Jesus: Communist or Capitalist?

I get into this discussion a lot. It is kind-of the idea of the old WWJD; which would Jesus advocate for more: Socialism or Capitalism. It is tough. There are a lot of passages and examples from the teachings of Christ and the early Church that make a lot Christians who are social activists to answer: socialist. However, there are other passages that would make one argue against that.

Even pulling the Bible out of the picture, this has been an ongoing philosophical battle for decades in the US. I am a big fan of Ayn Rand and her Magnum Opus: Atlas Shrugged. It is perhaps the most comprehensive philosophical and narrative argument for Capitalism. However, it is an idealized Capitalism, not an actual one. I struggle with her theories in my head because that is the only place her reality has existed. Socialism, on the other hand, shares much of the same story. Socialism DOES NOT = COMMUNISM. There is a difference. I think that socialism is another "ideal" that has yet to be realized. Both, in my humble opinion, have their strengths and flaws in the utopian philosophical arguments.

However, CNN has a post that puts these two ideas in debate. I DO beyond a doubt think this is a great discussion for Christians and the Church to have. However, as much as I like this conversation, I must remember that Jesus was BEYOND either systematic thesis. The Kingdom of God (again IMHO), is bigger than this. But, if we want to bring about the Kingdom of God on this earth, then we have to do so with the systems that are in place. Wether it means subverting a specific system or embracing it, we have to use the best of it to heal while we in turn, heal the broken parts of our system.

It seems to many (I'm not sure I agree) that our government is sliding into a more socialist identity. While this is not a political blog, I'm not sure that some synthesis of the best parts of a socialist and capitalist mindset are truly at odds. A government's job in the USA is to protect and care for it's people. I'm not sure how you can do this with an Ayn Rand type of Capitalism. Then again, we have yet to have a truly successful Socialist experiment without the corruption and disenfranchisement of the people. Yet as a Social Conscious Christian, I find myself asking, "in what areas would a more Capitalist/Socialist approach truly do things like:

End Poverty
Alleviate corruption in government (this must be done, not to be political, but because to truly heal a situation, the system itself that is causing or at least allowing oppression, must be fixed).
End World Hunger
Give equal rights to all men and women
AND THE LIST GOES ON......

In any case, as always I have more questions than answers to offer. So in my offering I give you the link to the following debate/article and the video clips.

CLICK FOR ARTICLE



Enjoy, and please feel free to leave comments.

Always About Us

Hey faithful readers. Sorry for the blackout in posts, but just got back from a week in glorious Chicago! This was a great trip to a fantastic city for a much needed break!

As I was gone, I tried to keep myself away from blogs (successfully I might add), news (mostly good), and anything on my usual tech. routine (except for google maps on my iPhone... needed that in the city)!

Yet now that I'm back I saw New York Times (and many AP papers) ran this story today: Climate Change Seen as Threat to U.S. Security

Now one doesn't have to be a liberal hippie to have heard warnings about climate change and its dangers for say that last 25+ years! And I know we in America have gotten better (at least while the gas is still high and the economy still low) and more aware on the issues. However, as our cogs turn in our American self-preservation systems it becomes front page news (it was sent out as lead story on NY Times daily update, and was front story on N&O) when it be comes a "security issue".

This saddens me for many reasons. It isn't an issue that our world is in trouble, or that our yet-to-be-born relatives will have this impact their daily lives. No, it is that it is a threat to the security and prosperity systems of our country. I don't understand why it takes the pentagon telling us it is an issue before we take it seriously.

I mourn for who we are and what we've become as ego-centered Americans. God knows I love this country and thus why I am so proud of who we were and so distraught by whom we have become. But I am still retaining hope that we will break out of our self-centered systems and step up to the plate as people who care about something bigger than ourselves...something bigger than a singe country. But as we have people fighting and misguiding health-care reform out of ignorance and selfishness, as we have people still walking on the meek to rise higher on the ladder, and as we continue to focus only inward I lose a little more hope in us each day!

But I haven't given up hope yet. We were created better than this... and we can become better once again!

On Abortion And Murdering Abortionists

I actually never thought that I would write a post on the topic of abortion simply because I think that it has become a hot-button political/religious topic that has helped to polarized both the Church and America. None of the arguments we hear are fair, balanced, or productive at this point. So I simply avoid this topic. I have my thoughts and beliefs, but I also respect those that might disagree. I am not above having a civil discussion on the topic, but I can count how many of those I've encountered in my life on one hand!

WARNING: I am going to trust my readers, BUT I will break my own rule and delete inappropriate comments and even shut off comments on this post if they are not respectful. I invite constructive comments and even conversation. You are free to share your thoughts, but do so respectfully.

Anyway, something about this latest story on the death of Dr. George Tiller, gunned down while in church sets me off.

