liberalpastor in burnsville

Sunday Night Mass

2011-08-15T08:06:00.004-05:00

Yesterday evening I took my mother-in-law Mary, mother of my wife Mary Ann, to Mary Mother Catholic Church in Burnsville. There is something about Mary in Catholicism.

This was my second visit there with my mother-in-law this summer. She has been out for both weddings and has been a great help so I am happy to take her to mass. Mary Mother Catholic Church is the more theologically progressive of the two Catholic parishes in Burnsville. It is reflected in their active social justice ministry and their (carefully worded) prayers of inclusion. The music is very good. Yesterday the worship leadership - altar girl, worship leader, scripture reader - were all female. The priest, of course, was not. In the two times I have heard him deliver a homily it is obvious that he puts a lot of time into the message, which is not always the case in Catholic, or Protestant, services.

The gospel reading yesterday was from Matthew 15:

Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon.Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.’ But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, ‘Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.’ He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.’ Then Jesus answered her, ‘Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.’ And her daughter was healed instantly.

This is one of those "hard" sayings of Jesus. He appears to callously dismiss the gentile women's plea for help. It is only her persistence and smart comeback that gains her a genuine hearing. This is not a very welcoming Jesus.

I thought it was interesting how the priest handled this passage. It was a very Catholic message on the rewards of persistence in faith. Jesus' initial brush-off was just a test, giving the Canaanite woman an opportunity to work for her reward. He likened it to his 91 year old mother doing a jigsaw puzzle. He said she loves to work on big, difficult puzzles, plugging away at it for days and even weeks, looking for the satisfaction of the completed puzzle at the end. So it is with faith. If we keep plugging away at good works we can be sure we will get our reward at the end.

He talked about prayer in the same way. We need to keep praying with the confidence that God will reward our efforts with an answer. Although, he said two different times, we should not expect miracles but healing. Healing, he said, is what we should pray for. He didn't define those terms but I thought it was interesting that he made the distinction and assume that at other times he has spelled out what would be a fairly progressive theological distinction.

Still, it was a very Catholic message on faith and works. Traditional Protestantism would trumpet God's grace over works, but then remind us that although God's grace is sure we can never be sure that we have it. But our works are a visible sign that we probably do. In the hands of an unscrupulous Protestant minister it is a back-handed way to keep the flock coming back for more.

There is something to be said for a more straight-forward and fair earn your way into heaven plan of action. If you can get past the creed, the all-male priesthood, the theology of the mass itself, etc. I can't, but the couple hundred who were present for both services I attended obviously can. I am happy for them and for my mother-in-law that they find it meaningful.

Bob Herbert Signs Off Saying We Have Lost Our Way

2011-03-26T07:09:00.004-05:00

Bob Herbert writes his last column for the NYTimes today and gives voice to my thoughts about our plunge into another war while millions in the US are unemployed:

So here we are pouring shiploads of cash into yet another war, this time in Libya, while simultaneously demolishing school budgets, closing libraries, laying off teachers and police officers, and generally letting the bottom fall out of the quality of life here at home.

Welcome to America in the second decade of the 21st century. An army of long-term unemployed workers is spread across the land, the human fallout from the Great Recession and long years of misguided economic policies. Optimism is in short supply. The few jobs now being created too often pay a pittance, not nearly enough to pry open the doors to a middle-class standard of living.

Arthur Miller, echoing the poet Archibald MacLeish, liked to say that the essence of America was its promises. That was a long time ago. Limitless greed, unrestrained corporate power and a ferocious addiction to foreign oil have led us to an era of perpetual war and economic decline. Young people today are staring at a future in which they will be less well off than their elders, a reversal of fortune that should send a shudder through everyone.

The U.S. has not just misplaced its priorities. When the most powerful country ever to inhabit the earth finds it so easy to plunge into the horror of warfare but almost impossible to find adequate work for its people or to properly educate its young, it has lost its way entirely.

There is no political will - even from Democrats - to spend money at home to bring down the unemployment rate and tackle the countless number of problems we have here. "We are broke" is the constant refrain. And yet there is barely a murmur of dissent as we commit ourselves to spending billions on another war of choice. It is hard not to agree with Bob Herbert: we have lost our way.

It's Time to Stop Playing the Killing Game

2011-03-25T13:31:00.003-05:00

Donald McCartin is a retired Superior Court Judge in California. He was named to bench by Governor Jerry Brown in 1978. During his tenure on the bench he became, by his own admission, known as a "hanging judge" for the number of people he sentenced to death row. As he watches another go-around with Jerry Brown as governor, he thinks the time has come, for moral and economic reasons, for the Governor to end the death penalty in California:

I watch today as Gov. Brown wrestles with the massive debt that is suffocating our state and hear him say he doesn't want to "play games." But I cringe when I learn that not playing games amounts to cuts to kindergarten, cuts to universities, cuts to people with special needs — and I hear no mention of the simple cut that would save hundreds of millions of dollars, countless man-hours, unimaginable court time and years of emotional torture for victim's family members waiting for that magical sense of "closure" they've been falsely promised with death sentences that will never be carried out.

