both ends of the dialectic are faulty because both focus on what we are recieving from worship. The church, protestant/non-denominational, has made humanity the center of worship and when we make ourselves the focus, we have to basis upon which to assess the appropriateness or faithfulness of our liturgy, whether traditional or progressive. In the Bible, worship is something that humanity offers to God. Praise and thanksgiving, submission and petition all directed toward God, is the biblical witness and yet most of our consideration about worship is more concerned with what will interest and entertain, either the old faithful or the young and unchurched.

While it may sound like I am a guardian of tradition, I think that ref-ocusing on God in worship would challenge the 'praise' movement in ways that would make it more effective. The bible offers many examples of exhuberance and joy in worship; Moses and Miriam singing after the crossing of the Red Sea, David dancing with all of his might before the Ark. Offering God thanks for the power and strength to act faithfully and justly in the world would give praise hymns a depth and substance that is sadly lacking. It would change our focus from entertainment models in worship, to thinking artistically and creatively. Instead of putting up movie screens we would be using our creative talents to express thanks for the presence of God in our lives and in the world.

As it is, both traditional and progressive worship are weakened because we are the focus more than God. Traditionalists that don't want to change anything because they are just comfortable with the same old hymns, the same old prayers and the same old liturgical actions are more focused on themselves than on a creative expression that ushers the community into the presence of the living God.

As an example, the music minister at the church I serve told me a progressive and non-traditional liturgical act at a church he served in the mid-west. Someone actually wove a prayer shawl that 6-8 ushers would carry and surround the entire congregation in at the prayers of the people. I prayer shawl not for one person, but for the whole blessed community, surrounding everyone in prayer. I think that must have been a beautiful act. It isn't traditional, but neither is it based solely on entertainment. It is a creative and artistic offering of ones talent to God, intended to lift the whole community into an experience of God's presence in prayer.

I think that we will attract many people, young and old, when we free ourselves to creatively lead people into the presence of God. By focusing on God, instead of doggedly holding tradition or blindly accepting entertainment as our model, we become relevant and remain substantive at the same time.

Tradition, Progression and Justice in Worship

2008-09-05T07:23:00.000-07:00

Vance said of my last post regarding worship

'But what bothers me the most is a sense of irrelevance and disconnectedness from the world that I feel in most churches. Maybe that is just the nature of the narrow way, but somehow I think our fellowship should be future pointed rather than past pointed. It feels to me that most churches are trying to preserve a worldview of science, culture, philosophy, and an attitude towards God that doesn't work anymore.'

Thanks for that thought,
Here is what you have encouraged me to think about.

Relevance may be the key concept for us here. Is the church meant to be 'relevant'?
That may seem like a strange question because the obvious answer is 'of course'
that is what most churches report they want from their preachers and sermons, relevance.
We want to understand the revelation of God as it applies to our lives today, in our context, so that we can live faithfully and be an effective witness. That reasoning I understand and suppport.

So if relevant means understanding the word of God so that we can apply it to our societal and cultural context and be an effective witness, than I say relevance is an important goal for our worship.

But Paul said in Rom 12:2
Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect.

I think this may move us toward a good working definition of 'relevance'

Our worship must be relevant in such a way as to guide us in to transformation from life as the world (culture and society) define it, into life as God defines it.
In other words, the goal of following Christ is to be Christ-like. The goal of worship is not to simply mirror popular culture so that it becomes more accessible, but to lead us into rejecting what is considered popular and might just be the opposite of what Christ expects from his disciples

That is my contention with much of what is happening in worship. that it conforms to the ways of the world. Large screens like a movie theatre. Bands like at a bar or a concert. No more robes on the pastor, just jeans and a hawaiian shirt. Play down the religious symbols. Take out the traditional parts of liturgy, like the Lord's Prayer and the Gloria Patri.
Traditional worship makes people uncomfortable and is foreign to them. And we want them to come to church.
Many do not understand these elements of worship and so they are 'irrelevant'

But in the scripture above, Paul is not calling us into a comfortable relationship with Christ. We are not to conform (which is comfortable) but instead to be transformed (which is to be different, and that is decidedly uncomfortable . we are meant to be different from the world and worship is meant is meant to be different from the world around us, critiquing that in the culture around us that goes against the Kingdom Christ brought in his life, death and resurrection. Worship meant to make us uncomfortable in the world, so that we will live differently. We must be uncomfortable in order to see the world a different way, to catch a glimpse of the kingdom so that we can know the dangers of conforming.