I've been sitting here watching CNN and tonight on AC360, I simply hit my breaking point. I can't believe what some people are saying publicly about this. The pure hatred and evil that pours from people's mouths is EXACTLY why I avoid this topic. Here's a great example on CNN, and interview by Drew Griffin with Dan Holman of Missionaries to the Preborn. Here's an excerpt:

Drew Griffin: When you heard the news over the weekend about the abortion doctor -- that I'm sure you are well aware of -- was shot and killed, what was your reaction?

Dan Holman: I was cheered by it because I knew that he wouldn't be killing any more babies. And I expect that would happen when all legal and moral -- legal ways of trying to stop it has been exhausted, as they have tried to prosecute him for giving abortions to people in violation of Kansas law.

Drew Griffin: When you say you were cheered by it, is there any inconsistency in your thought in that you are trying to protect life and at the same time here's this doctor who was shot and killed and in your own words you are cheered by that?

Dan Holman: No, because I'm protecting innocent life. I'm not -- and the doctor or the abortionist is guilty of murder as far as I'm concerned. It's no different for him to be killing a preborn child or a post-born child. The preborn child is entitled to the same rights, privileges and protections as a post-born child.

Drew Griffin: So, you support this killing?

Dan Holman: I don't advocate it, I don't support it. But I don't condemn it, and I believe that what he did was justifiable.

Drew Griffin: You told me earlier that he -- meaning the shooter -- he did what the law should have done?

Dan Holman: Right, exactly. The law should have protected the preborn child; and the law is supposed to execute vengeance, you know, in protecting the child. But what the man did was not execute vengeance, as far as I'm concerned. He was protecting preborn children, ones that are slated for abortion today and the future. I don't feel that what he did is vengeance.

Drew Griffin: Do you seek this fate on all doctors performing abortions out there?

Dan Holman: I believe that all abortionists are deserving of death, and they are not the only ones. There are politicians and judges and others who support this murder that are also deserving of death.

I choose this article because it is somewhat more kind than other comments I have heard. Anti-Abortionist Randall Terry was quoted on AC360 tonight as saying that, "Dr. Tiller was a mass-murder who reaped what he sowed."

But at least these two people "say" they don't condone the murder (I think that nice little semantic dance above is a particularly interesting exchange). I don't know if their other words match that lip-service, but let's give these two the benefit of the doubt. But right after Anderson quotes Terry, a close friend of the suspect was quoted saying, "[Dr. Tiller] was a rat and he needed to be killed." And that is still one of the more kind statements I've heard!

I listen to the rhetoric of hatred on this topic and I see such hypocrisy. Not to mention that it is an "issue" and we argue the issues (both sides) as if there are not real people with real hopes, dreams, worries, struggles, families, and whatever else constitutes living this life. Never mind that everyone involved in all areas of this topic are supposedly created by God and created in the image of God. We do a fantastic job of living as if we believed this to be true!

No matter where one falls on this, like most "issues", when we remove the human element from the topic, we begin this process of distancing ourselves from our own humanity. We devoid ourselves of things like empathy, compassion, grace, love, and humility. Yet these are the very things that make us supposedly "set apart" from all other creation. It's these things in part that supposedly places us at the top of the animal kingdom... yet it is instances like this that remind me just how close to animals we are.

It's time for a new rhetoric. We need to rethink how we talk about these issues, and more importantly, how we think about these issues. We need to regain our civility; it's time to find our humanity. We need to regain our imagio dei, both in ourselves, and in how we view and treat others.

I value Frederick Buechner's thoughts on abortion, and I think they really ring true with what I have seen and heard today:

Speaking against abortion someone has said, "no one should be denied access to the great feast of life," to which the rebuttal, obviously enough, is that life isn't much of a feast for children born to people who don't want them or can't afford them or are one way or another incapable of taking care of them and will one way or another probably end up abusing or abandoning them.

And yet, and yet. Who knows what treasure life may hold for even such children as those, or what treasures even such children of those may grow up and become? To bear a child even under the best of circumstances, or to abort a child even under the worst-- the risks are hair-raising either way and the results are incalculable.

How would Jesus himself decide, he who is hailed as Lord of life and yet who says that is is not he ones who, like an abortionist, can kill the body we should fear, but the ones who can kill body and soul together the way the world into which they are born can kill unloved and unwanted children (Mt. 10:28)?

There is perhaps no better illustration of the truth that in an imperfect world there are no perfect solutions. All we can do, as Luther said, is sin bravely, which is to say, (a) know that neither to have the child nor not to have the child is without the possibility of tragic consequences for everybody, yet (b) be brave in knowing also that not even that can put us beyond the forgiving love of God. (Beyond Words: Abortion Entry. Emphasis his)

Your thoughts are welcome, but keep it civil and respectful! I welcome honesty, but honesty with tact is expected.