There is actually, I've come to realize, no such thing as "closure" when a loved one is taken. What family members must find is reconciliation with the reality of their loss, and that can begin the minute the perpetrator is sent to a prison he will never leave. But to ask them to endure the years of being dragged through the courts in pursuit of the ultimate punishment is a cruel lie.

It's time to stop playing the killing game. Let's use the hundreds of millions of dollars we'll save to protect some of those essential services now threatened with death. Let's stop asking people like me to lie to those victim's family members.

The Followers of Gandhi and Jesus

2011-03-25T12:54:00.004-05:00

Geoffrey Ward begins his review of a new book on Gandhi, Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India By Joseph Lelyveld, with this telling observation:

Some years ago, the British writer Patrick French visited the Sabarmati ashram on the outskirts of Ahmedabad in the Indian state of Gujarat, the site from which Mahatma Gandhi led his salt march to the sea in 1930. French was so appalled by the noisome state of the latrines that he asked the ashram secretary whose job it was to clean them.

A sweeper woman stopped by for an hour a day, the functionary explained, but afterward things inevitably became filthy again.

But wasn’t it a central tenet of the Mahatma’s teachings that his followers clean up after themselves?

“We all clean the toilets together, on Gandhiji’s birthday,” the secretary answered, “as a symbol to show that we understand his message.”

Reminds me a lot of the followers of Jesus.

The Anabaptist Catholic Witness

2011-03-25T12:27:00.002-05:00

Over the National Catholic Reporter Michael Sean Winters was musing about recent polling data that shows Catholics - even those who attend Mass at least weekly and who tend to be more conservative on social issues - warming to the idea of recognition for civil marriage for gays. What should be the response of the Church:

The Catholic Church should not bury its head in the sand as Donohue (Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Civil Rights) seems to want it to do. Our approach to this issue, like our approach to many issues in this increasingly secular culture, must be to foster what Pope Benedict has called “creative minorities” in which we live what we believe and hope the beauty our lives evidence will attract others. Allowing ourselves to be lumped with anti-gay bigots is not the answer. We must ask ourselves: Why do others not see the beauty of a lifelong marital commitment? Why do others not see Christ as a part of their marriage? And, why should we be in the business of trying to prevent gays and lesbians from achieving some level of legal stability and protection for their unions? These are not easy questions, even though the loudest voices on both sides of the issue treat them, if they treat them at all, as easily answered.

Benedict's "creative minorities" sounds very anabaptist. It is a recognition that our most telling witness is the witness of our lives. If our lives radiate the beauty of love, sacrifice and commitment then we may find that we will have something that is attractive to offer to the world. The power we have in this way of living is not the power of being able to legislate our way but the power of authenticity which is the only power that ultimately changes hearts and minds. This is, in my opinion, the very best of the anabaptist witness. So it is interesting to hear it being espoused by the Pope.

Change We Can't Believe In

2011-03-25T11:31:00.004-05:00

Unfortunately I find myself pretty much in agreement with this comparison by Stephen Walt -- now of Harvard and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace -- of the difference between the liberal interventionists leading us into war with Libya and the neocons who led us into war in Iraq:

The only important intellectual difference between neoconservatives and liberal interventionists is that the former have disdain for international institutions (which they see as constraints on U.S. power), and the latter see them as a useful way to legitimate American dominance. Both groups extol the virtues of democracy, both groups believe that U.S. power -- and especially its military power -- can be a highly effective tool of statecraft. Both groups are deeply alarmed at the prospect that WMD might be in the hands of anybody but the United States and its closest allies, and both groups think it is America's right and responsibility to fix lots of problems all over the world. Both groups consistently over-estimate how easy it will be to do this, however, which is why each has a propensity to get us involved in conflicts where our vital interests are not engaged and that end up costing a lot more than they initially expect.

So if you're baffled by how Mr. "Change You Can Believe In" morphed into Mr. "More of the Same," you shouldn't really be surprised. George Bush left in disgrace and Barack Obama took his place, but he brought with him a group of foreign policy advisors whose basic world views were not that different from the people they were replacing. I'm not saying their attitudes were identical, but the similarities are probably more important than the areas of disagreement. Most of the U.S. foreign policy establishment has become addicted to empire, it seems, and it doesn't really matter which party happens to be occupying Pennsylvania Avenue.

So where does this leave us? For starters, Barack Obama now owns not one but two wars. He inherited a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, and he chose to escalate instead of withdrawing. Instead of being George Bush's mismanaged blunder, Afghanistan became "Obama's War." And now he's taken on a second, potentially open-ended military commitment, after no public debate, scant consultation with Congress, without a clear articulation of national interest, and in the face of great public skepticism. Talk about going with a gut instinct.