Church that gives away SO much to be popular and comfortable soon, in my opinion, looses its power to witness to the larger world.
Praise hymns themselves. Not only do they not really teach us anything about the faith. they are completely individually oriented, internally focused... its just about 'me' and Jesus. And finally, these praise hymns are not created with any lasting power. They are like cell phones and computers, created to be purchased today, tomorrow obsolete because another new song has come out, so that we will purchase another one. It is that impermanence, that disposable ethic that worries me most, even though it is relevant. The ethic of disposability is what has created such dangers for the natural world around us. Ton's and Ton's of trash build up for the sake of convenience and disposability. When things are disposable, soon people are disposable (read the first chapter of Esther to see disposable good and disposable people). Even marriages are disposable and babies too.
the church needs to be a witness for the value of people, marriages, babies. We must stand against this disposable ethic instead of conforming to it, yes, even in our music we make that witness.

Hauerwas maintains that the point of the church is not to be successful or popular, but faithful. What are we being faithful to if we we are jetisoning all those things that make us unique and teach us how to be non-conformists?

This isn't to say I'm against relevance or innovation either.
I like to play my guitar in worship, which really isn't a part of my tradition
(it actually is a part of some traditions, including the african american tradition as I understand it. Guitars being the only affordable and accessible instruments for many African American churches in the days soon after slavery when they were still not allowed in the wealthy white churches)
and I like to find hymns that are written with contemporary language and themes.
I grow tired of the 'blood' hymns as they espouse an understanding of atonement that I cannot affirm. I grow tired of hymns that have antiquated language 'Here I raise my ebenezer' What does THAT mean?

this is where Justice comes into play.
Look to Is 58.
that is all about worship.
israel is asking God why they are faithful in worship, in prayer and sabbath, and yet God does not seem present and available to them.
God launches into a critique of their worship. it isn't relevant. by relevant god means that worship does not shape the lives of the worshippers outside of the temple. They use each other cruelly. they amass wealth for themselves and ignore the poor. The share fine meals and let others go hungry. Relevant worship according to God, changes us from self-centered individuals to community oriented people. Worship makes them feel good for a while and then they can go out and act however they want. This sounds too much like praise music to me. I have just had a moving and cathartic experience of singing 'Here I am to worship, Here I am to bow down, Here I am to say that you're my God...' but then, have I volunteered at a soup kitchen, simplified my life by donating the clothes that I speant hundreds of dollars on and then didn't wear. Have I sold my SUV and bought a hybrid, have I done anything differently in the world?
Relevant worship, according to God opens our eyes to the emptiness of material wealth, and to the plight of those who cannot even attain the most basic of needs. Worship was meant to highlight the sins of society and strengthen those gathered to live just lives. when they did live just lives, their worship was relevant.

This is the way i propose to navigate the 'worship wars' between tradition and contemporary. And it aint easy. There are few traditional hymns that pick up peace and justice themes. There are few praise songs that do so either. I am constantly searching for hymns with justice themes written to traditional hymn melodies and to contemporary hymns that are written with a certain 'pop music sensibility' that still proclaim the faith.

thanks vance for your response and I hope you will continue to challenge me to think further

Worship, the Democratic National Convention and Spectacle

2008-09-02T11:43:00.000-07:00

This post isn't actually about politics.

Home eating lunch today I watched the daily show with Jon Stewart. The show included a really funny and interesting piece which highlighted what some called the 'spectacle' of the convention. Stewart had a correspondent running around the convention dancing and chanting and clapping with people. At one point he is dancing with a woman and asking her questions about Obama's policies. at one point he questions the substance of her answers which was particularly funny as they were 'getting down' while discussing political policy.

I didn't watch much of the DNC and the spectacle was my problem. I must be turning into a crumudgeon, because I kept thinking to myself, 'is this the method and the context in which politics should be done in the US? It looks like a Jimmy Buffet show or a Tail-gate party at a football game. Is this really the only way to involve the American Public in such important decisions and processes, by providing loud music and fire-works? I must be growing old or something because I keep thinking to myself that occassionally there are times and places for serious discussion of serious matters, but aparently the DNC wasn't it.

and I wonder too about worship. I just wrote to my church about the changes I see in worship around me. Praise music and Praise bands. congregations choosing to elliminate the Lord's Prayer, the Gloria Patri and the Doxology from worship. Large screens installed for Power-point sermons, religious symbols put int he basement, hymnals in the attic. some even changing their names so that you would never actually know they are a church. All so that worship can be a spectacle, so that it is more entertaining to Gen Xers I guess.