Jesusland

IDK why but I never can get enough of this song. As you may see on the right and down, I've been listening to Ben Folds Presents University a Cappella. Below is the UNC Loreleis performing their version of the song. Hauntingly beautiful and really refocuses the song on the lyrics.


The original song is a beautiful video and song of juxtaposition in our faith, the USA, morals, priorities, and such. There is something that rings so true in this song every time I hear it! Here's the link to the original Ben Folds video!

Your thoughts?

Should Clergy Perform (LEGAL) Marriages?

I am ordained clergy and one of my favorite parts of being ordained is the unique role that I can play in officiating a wedding. I've already done 2 this year, and there's more to come. There is something so holy to me to when I walk a couple through the vows that they chose/wrote for each other as they look lovingly in each others eyes.

However, as of late there has been an interesting point being pointed out by many in the church. The latest is found on Tony Jones' blog entitled: Doug Kmiec Is Right: Clergy Should Not Perform (Legal) Marriages.

In this Tony points out some interesting and thought-provoking observations about clergy and marriage. He says:

In no other fuction as a clergyperson did I function as an extension of the government -- not when I was baptizing, burying, counseling, or communing. Only when performing a wedding did I, with the stroke of a pen, make official a legally binding contract that, in the eyes of the state, allowed that couple to enjoy certain privileges like the ability to file joint tax returns, visit one another in the hospital, and receive joint health care benefits from one of the partner's employers.....
I do find it odious that clergypersons are called upon, in this one instance, to act as agents of the state.

He goes on to conclude:

Clergy and churches, on the other hand, should have no part in legally-binding contracts. Instead, religious professionals should bless and sanctify unions and partnerships that fit within their religious traditions as part of their sacerdotal functions.

Of course part of this is brought on by the issue of same sex marriage. Douglas Kmiec on The Colbert Report (Video Below), points out that "the state has an obligation to treat all of its citizens equally and to preserve the principle of equality." In essence, he is saying that by allowing the polemic Church to decide who can and can't be married that the State is not upholding its role of equality for all citizens. This is something of which I had not considered, but has been thought-provoking to me.

By watching the video and reading all of Tony's blog, you will see that what they are suggesting is a separation of the two roles. This allows the state to practice equality, while allowing the Church to decide according to their own convictions and traditions. That would mean that different traditions would bless and marry same sex couples, and others would not. If a couple would not be recognized/blessed by their own church/tradition, then they could seek out another tradition. Either way, they would still have equal rights as heterosexual unions, because according to the State, all couples would have to go through the state for the legal union of marriage.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Douglas Kmiec
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Gay Marriage Commercial

I'm not sure this solves the problem, but it is an interesting concept. Let's face it, when it comes to marriage there is no separation of Ch. and St. When that occurs, others suffer. In this case, some churches suffer and many individuals and couples suffer. I agree that the Church and her clergy should not be agents of the State, but marriage has also become a tradition of sacrament.

I'm not sure what the right call is here, but it is a new (at least to me) thought that is interesting and will be given more thought! I do believe in equality, but in that equality it also means not forcing churches into performing marriages with which their beliefs do not mesh. How do we provide equality for all parties involved? I do not believe that there is true equality if one party is hurt by the "rights" of the other. I think on this issue it goes both ways.

In the meantime, I will continue to do weddings when asked because I truly do enjoy the unique perspective on that holy moment. I adore watching as everything that the couple feels for one another culminates into that one moment where they are pronounced married for the first time! I will continue to do it because I love the role that God plays in the blessing of those that want to seek the marriage commitment. But I will also continue to speak out for equality for all, even those that I don't agree with. Those that want to call me names and label me because I disagree with their theology, I will still fight for you. Why? 2 reasons: Because liberty for one means liberty for all. And 2, because I am called to love all and not be judgmental. And I will never forget that behind these "issues" are real human faces. People with feelings of love, pain, sorrow, etc... the same feelings that I feel. We must never remove the human element when discussing these issues or we chance perhaps losing our own humanity in the process.

These are some interesting thoughts, feel free to share yours.

Elizabeth Warren on the Economy

An interview with Elizabeth Warren on last night's Daily Show.
I thought this was a good and one of the most educational and informative interviews out of all the "experts" that have been interviewed on any network/show. Perhaps it is because I feel like finally someone is being honest with us (good and bad), as well as keen insight on the economic trends through history, and on the precipice that we are on economically RIGHT NOW!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Elizabeth Warren Pt. 1
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Elizabeth Warren Pt. 2
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

I think, like John Stewart, that after this, this is the first time I have felt a little better...can we say possibly...hopeful?