Should I Buy a New Car or Go on an Expensive Vacation

2011-03-24T16:38:00.004-05:00

Well, the answer for me is neither. Both my kids are getting married this summer. But if you have a choice and want to know which will ultimately make you happier, Professor Daniel Gilbert, author of Stumbling On Happiness answers the question in an Atlantic article and says you should pick the vacation:

We favor objects because we think that experiences can be fun but leave us with nothing to show for them. But that turns out to be a good thing. Experiences have the nice property of going away. Cars need repairs, they rust in our driveway, and they ultimately disappoint us enough that we sell them and get new ones. Experiences are like good relatives that stay for a while and then leave. Objects are like relatives who move in and stay past their welcome.

Another reason why experiences beat objects is that experiences are usually social. If you go to Europe you will almost surely go with someone, whereas if you buy the car, you will probably drive it by yourself. We are social animals, and the best predictor of happiness is the goodness and extent of our social relationships. Experiences are more likely to be shared than objects are.

A couple other Q&A's from the article:

You write, "unfettered access to peak experiences may actually be counterproductive." Explain that.

Imagine making love to the person of your dreams. That will be a good day. But the day after will not. The good thing about peak experiences is that they make us happy while we are having them, but the bad thing is that they then serve as a standard of comparison for all the experiences that follow. When researchers looked at lottery winners, they weren't happier than a control group, but they did take less pleasure in everyday events. The big happiness rush you get when you receive the big check is gone pretty soon, and then when good things happen you find yourself saying, "That was nice but it wasn't like the day I won the lottery."

That doesn't mean you should refuse peak experiences. It just means you should ask yourself, "If I have this peak experience, will it make the rest of my life dull and unsatisfying?"

What's the most controversial suggestion in the paper?

If one thing surprises most folks, it might be the suggestion to buy many small things rather than fewer big things. If you asked people if they'd prefer an ice cream cone every Monday for the next few weeks or a great meal at a French restaurant, most would probably take the great meal gift certificate. But it turns out that the frequency of positive events is a better predictor of happiness than intensity of those positive events.

I prefer beer to ice cream but it makes sense to me. And I rarely come away from an expensive restaurant satisfied that the meal or experience was worth the price.

How Great Entrepreneurs Think

2011-03-24T16:12:00.003-05:00

Saras Sarasvathy, a professor at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, has been studying entrepreneurs and how they think. Her conclusion:

Sarasvathy concluded that master entrepreneurs rely on what she calls effectual reasoning. Brilliant improvisers, the entrepreneurs don't start out with concrete goals. Instead, they constantly assess how to use their personal strengths and whatever resources they have at hand to develop goals on the fly, while creatively reacting to contingencies. By contrast, corporate executives—those in the study group were also enormously successful in their chosen field—use causal reasoning. They set a goal and diligently seek the best ways to achieve it...

Would you describe Jesus as a master entrepreneur or a corporate executive? Was he developing goals on the fly or did he have it all planned out from the beginning? At what point did he see a cross in his future? Was this always the short-term goal on the way to resurrection and a church? Or did he start out with other goals - say forming a renewal movement - and eventually come to see his own martyrdom as necessary in order to jump-start something bigger? Was the cross a calculated risk or a painful but necessary step on the way to a global organization?

I'd say he was closer to entrepreneur.

It's Snowing Again

2011-03-23T09:22:00.004-05:00

These goldfinches are as happy about it as I am.

Saving the Jefferson Bible

2011-03-21T08:17:00.004-05:00

In my message yesterday I was talking about how I have come to understand the stories of Jesus the healer and exorcist. I mentioned that there was a time when I practiced the Thomas Jefferson method of reading the Bible. I cut out - figuratively - all the stories I didn't like. I just ignored them.

Jefferson, of course, literally cut them out. Or more precisely he cut out the passages of the Bible he did like and created his own private Bible. This morning I saw a Washington Post article reprinted in the Star Tribune about Smithsonian Institution attempts to save the Bible, which is apparently falling apart:

For more than 116 years, the Jefferson Bible, as it is known, has been one of the iconic possessions of the Smithsonian Institution. Now a group of conservators and curators has removed the 86 pages from the original binding and is examining every inch to stabilize its condition, study its words and craftsmanship, and guarantee that future generations can learn more about the artifact and the man.

The pages, with verses glued on each side, are brittle and stiff -- 90 percent show some damage. Jefferson used a mix of animal glue and starch as an adhesive. The handsewn binding is tight, making the spine rigid.

On one table in the basement workshop, Jefferson's title page for "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" is elaborately written in his clear hand.

"There are 12 different types of paper and seven different types of ink," said Janice Stagnitto Ellis, the museum's paper conservator. "We took tiny samples of ink from the ruled line. The paper fibers are weak."

Jefferson was meticulous, she said, leaving precise gaps in each book as he removed the verses that supported his religious and moral beliefs. He used two English texts, as well as two French and two Greek and Latin, arranging his selections in chronological order over four columns.

He was also an editor. "Apparently he didn't like the construction here of 'for as in a day,' so he edited out the 'as,'" explained Ellis, pointing with a silver micro-spatula to the little square where he had eliminated the word.

"This is a private document he created for himself," said Harry Rubenstein, the chair of the museum's political history division. "He never sold it because he didn't want it to be public. He wanted to avoid bringing back the arguments that he was anti-Christian."