The concern that these churches are hoping to address is the steep decline in attendance to worship. Perhaps if worship were more entertaining, less formal, and more like other experiences, like movies and pop concerts, more people would come.
but that leaves two questions unanswered:
1. Once they come, what are they learning? Praise music is notoriously influenced by pop-music, including its disposability. Praise music is written to be easily learned and sung, quickly sold and therefore quickly replaced. Most praise songs have little theological substance. So, we get young folks into church and they enjoy singing, 'Come, now is the time for worship' but what have they learned about who God is, what Christ did, what the church believes or what discipleship means and looks like. 'Lo He Comes on Clouds Descending' may not lend itself well to the electric guitar, but at least you have learned something about Christ, Salvation, Crucifixion and Resurrection after you have sung it. so they like to hang with us when we sing praise, but are we passing on a faith with any depth or substance to them? and if we aren't passing anything of substance on to them, why are we so concerned about their presence? Are we more interested in success than in being faithful to Christ and the Kingdom?

2. should church and worship look and sound like the world around us? Are we not meant to provide the world with an alternative, THE alternative which is the gospel? Worship, at least in my understanding of it, is meant to be an experience, perhaps ever so fleeting, of the presence of Christ and the reality of the Kingdom. that will NOT look like the world around us. Our values will not be the worlds values. So if we accomodate so much to remain 'entertaining' we run the risk of accepting the values of the world that we are meant to subvert not support.

These are serious times we live in. And we need a serious devotion to the gospel in order to remain the faithful witness that Christ has called us to be. Spectacle in worship, it seems to me, teaches is the wrong thing about worhsip and faith.
First it teaches us that worship is meant to make us 'feel' something. while worship, in the Bible, is first and foremost meant to be an offering of the individual and the community to God, not the recieving of happiness or entertainment. Worship, in short, isn't about me, its about God. Entertaining worship is about me.
Second it teaches us that a relationship to God is about me. I am meant to recieve happiness, peace, prosperity from this relationship. There is little to no 'service' in praise music or entertaining worship. this worship does not push us to 'take up our cross' or explain to us how we do that. Instead we repeat a few simple phrases 'Yes Lord, Yes Lord, Yes, Yes Lord' and slip into a pop-candy induced stupor.

It isn't that I don't think there should be some changes in worship or an attempt to be relevant.
perhaps my next post will talk more about that should my millions of adoring fans clamor for more.

2.

A Sports Ethic

2008-08-26T12:12:00.000-07:00

This interesting story on Yahoo highlights a parenting delima I am having.
A nine year old boy who is not allowed to pitch because he is too 'good'
http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ap-toogoodtopitch&prov=ap&type=lgns

I took my oldest son to his first soccer game.
first, and I admit, this particular post is a bit of a 'bitch' on my part.
He had one short fall season of instructional soccer last fall and this year he just plays games.
Mind you, he has a high-school kid as a coach who doesn't explain anything about the game at all to any of the kids. The referee for the game is also a high-school kid who doesn't bother to explain the calls he makes. so most of the kids are clueless as to what is going on.

But here is my main concern.
The opposing team had a 'competitive' soccer player. there is 'competitive' and 'recreational'
My ex-wife signed our boy up for 'recreational' which I always thought meant fun and instructional. this was neither. It wasn't instructional and it wasn't fun. My boy handled the 12-2 drubbing we got thanks to the competitive kid, without much care. He just likes to get out there and run around. some of his team-mates were in tears because they just couldn't hang.

Back to the pitcher story. As a boy I was awful at sports. No one explained any of them to me and so I would should up at little league, ready to learn, with no one interested in teaching. they just wanted to play and win. there was no way for me to learn in that system. I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time feeling bad for the pitcher who was told he couldn't pitch, because I'm the kid who already isn't that good at hitting to begin with, who isn't going to learn a thing by striking out in three pitches.

I'm not saying, don't let him play, find a league where he can be competitive and where the batters can compete with him. If he continues to strike out kids who can't keep up, what will they learn and what will he learn.

What is my son learning about sports from his experience at soccer? How to be a punching bag?

Here is my failing. I got so upset about the game I was trying to coach him for the whole game, which increased his stress levels trying to make me happy. I completely forgot the only reason I wanted him to play sports anyway; to get some exercise, meet other kids, and HAVE FUN.
I am disapointed by the apparent lack of concern on the part of the soccer powers that be, that including competitive kids in recreational leagues ruins the fun for everyone.

What I have to remember is my sport ethic. Play because its fun, you meet some people you like and you feel good about accomplishing something. I'm not going to push my son any more to keep up with little mister Beckham on the other team.
Learn something new, have a good time, introduce yourself to a team-mate
then soccer is worth something.

Oh, and yes, I want my son to learn to be concerned with the other players and the opposing players. I don't want 'winning' to be his only goal. I want him to value sports achievement for everyone, not just himself and his team.

Now I just have to remember that myself.