I also like Warren's text called "The Vanishing Middle Class" in the book, Ending Poverty in America: How to Restore the American Dream, which is an issue close to my heart (at least the widening gap between the wealthy and the poor). As is stated in the book, I think the issue of the emerging gap and polarization between classes and the issue of poverty go hand-in-hand...not just in America, but also on a global scale!

Any thoughts?

Who Goes Where There: A Cultural History of Heaven and Hell (Review)

When reviewing a book, there are many questions that I ask whilst reading. Some examples:

What is the author's thesis?

Does the author effectively work from/towards that thesis?

For what audience is the book best suited?

What are the negatives and positives about the work?

And what/how does this book add to the ongoing dialog of the Christian faith?

In Rebecca Price Janney's Who Goes there: A Cultural History of Heaven and Hell, I felt that her premise was 2 fold. One, to explore the attitudes of Heaven and Hell during different time periods in our nation; and two, to explore WHY the attitudes and theologies have changed over time. I have mixed opinions about whether she achieved these objectives or not. I think that she began this book with those two premises in mind, but quickly lets it give way to concluding that most people simply have poor theology on Heaven and Hell, and it has been that way for a while!

I'll begin with premise #1. Janney gives an American snapshot of the trend in our history to change our opinions on the subjects of the afterlife. She is very unbiased towards the fact that there was once a time when the majority (and I question her use of the word "majority") had "solid theology" on the subjects of Heaven and Hell. When was this time? Well it was none other than The First Great Awakening. Known for such tent/traveling preachers as Wesley, Whitefield, and Edwards, this was a booming time of what has become known as "Hell-fire and Brimstone Preaching". These preachers would come into town, set up shop, and people would flock to these events and buy whatever was being sold. I say that tongue-in-cheek, but let's think a little about the lifestyle of that time period.

Moral was low, the death-rate was high, all day was spent working (usually manual labor), and money was scarce among the masses. Who can blame people for flocking to an invitation given by one of these great orators that either 1) played on their already present fears, or 2) gave them a beacon of hope. People were wooed by these educated preachers because education was also poor in America at this time. It's not that dumb people fall for these messages, in fact I think it is that these average people longed for better understanding and education and "learned" from these people these doctrines they were pandering. Who would blame them? It makes complete sense that people thought more about Heaven and Hell at this point in time than any other since.

But for Janney, those were the "good old days". Americans have produced nothing but poor views on the subjects since. She chastises those who's understanding of Heaven is that "everyone good gets to go, except child-molesters and Hitler." I started thinking about this and I have to say, in all my years involved with churches and my time in ministry, I have NEVER once even heard a preacher say at a funeral, "well, Clive was a good guy, but since he never accepted Christ.... well, Clive's off to Hell now." It's not just the American populace and laity that think that people deserve to go to Heaven, even some of the most conservative ministers deep down do not act this out practically. Only when it is a concept from behind a pulpit, when we don't put faces to the concepts (except Hitler?!) is this taught with the utmost certainty.

But Janney doesn't mention this. And because she fails to accurately discover why most people's theology on the afterlife have changed, I feel that this book is truly not worth the read. Please understand, it has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with her theology on the subject! I don't recommend this book to anyone because she doesn't stay on her thesis, she is completely biased to the fact that any theology but her own is poor, and she truly misses out on a fantastic opportunity presented by this book. That opportunity comes with my last question I ask of a work:

What or how does this add to the ongoing conversation in our Christian faith?

I think that there are 2 thoughts that I conceived from this book.

1) There is a trend by many Christians, especially postmodern Christians, to NOT talk about the afterlife. I don't think its fair to say that theology has gotten weak, in fact, there has been some great theological thoughts on Salvation and the afterlife (both new and reclaimed) that has come out of this shift. But since the Heaven/Hell theology has been forced down many people's throats at the expense of equally important messages of Christ, there is a tendency to shy away from talking about or tackling the questions that people still have about the afterlife. We must focus on a holistic view of following Christ, and that means not ignoring any of these issues about which the Bible speaks. Janney, sort-of leads the reader to this conclusion, but sacrifices the calmer message for that of denouncing any theory of the afterlife except for the single one to which she herself adheres.

2) I think this is the more important question that Janney totally misses her opportunity on. When you have billions of people in the world, (Janney never really looks past the American geographical boundaries, but the phenomenon of which she speaks is world-wide) and over the past 100 years (or more) this idea of a different Heaven has emerged and held tight: the idea that it isn't about accepting Christ, but something bigger. That Heaven is a place that people deserve after the hell of this life, or because they are good people, or the myriad of the other beliefs out there. When are we going to let these theological concepts (and yes they can be considered theology, that one branch of Christianity does not have a patent on thinking about Heaven and Hell) dialog with more "traditional" ideas of the afterlife? If we believe that God is still at work and revealing himself...if we believe that theology is as Daniel Migliore defines it: "Faith seeking understanding," then we owe it to our own beliefs and certainties to face these challenging thoughts and questions. Who knows where it will lead us? I think we would find that these thoughts are far from "poor theology", and in fact, be shocked to find how well thought out and developed these ideas are.