Gay Marriage Support Crosses Threshold

2011-03-18T14:39:00.003-05:00

Looking around for good news on this Friday I see these results from a new ABC News/Washington Post poll:

More than half of Americans say it should be legal for gays and lesbians to marry, a first in nearly a decade of polls by ABC News and The Washington Post.

This milestone result caps a dramatic, long-term shift in public attitudes. From a low of 32 percent in a 2004 survey of registered voters, support for gay marriage has grown to 53 percent today. Forty-four percent are opposed, down 18 points from that 2004 survey.

Committed couples and stable families make for healthier children and a stronger society. Whether those couples are gay or straight makes no difference. You would think that every pro-family/children Christian would support gay marriage, wouldn't you?

It's Off to War We Go

2011-03-18T13:58:00.004-05:00

Again. Hi Ho. Hi Ho. No Congressional debate needed. No clear definition of what the end game is, how success will be defined. (At least I didn't hear it from the President's remarks.) Just a promise from the President that there will be no troops on the ground in Libya. But we have lots of high-tech technologies and weapons to use and that military-industrial complex to feed. So it's off to the shores of Tripoli we go, again.

Rick Santorum on Separation of Church and State

2011-03-15T17:11:00.003-05:00

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (not a proud part of my home state history) was in Massachusetts speaking to a group of Catholics and he not only ripped former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for his health care law but he also ripped former President Kennedy, also from Massachusetts, for saying that he supported separation of church and state:

Santorum decried what he called the growing secularization of American public life.

He traced the problem to Kennedy's 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, in which Kennedy – then a candidate for president - sought to allay concerns about his Catholicism by declaring, "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

Santorum, who is Catholic, said he was "frankly appalled" by Kennedy's remark.

"That was a radical statement," Santorum said, and it did "great damage."

"We're seeing how Catholic politicians, following the first Catholic president, have followed his lead, and have divorced faith not just from the public square, but from their own decision-making process," Santorum said.

Might it be possible that President Kennedy's faith was actually informing his decision-making? Might it possible that not all Catholic politicians share the same faith perspective as Santorum? Might it be possible here that the real radical is Santorum, who also added this little bit of historical commentary about another President:

"Jefferson is spinning in his grave," he added.

When Jefferson became President he discontinued the practice started by his predecessors George Washington and John Adams of proclaiming days of fasting and thanksgiving. He wrote this famous letter to the Danbury Baptists in response to their concerns about religious establishment:

Mr. President

To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.

(signed) Thomas Jefferson
Jan.1.1802.

Wanna guess whose statements about church and state really make Jefferson spin in his grave?

When Liberation Movements Go Viral

2011-03-07T09:27:00.006-06:00

One of the interesting scholarly and blog conversations that never ends is how much if any of the gospel accounts of Jesus life are based on things Jesus actually did or said. How much can we really know? There is one kind of this conversation that takes place on a level that debates whether Jesus even existed. You can read some of that conversation here and here if you are interested. I enjoy reading the posts but confess that even as a very liberal pastor who cares about historical accuracy I am hopelessly biased on this issue.

Recently, though, I have been reading Richard Horsley's book Jesus and the Powers: Conflict, Covenant, and the Hope of the Poor. and have been interested to see Horsley address Jesus' "fame". Our earliest gospel Mark states in the very first chapter that Jesus "fame began to spread throughout the surrounding region of Galilee." Is this true? Is it possible? How popular was Jesus? How much of a "scene" did he make? How much of a movement did he have?

Here is Horsley:

Toward the beginning of Mark's story, Jesus' mission appears to be "headquartered" in the village of Capernaum, at the northern end of the Sea of Galilee, along the frontier with Herod Philip's territory from the east. From this base, the mission and communication spread into surrounding villages. Mark's Gospel thus paints a picture different from the normally limited communication from village to village in agrarian societies: the interaction among Jesus, the disciples, and the responsive people generated an expanding network of communication around the countryside.

...In these early accounts of the mission, Jesus delegates disciples to spread the proclamation and manifestation of the kingdom into other villages, where they are to work closely and stay with the people. Jesus' mission thus involved an intentional orchestration of communication across village lines. Though exaggerated, Mark's representations of rapidly expanding communication at least partly what was happening in Jesus' mission itself.

Horsley cites a book I haven't read, Domination and the Arts of Resistance by James C. Scott, as evidence of how "rumor" spreads among disparate communities and inflames hope and emboldens beaten down peasants to take action as they hear news of resistance and victory from other communities.

Horsley thinks that this is what was happening with the Jesus movement in peasant villages around Galilee. His kingdom movement reminded the people that the were (or could choose to live) under the direct rule of God not Rome or the temple aristocracy. It inspired hope and action in the form of sharing of goods and healing both physical and spiritual. The news about Jesus was going out through intentional mission and through the peasant rumor mill. The Jesus movement, Horsley suggests, was real; it was spreading; and hence it was quickly and correctly perceived to be a genuine threat by the religious and political authorities.

I find Horsley's explanation plausible. It could have happened this way. I certainly resonate with his description of Jesus' movement as being centered around spiritual/political/economic liberation.

I also can't help but make the connection between Horsley's description of the surprising and almost explosive spread of the Jesus movement and events in the middle east right now. If you wanted to see evidence of how a liberation movement can spread rapidly and seem to come out of nowhere we are watching it happen before our eyes. I keep asking 'why now'? What has changed between one year ago or five years ago and today? Certainly the technology that has fueled the spread of "rumor" has penetrated these societies enough to make it possible to keep the news flowing and to make it nearly impossible to suppress from above. But there also has to be an element of frustration and anger and hope reaching a certain critical mass where it just needs to find an outlet. The good news about this movement is that it has been mostly peaceful, making a mockery of those who equate Islam with violence. Even better some of the government response has been peaceful. Alas this is not true everywhere.

Still, to watch a movement go 'viral' in this manner is a reminder that it really does happen this way. It very well could have happened this way with Jesus.

Teachers Need to Sacrifice Like Wall Street Bankers

2011-03-04T12:38:00.003-06:00

This Jon Steward segment is priceless:

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

How Should We Fix Our Budget Problems

2011-03-02T18:27:00.004-06:00

A new NBC/WSJ poll asks Americans to make choices about how to fill the hole in our budget:

The most popular: placing a surtax on federal income taxes for those who make more than $1 million per year (81 percent said that was acceptable), eliminating spending on earmarks (78 percent), eliminating funding for weapons systems the Defense Department says aren’t necessary (76 percent) and eliminating tax credits for the oil and gas industries (74 percent).

The least popular: cutting funding for Medicaid, the federal government health-care program for the poor (32 percent said that was acceptable); cutting funding for Medicare, the federal government health-care program for seniors (23 percent); cutting funding for K-12 education (22 percent); and cutting funding for Social Security (22 percent).

This just confirms my view (hope?) that the last election was an aberration as angry tea-partiers showed up in an off-year election and skewed the results, throwing the election into the hands of a political party that mistakenly believes it has been given a mandate for taking draconian action to cut government spending on social programs, not to mention taking out public-employee unions to boot. This is just the latest poll that suggests that these leaders are over-reading the results of the election and misreading the mood of the public.

Jesus the Village Organizer

2011-03-02T09:52:00.003-06:00

I am about half-way through reading Richard Horsley's latest book Jesus and the Powers: Conflict, Covenant and the Hope of the Poor. Horsley does a masterful job of spelling out the economic/political/religious milieu of Jesus. He provides a forceful reminder of the fact that the Temple in Jesus' day (and previously) was very much under the control of the Roman occupiers who supported the king who built and maintained it and appointed the high priests who ran it. Taxes were collected in the temple for the empire. The Temple was indeed much more than a house of God.

Horsley depicts the scribes and the Pharisees as the intellectuals very much caught in the middle. Their livelihood depended on their service to the Roman-appointed leadership. But they were also keeping alive a religious tradition that breathed through and through with a message of liberation from oppression. They very much feared the results of active resistance and so for the most part collaborated to help put it down, but they also occasionally were moved to actual resistance as when students of the teachers Judas son of Sariphaeus and Matthias son of Margalothus tore down Herod's imperial eagle after his death. (909 Kindle)

Meanwhile out in the villages of Galilee and Judea the peasants attempted to eke out an existence that was made more and more desperate by the forced taxation that supported the temple and the Hellenization projects of Herod. Most couldn't read but they kept alive the ancient remembered traditions of resistance and liberation:

The Village communities in which the Galilean and Judean peasants lived provided the sequestered sites in which they could cultivate their popular tradition and develop their "raw" resentment into a "cooked" discourse of their desire for dignity and hopes for deliverance. It was in the "hidden transcript" of the continuing cultivation of popular Israelite tradition in the village communities that past deliverance was remembered, and hopes for a better life nurtured. This was the fertile soil from which movements could grow... (1005 Kindle)

In a period of time that spanned more than a century before and after the time of Jesus a series of peasant-led resistant movements, some messianic and some prophetic, came out of the villages and succeeded for varying periods of time in taking back village life from the Romans and their wealthy Jewish client leaders. Each, however, was eventually crushed by the overwhelming force and brutality of the Roman legions.

The Jesus movement was one of these peasant-led movements. Horsley says it differed from the other resistance movements in this way:

Yet there was a significant difference between Jesus and his movement and the (other) popular prophetic movements. Both drew on the popular memory of Moses (and Joshua or Elijah). But, whereas the other prophets led their followers out of their villages and into the wilderness or up to the Mount of Olives in anticipation of God's new acts of deliverance, Jesus focused his mission on village communities and their concerns. Throughout Mark's narrative of Jesus mission in Galilee and beyond, Jesus works in villages and synagogues (which were village assemblies, not buildings.) (1149 Kindle)

Jesus sent his envoys out to work in the villages. His renewal movement was about reclaiming covenant relations, social and economic, among the people living there. He knew well the indignities of village life under Roman role. His healing acts symbolized this:

This is perhaps nowhere more vividly expressed than in the two interwoven episodes of the twelve-year-old woman and the woman who had been hemorrhaging for twelve years (Mark 5:21-43). Both women are representative of the people, as symbolized by the "twelve." In both, the power of life is ebbing away. The lifeblood of the older woman had been steadily drained from her. The younger woman, just at the age when she should be married and being reproducing life in Israel, was "at the point of death." These are the representative figures of Israel in the Galilean villages where crowds eagerly greet Jesus. (1215 Kindle)

Significantly, Horsley notes in these stories that the initiative to be healed comes from the people themselves and healing takes place in an interaction between Jesus and the people who respond to his message of hope and his genuine authority but are not merely passive recipients of Jesus power.