When we push people and thoughts like this aside for our own "certainty", we miss out on many opportunities. I think this sums up Janney's book...a missed opportunity!

Find more reviews here!

Previous post w/ media here!

Feel free to leave any thoughts!

An Ooze.com Viral Blogger Post.

Is The Economic Crisis Good For America?

First off I want to apologize for not posting the last 2 weeks. Believe it or not, I've been doing A LOT of thinking and writing (in note form), but have not had time to really sit down and hammer out my thoughts in an a more reader friendly format. Don't worry, I have much on mind that I hope I catch up on here soon. Interestingly enough, a lot of the thoughts I have are all converging. Once I am ready to tackle these thoughts, new ideas and/or circumstances cause me to take a step back and ponder more!

---__---

The center of a lot of my thinking of late centers around the global issues that plague our world. With issues like global poverty, hunger, war, social justice, oppression, slavery, etc... always near the front of my mind, I have found myself thinking less about what we/I can do (even though that is always a big concern for me) and more about what causes and perpetuates these problems. This has a lot to do with our Bible Study Community reading and discussing Brian McLaren's Everything Must Change. In this book he tackles the systems that keep us from solving these global problems. More on that in another post.

With this at the front of my mind, along with the economic situation, I see this week's Time

Magazine with the cover story, "The End of Excess: Why This Crisis is Good For America" (click on link to read the full article). There are some interesting things pointed out.

We saw what was happening for years, for decades, but we ignored it or shrugged it off, preferring to imagine that we weren't really headed over the falls.....Even smart, proudly rational people engaged in magical thinking, acting as if the new power of the Internet and its New Economy would miraculously make everything copacetic again. We all clapped our hands and believed in fairies.
The popular culture tried to warn us. For 20 years, we've had Homer Simpson's spot-on caricature of the quintessential American: childish, irresponsible, willfully oblivious, fat and happy. And more recently we winced at the ultra-Homerized former earthlings of WALL•E.

The article goes on to say:

We are like substance abusers coming off a long bender, hitting bottom (we can only hope) and taking the messes we've made as a sobering wake-up call. I've always thought many of the 12 Steps were superfluous, so here is a streamlined, secularized Three-Step Program for America — Bubbleholics Anonymous? — to start getting back on track:

• Admit that we are powerless over addiction to easy money and cheap fossil fuel and living large — that our lives had become unmanageable.

• Believe that we can, individually and collectively, restore ourselves to sanity and normal living.

• Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves and be entirely ready to remove our defects of character.

Unfortunately, those steps are only a start, but the article shines with hope...at least for some people. Others (the addicts that are in denial or want to remain addicted to our "prosperity, security, and equity systems" (EMC)) will find this a judgement of damnation in their lives. For me, although this economic crisis hurts, (I like my comfortable consumerist life), I see a hope that this is the breaking down of those addictive systems. I hope that this helps break us out of our collective greed bubble and will help us focus on the role we, as the wealthiest nation in the world, can play in solving these global crises.

We've already seen it. When gas prices get too high we start looking into more affordable vehicles and learn about our carbon footprint and begin to focus on the environment. However, as gas prices dropped, we once again looked longingly at the newest H2. No, our addictions are much deeper and a bigger intervention is required. Perhaps an economic meltdown is the kind of intervention we need! Trust me... it hurts me to say that. It also scares the living snot out of me!

However, we can do it...."Yes we can!" We can break free of our suicidal systems and addictive habits and begin to see past ourselves into a bigger world; a world where there are a LOT of issues that we need to deal with. Its not just about helping others, its about helping ourselves. Its about working for the good of the collective, not just working for our own good.

Poverty, AIDS, Hunger, War and Peace, Social Justice, Equality, the Environment, Etc...

These are American issues. By that I mean these are issues about which Americans should be concerned. By ignoring these issues and denying "the American dream" ideal to the world, we have lost our own identity as a great country!

These are also spiritual issues! While we've been in our own secure little bubble where our biggest concern is safeguarding ourselves at the expense of others, we've been losing our very soul! We would sell the very essence of who we are...who we are created to be. All for excess. How? Because we are all connected. we are connected to the abused, malnourished, mistreated, and alienated human-beings that we've all been ignoring for far too long. We are all created in the image of God...referred to as the children of God. Yet we've been ignoring our own siblings.

This is why I see hope in this article. Don't question my patriotism, I love America! But perhaps this is the kick in the pants we all need to see past ourselves and to begin living for something other than ourselves...something BIGGER than ourselves!

What are your thoughts?

Hope is Crazy!

Brett Dennen - Make You Crazy (Feat Femi Kuti) 

You Know, It`s hard to be Yourself,
Free Yourself, To see Yourself,
When all around You there are Lies just to get You,
Spies just to get You, To Buy so they can get You

There are Cameras in the sky, Lasers in our Living rooms,
There are Wolves watching wearing Sheep`s Costumes

It`s Enough to make You go crazy (woah)
It`s Enough to make You Mad
It`s Enough to make You go crazy (woah)
And, I`m amazed I Haven`t yet

Isn`t It, A Shame The way We cheat Each other, 

Treat Each other, Beat Each other??

It`s, A Shame The way We use One other, 

Abuse One another
And, Screw One another, It`s true.

They will Lock You up in Prison, But They won`t call it slavery, 

There are stolen Children raised and Trained in Armies

It`s Enough to make You go crazy (woah)
It`s Enough to make You Mad
It`s Enough to make You go crazy (woah)
And I`m amazed I haven`t yet

Don`t hesitate to speak Your Mind? (speak Your Mind)
Never hesitate to speak Your Heart? (speak Your Heart)
They`ll call You crazy, When You speak Your Mind? (When You speak Your Mind)
So never, Never hesitate? (never hesitate)

`cause It`s Enough to make You go crazy? (woah)
It`s Enough to make You Mad
It`s Enough to make You go crazy (woah)
And, I`m amazed I haven`t yet

__________

This guy is worth checking out!  If you haven't already, Brett has become one of my fav. artists over his 3 albums.  He sings a LOT about things I truly care about: 

Hope

Love

Acceptance (of yourself & each other)

Awareness of the atrocities going on around us, and how we're in a position do actually better this world.  

Check Him Out!!!!!

"Ain't No Reason"

Becoming Christian Vs. Being Christian

I've had many, many conversations centering around what the biggest thing is that makes them cringe when thinking about their past church experiences. A majority of the time it has to do with the over-used and abused message that we're all sinners, going to hell unless we say a prayer of salvation and accept Jesus as our "lord and Savior".  Now, before the hateful comments start coming, give ear to WHY this message is like fingernails on a chalkboard for many.

Let me begin with a story of my own.  As I posted recently, I lost my grandfather a little over a week ago.  He was a fantastic person with a life full of stories.  To me, he was the embodiment of what living looks like.  Yet at his funeral very little about his life was mentioned.  Now I disclaim that I had no say in the funeral, that was for my grandmother, mom, and uncles to prepare.  The pastor was placed in charge of everything, and so he did what he thought best.  I am not complaining nor criticizing...simply using this as an example.  

There was one story told of my grandfather.  The pastor did a fantastic job talking to the audience/family about the allowing their emotions to run their course.  But the majority of the time was the same old sermon that you can hear in most any church in America on any Sunday morning.  Rather than being about my grandfather, it was more about trying to appeal to everyone else to make haste and become a Christian so that you will know where you are going when you die.  

I know of many churches where this happens at every funeral the pastor presides over at their church.  I know of many more churches where this is the ONLY sermon/teaching that you will ever hear on a Sunday.  It gets old.  It loses its effectiveness.  I dare say, overexposure dilutes the enormity and significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus.  I dare say that even more, it leaves those that have become a Christian in this limbo because they are never taught what to do with that after, because each Sunday they have to hear the same message.  For many pastors its only about "getting them in and getting them saved".  Well, that doesn't cut it for the emerging world-view.  They want more!  They want to learn what it means to LIVE as a Christian.

Think about modern Christianity's focus in America.  It has, for the most part, been about becoming a Christian.  Now however, people want to experience the rich, active lives that faith brings them.  When these people read and study the teachings of Christ, they see less and less of a focus on becoming a Christian, and a huge focus on living a life of faith and vitality.  The focus has shifted from becoming Christian, to being Christian!

However, this is hard for churches to change, because the focus goes far deeper than the inability to prepare a different sermon each week. Take a look at our iconography.  The main icon of Christianity is that of the Cross.  The cross was an icon for the Romans and their subordinates long before Christians adopted it.  It was a symbol of pain, torture, empirical rule, conformity, and ultimately, death.  The symbols that the earliest Christians used was not the symbol of the Cross, rather they were symbols of life like the shepherd, the Ichthys (fish), and the lamb.  There are writings as early as the second century that speak of the use of the cross, but many historians agree that it wasn't until 326CE that the sign of the cross became a common and universalized symbol of Christianity.