Interesting read so far... I see Horsley making his own way here rejecting both the wisdom Jesus who left us memorable and timeless parables and aphorisms and the failed apocalyptic prophet whose martyrdom spawned a movement. Jesus, in Horsley's treatment, created an indigenous kingdom movement that spoke to concerns of peasant/village life.

Horsley is great in the book's beginning describing the history of Israel's formation in reaction to a repeated history of imperial rule from external (Babylon, Egypt, etc.) and internal (David, Solomon, etc.) powers. As I mentioned earlier I found his treatment of the function of the temple as a seat and symbol of that imperial power to be particularly enlightening.

Can Gays Raise Children?

2011-02-09T09:36:00.005-06:00

A member at church clued me into this speech delivered by 19 year old Zach Wahls before the Iowa House of Representatives before it passed a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would ban same-sex marriage. I believe she told me that her daughter had the "misfortune" to testify after this speech. I am sure she did fine. But as I was just reading about it here I thought I would share this clip.

Holy Foreskin

2011-02-09T09:11:00.003-06:00

I am currently reading Christopher Tyerman's Gods' War, an account of the crusades and find myself wondering whatever happened to these holy relics:

As a cardinal in Rome after 1079, Urban (Pope of the first crusade) had been surrounded by relics of Jerusalem and the Holy Land, especially the collection housed at the Lateran, then the pope's habitual Roman residence. These included Christ's umbilical chord, foreskin and some of His blood, pieces of the cross, numerous objects associated with His ministry and Passion (such as a loaf and thirteen beans from the Last Supper), relics of Holy Land saints and numerous physical specimens, such as rocks from Bethlehem, the Mount of Olives, the river Jordan, Calvary and the Holy Sepulchre itself.

I wonder if they are still housed somewhere at the Vatican.

Not So Typical Christmas Eve Activities

2010-12-29T14:01:00.002-06:00

For most pastors Christmas Eve is a busy evening of preparation and services. This pastor had a slightly different kind of busy evening:

The Dallas pastor facing felony charges of burglarizing a church member's home on Christmas Eve said Monday she had no criminal intent.

Sandy McGriff, 52, said she was trying to protect valuables at the home of her longtime friend Serita Agnew and made a horrible mistake.

Police accuse McGriff of stealing more than $10,000 worth of fur coats, designer purses and electronics from a home in the 2200 block of Village Way near Kiest Boulevard and Lancaster Road. She was also charged with resisting arrest.

She claims she was in the neighborhood driving by the house when saw two men entering and leaving the victim's house and decided to take the valuables to protect them. She also claims that she had no need to steal valuables. This additional piece of information would seem to buttress her second claim:

She said she pulled her black Jaguar into the driveway and walked around the home. That's when she saw the broken kitchen window.

I can't say I have ever known a pastor who drives a Jaguar. In any case you can watch a video of the pastor in front of the fur coats telling her side of the story.

unChristian America

2010-12-20T14:30:00.003-06:00

Ross Douthat surveys two recent sociology of religion books on the state of Christianity in American culture and comes to this conclusion:

...this month’s ubiquitous carols and crèches notwithstanding, believing Christians are no longer what they once were — an overwhelming majority in a self-consciously Christian nation. The question is whether they can become a creative and attractive minority in a different sort of culture, where they’re competing not only with rival faiths but with a host of pseudo-Christian spiritualities, and where the idea of a single religious truth seems increasingly passé.

Or to put it another way, Christians need to find a way to thrive in a society that looks less and less like any sort of Christendom — and more and more like the diverse and complicated Roman Empire where their religion had its beginning, 2,000 years ago this week.

This is an assessment I have shared with my congregation on numerous Sunday mornings and it is a common refrain in post-modern church circles as well as the anabaptist circles I have contact with (where the assessment is greeted by a rowdy cheer growing out of a belief that this is precisely where Christianity belongs).

It is worth pointing out, though, that there is at least one enormous difference for Christianity between now and then: then it was a new movement with a unique message about God and about how to live together in the world. It's organization, its member-care and its outreach were all revolutionary. As Rodney Stark has reminded us the Christians made a very real-world positive impact on the culture; the citizens of Rome had never seen anything quite like the Christians before.