Why 326CE? Because of the rule of Constantine who united Rome under the Cross.  In fact, Constantine took up the cross after his conversion as his banner of war.  The Cross has always meant "death".  When we hang the crosses in our churches, we are centering our subconscious and subliminal on the message of death.  I know that the message of the death and resurrection of Christ (this is why protestants adopted the empty cross icon over the crucifix) has been central, but we've also taken out the signs and thus the message of life; the lessons of living!

People today see enough suffering and death in the world.  They want a message of hope.  And while most Christians would agree that the story of Christ's death is essentially one of hope, the stock portrayal of that story is one of condemnation, sin, death, hell, and overall: hopelessness. These "fear tactics" overshadow any message of hope in the story.  There is a hunger for a new way to live.  A way to live out hope in our everyday lives.  A way to actually DO something about the pain and suffering in our world, which Jesus did indeed address far more than he did the message of death.  We are leaving people behind when we focus our attention only on the one message.  Rather, we should be modeling our churches after Christ; presenting a holistic message of practical living.  Living that involves love, peace, forgiveness, etc... 

People are hungry enough, and if they see the vitality of others living and helping, they will seek out how to become Christian, but are more interested and affected by being Christian first!

Thoughts?

(The picture above is of a Tau Cross, the earliest representations of the cross in Christianity.  Now best known in correlation with St. Francis of Assisi)

Jesus Sing-A-Longs: More Than Just A Fun Tune?

This is from artist and blogger David Hayward entitled Inaugural Hopes.

It really caught my attention especially as much hate-filled language as we have had floating around in the last year in America. Our politics and religion seem to have become more vocal about their prejudices.  

We place people in nice neat categories such as a race, and think that this one specific category defines who they are.  Yet people are people... they extend beyond and even defy catagorization.  Yet, we label them as this or that in order to take the human element out of our hatred, fear, and judgement!  Its just easier that way.  

Yet...lest we forget, "Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world"!  We are ALL God's children regardless of race, creed, sexuality, religion, etc...

The only label that truly defines us all is the title of "human".  

I wonder if we should add a few more lines to the verse of the song? It has failed to keep up with our growing prejudices.  "For God so loved the world" surely exceeds simply primary colors!

Thoughts?

Black Friday Gets Darker

I saw this sotry entitled:
As store worker died, shoppers kept on
on the front of today's N&O. It really saddened me.

The Friday after thanksgiving supposedly marks the official beginning of the Christmas season. Even in the secular understanding of the holiday, it is supposed to be a time of goodwill and glad tidings. This year, Black Friday captured neither goodwill or glad tidings. However, it captured our greed, selfishness, and self-obsession quite well.

Sad.

There is also a good post HERE by Neale Donald Walsh on Beliefnet.

Same Sex Marriage Blogalogue

An interesting discussion Over at Beliefnet between Tony Jones (Emergent Church) and Rod Dreher (Conservative politics and religion blogger) on the issue of Same Sex Marriage. Obviously this is a hot topic after the prop. 8 vote.

I am not promoting one over the other as the discussion continues (it will continue over several weeks), but give ear to both writers and the comments. It is a great resource that you can participate in...just please do so respectfully on all sides!

check Tony's first post here, Rod's is linked at the end of Tony's post, and at the top of this post.

feel free to leave your thoughts here too if you like!



A taste of the discussion!

Advent Conspiracy?!

A link worth checking out at the end of the video. To think that following Christ and ALL of his teachings along with his life's example could still change the world? A stretch? Perhaps.... or maybe not!

Loss Of Focus?

I found these thoughts and news interesting from Adam over at POMOMUSINGS. Concerning James Dobson and Focus on the Family's priorities of late.

(Original Source)

It’s good to see that Dr. Dobson and the crew in Colorado Springs at Focus on
the Family really does put families first…well, maybe not those whose family members actually work at Focus on the Family. There was an interesting article in The Colorado Independent entitled “More
layoffs at Focus on the Family” that told the story about how 202 jobs will
be cut from Focus on the Family. However, the article focused on how Focus on
the Family was one of the largest out-of-state financial backers for Prop 8 in
California. In fact, the organization gave $539,000 in cash and $83,000 of
non-monetary support to the fight to “protect marriage.” Over half a million
dollars spent to “protect” families from the dangers and evils of gay marriage.
Unfortunately, they didn’t do a good job of protecting their own; how 202
families will be suffering a loss and needing to find work elsewhere. Sure, the
current state of the economy is playing a major role in these layoffs, I’m sure.
However, the articles points out that this may simply be a good example of the
true priorities of Focus on the Family, and other like organizations. Are they
really trying to put families first? It’d be interesting to hear from some of
those who are going to be laid off, especially after Dobson and crew spent their
salaries trying to prevent gays in another state from getting hitched.

I ask myself, did they lose focus, or consciously decide that a loss to that many families was worth defeating prop. 8 (the same employees that helped fight that ironically enough). IDK, as someone struggling in this economic crisis with job security, I guess my priorities would have been a little different! Just my 2 cents tho... (which is worth absolutely nothing in this economy)

Your thoughts?

Poverty Wordle

see it bigger here

God Bless America

Saw this as a new PostSecret and it rips my heart out.

Back

Front

$700 Bil. Bailout. I'm sure that this person will have their groceries delivered to their door next week!

The Greed Creed

From jonbirch @ ASBO.
Your thoughts?

The Free Market god

Steven Colbert's "The Word" from Monday night after the failed financial bailout. I thought this very interesting. I mean we NEVER equate our consumerist free-market with the Christian faith... right? Enjoy:) (Actual "The Word" begins @ 2:12 into it).

Palin, Position, Piety, & Politics

What do all of these things have in common? The Religious/political Conservative agenda in this election.

This entry is not a critique on Gov. Sarah Palin, rather, a critique of the inconsistencies of many Christians (mainly those calling themselves "Conservative" or the "Religious Right") who have jumped on the Palin Bandwagon. It is interesting to me that these people who are now heralding in a female VP (and possible leader of this nation if something were to happen to McCain) are so hypocritical. These are people who won't let women lead their churches but will back a woman VP. This is the group that lauds Stay-at-home moms, yet heralds a mom with 5 kids (and a grandchild on the way) who is going for the second most ambitious political position in America.

Don't get me wrong, I personally have no problem with any of these things that Palin has done. I applaud ambitious women, and support their career oriented goals. But I also support ordained women pastors, and don't believe that every woman is supposed to be a stay-at-home mother. I applaud her response to her daughter's commitment to her pregnancy, but I also don't promote abstinence only education.

In a post today in Slate Magazine, there was a post in the section: xx factor xxtra: Women writing about politics, etc. Entitled: What Scarlet Letter?Why Christian conservatives have only admiration for Sarah Palin. By Hanna Rosin

This entry brings out some very good questions/thoughts on the
inconsitencies of those religious concervitives that are in the political
game. I suggest reading the whole article for context, but here is a
section:

Some of this reaction can be explained just by listing the religious
right's priorities in order. In the pantheon of family values, avoiding abortion
sits at the top, above marriage or staying home to raise your children.
Conservatives have spent the last 30 years seeding the country with crisis
pregnancy centers dedicated to convincing young women not to abort their babies,
regardless of their personal situations. The fact that Britney Spears' younger
sister made the same decision to keep her pregnancy at 17 and that Juno was a
hit movie only adds an unexpected glamour to the choice.

But this explanation takes you only so far. What's missing from the
conservative reaction is still remarkable. Just 15 years ago, a different
Republican vice president was ripping into the creators of Murphy Brown for
flaunting a working woman who chose to become a single mother. This time around,
there's no stigma, no shame, no sin attached to what Dan Quayle would once have
mockingly called Bristol Palin's "lifestyle" choices. In fact, so cavalier are
conservatives about Sarah Palin's wreck of a home life that they make the rest
of us look stuffy and slow-witted by comparison. "I think a hard-working,
well-organized C.E.O. type can handle it very well," said Phyllis Schlafly, of
the Eagle Forum.

Suddenly it's the Obamas, with their oh-so-perfect
marriage and their Dick Van Dyke in the evenings and their two boringly innocent
young girls, who seem like the fuddy-duddies.
What happened? How did the
culture war get flipped on its head?

It amazes me that those people that abhor teen pregnancies, and teach abstinence only Sexual Education, NOW respond lovingly saying, "At least she didn't choose to abort the child." I agree that I am glad she is keeping the child, and that Palin didn't abort her DS child... But I also don't have a hierarchy of sins (at least I try very hard not to do so). I try to be consistent. But then again, I also believe to be "pro-life" means you can't be in favor of the death penalty either. So what do I know?

I am not a political expert... But I do love ANY situation (and it happens a lot in the political arena) where these people can change their colors to maintain their grasp around the throat of America. These people that are being interviewed saying the proper response to Palin's daughter is to respond with love and compassion.... I am so there with you! But these are the first people to kick a person out of a church for being gay, or responding to the homosexual community with "love and compassion".

This is the group of people that says a strong family has the woman at home with the kids, and the dad providing for the family. But here they are getting air-time saying how wonderful it is to have a woman with the "same values as me". And, as Rosin mentions in her article, the candidate's demonstrating the "core family systems" are now the ones at which we should be shaking our fingers.

I wish Palin luck in her career. She is going to be a fighter, and a charismatic contender on her ticket. I simply question a "faith" or "religion" that changes its "core values" in order to gain/maintain position and power...esp. a religion that spouts humility and sacrifice as the basis of its beliefs.

And they call postmoderns "wishy-washy" in their beliefs!

your thoughts?