In marked contrast, today, as we Christians find ourselves in the West increasingly marginalized and having to make the case for why anyone should participate in our communities, a large part of the challenge comes from carrying around 2000 years of baggage. It is one thing to to be a brand-spanking-new Christian and have to contrast yourself with the pagans and Jews everyone knows; it is another thing altogether to have to explain how you are different than thousands of different Christian sects and perhaps more importantly how you choose to account for the accretions of two thousand years of Christian culture, a culture that for all its accomplishments has at moments a shameful history on many issues.

Sometimes I wonder if a new religion might someday burst on the scene in the way Christianity did 2000 years ago and rock the world. Or perhaps it already has and is just waiting for its Paul. Or perhaps that new religion is science and technology and the manner in which we live, work and play in its world and accept its worldview.

In the meantime those of us in Christian communities must choose what to do with our baggage and how to respond and hopefully thrive in a challenging culture. I am sure it is my own particular heritage bleeding through, but I think the way forward is going to be found in communities that gather for food, stories, music, art, and ritual, that focus on serving others, and that teach and practice non-violence. There is nothing earth-shattering in this; it certainly isn't new news or coming from the latest marketing research, but it is faithful to Jesus and the best of our Christian culture, and when it is done well it just works.

DADT Dead

2010-12-18T15:43:00.002-06:00

It is finally done, thanks to Joe Lieberman, among others. With the military set to accept all without regard to sexual orientation, can the church be far behind? It will be interesting to see if this changes the conversation any, especially with God and country Christians. Including some who claim the COB label.

Our War Machine

2010-12-17T14:47:00.004-06:00

The Cold War officially ended in 1989. Remember all that talk then about the peace dividend? We never saw it and, according to new book by Tom Englehardt reviewed by Brad Birzer at The American Conservative it doesn't matter who is President or in control of congress, we are now a nation perpetually at war:

The events of 1989 should have offered the West some breathing room, a time to rethink the purpose of our nation and reinvigorate republican ideals. Instead, the past two decades, under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, have revealed America and the West as morally and spiritually bankrupt. Plunder and torture best symbolize the bloated American Empire of the last 20 years, a force that exists merely for the sake of self-perpetuation. Our standing in the world has declined precipitously. At home, many are angry and want to change, organize, and harangue. Despite their best intentions, they stand impotent, comprehending neither the past nor the present, looking at the future—when not navel-gazing—with understandable dread.

When voters elected Barack Obama in 2008, his supporters acclaimed him higher than a prophet; he was messianic. As one fine and intelligent person—an expert in high tech as well as a farmer—wrote to me in immediate post-election euphoria, “Brad, why are you so upset, don’t you realize that we finally have a chance to end war and poverty, permanently?”

What the Obama administration has delivered, of course, is not only the continuation of the policies of the previous three administrations but a profound exaggeration of them. If anything, we suffer more violations of our privacy and civil liberties now than at any time during the Bush administration, all in the name of a national-security state that keeps the populace in its place while perpetuating war abroad.

In his soul-searching, illuminating, and often depressing look at the unholy ménage of Demos, Leviathan, and Mars, Tom Englehardt probes deeply into the war culture of Washington, D.C. He notes that only two positions have any real voice in contemporary public-policy debate: those who want more of this and those who want more of that. The key word is “more.” As Englehardt writes, when it comes to conflict overseas “however contentious the disputes in Washington, however dismally the public viewed the war, however much the president’s war coalition might threaten to crack open, the only choices were between more and more.” More drones, more troops, more nation-building.

So much for campaign promises and the new messiah who would end war and poverty permanently. The first military budget Obama submitted, Engelhardt notes, was larger than the last one tendered by the Bush administration. “Because the United States does not look like a militarized country, it’s hard for Americans to grasp that Washington is a war capital, that the United States is a war state, that it garrisons much of the planet, and that the norm for us is to be at war somewhere (usually, in fact, many places) at any moment.”

While I remain an Obama supporter and in many ways this about-to-end congressional session is going to go down in history as a historic one for progressives, Obama has deeply disappointed on the war front.

Epic Failure

2010-12-15T15:45:00.002-06:00

Said Without Irony

2010-12-15T15:27:00.003-06:00

Time's Swampland gives us this statement from Senator Jim DeMint:

"You can't jam a major arms control treaty right before Christmas," DeMint tells Politico. "What's going on here is just wrong. This is the most sacred holiday for Christians.

We certainly wouldn't want any kind of arms reduction treaty that promotes world peace signed on the eve of Christmas. Not when we have worked so hard to pass far more pressing and appropriate-to-the-holiday legislation like extending tax cuts for the rich. It is priorities like these that tell you all you need to know about what the Senator knows about Jesus and why he thinks that Christmas is the most sacred holiday for Christians.

Wings and Claws

2010-12-08T11:58:00.003-06:00

It was a foregone conclusion after the recent election that the rich were going to get to keep their tax cuts. Under the circumstances I think Obama got the best bargain he could get, although I welcome the righteous anger coming from the left. I just wish they - congressional dems - had more spine when it really mattered last summer, but they never brought up the tax cut bill then.

In any case the most organized and influential group in Washington these days are the rich, which include a majority of our legislators. So it is no surprise that they got their tax cuts. But I came across this passage from Walter Rauschenbush's The Theology for the Social Gospel this morning and it seemed apropos:

Ordinary sin is an act of weakness and side-stepping, followed by shame the next day. But when it is a source of prolific income, it is no longer a shame-faced vagabond slinking through the dark, but an army with banners, entrenched and defiant. The bigger the dividends, the stiffer the resistance against anything that would cut them down. When fed with money, sin grows wings and claws. (p.66)

Happy Death Day Leo Tolstoy

2010-11-24T15:51:00.002-06:00

Leo Tolstoy died 100 years ago today. Prospero at the Economist Blog tells the story of his death:

LEO TOLSTOY died one hundred years ago today, aged 82. His last days and hours succumbing to pneumonia in a railway master’s house were followed by the entire world. A special telegraphic wire was installed in Astapovo to transmit news about the state of his health, and newspapers carried reports from the Russian and foreign press. Tostoy was hardly aware of all the commotion.

Nine days earlier he had left his estate in Yasnaya Polyana in secret before dawn, accompanied by his doctor. Having contemplated leaving home several times before, he decided it was finally time to break away from his family life, from the rows over his literary heritage, from the battles between his wife and his secretary. On the night of his escape he wrote that he was doing what people of his age do: leaving the worldly life to spend his last days in quiet and solitude.

On the way to the station he stopped at Shemardino convent to see his sister. He stayed the night in a hotel by a monastery, and again left at four in the morning, heading south. He did not get very far, reaching Astapovo with a high fever.

Prospero also notes that Tolstoy's death is hardly noticed in today's Russia:

Devastatingly, but perhaps unsurprisingly, the 100th anniversary of Tolstoy’s death is hardly marked in Russia. Tolstoy was a man who opposed state violence, who considered the Church’s union with the state as blasphemous, who denounced pseudo-patriotism, and who wrote to Alexander III asking him to pardon those who assassinated his father. These principles are firmly out of fashion in today’s Russia. By turning Tolstoy into an icon, the Soviets ultimately hollowed him out.

A recent political manifesto published by Nikita Mikhalkov, one of Russia’s most odious, wealthy and Kremlin-favoured film directors, is a good example of the country’s dreary move away from Tolstoy’s ideals. Called “Right and Truth”, the 10,000-word call for “enlightened conservatism” draws on the ideas of Konstantin Pobedonostsev, one of Russia’s most reactionary thinkers, who viewed Tolstoy as one of his most dangerous enemies. (He once denounced democracy as "the insupportable dictatorship of vulgar crowd", and saw Tolstoy’s non-violent resistance as a real threat.) As a senior figure in the Church, Pobedonostsev helped to initiate Tolstoy’s excommunication. In 1899 the Holy Synod banned all prayers in Tolstoy’s memory after his death.

I would just note that while all of our religious traditions have flawed histories, I remain grateful that mine never had the opportunity to wed its religious views with political power. It is a particularly pernicious flaw.

No Roached Hair?

2010-11-17T09:01:00.005-06:00

Over at Brethren Cultural Landscapes Carl Bowman posted notes from an 1880's Annual Meeting of the Brethren. Same-sex marriage was not yet on the list of unbiblical and forbidden activities:

It is a dangerous and alarming evil for members to conform to this world, in fashionable dressing, building and ornamenting houses in the style of those high in the world, and ought not to be among the humble followers of the lowly Jesus. And to specify more fully what is regarded as fashionable, the following is named:

wearing of gold or jewelry of any kind,
female hats, hoops,
vain superfluities,
ruffled and costly garments,
and brethren should not get costly and fine burial cases,
and expensive tombstones,
carriages and harness of fancy styles,
and the use of sleigh-bells, except circumstances require them,
neither should brethren wear a fashionable beard or mustache only,
and it is not granted to members to have their likenesses taken,
nor to get and use musical instruments,
nor to teach instrumental music.
Neither should members attend places of amusement, such as…
State and county fairs, celebrations, shows, mass meetings, and political meetings, etc.
And members who will indulge in any of the above named things, and thus cause offense, and who will not be admonished to put them away, must be held as disturbing the peace of the church, and be dealt with as not hearing the church, according to Matt. 18.
And brethren are admonished, and urged to wear our time-honored round breast coat with standing collar,
the hair plainly, not fashionable, or roached,
and in case a brother is conscientious in wearing a full beard, others should bear with him.
And according to 1 Cor. 11: 10-13, sisters should wear as the covering there recommended, a plain cap, whether married or unmarried, in the time of worship, and should likewise wear plain and suitable dresses- See 1 Tim. 2:9. 1 Pet. 3:3,4.
And elders, ministers and lay members should cultivate a conformity with the recognized forms and usages of the church as the best method of guarding against the temptation and danger of being drawn into the everchanging fashions of the world.

No roached hair?

Preaching Submission While Not Quite Living It

2010-11-15T09:46:00.004-06:00

The New York Times Magazine has an interesting feature article Housewives of God about Priscilla Shirer, daughter of mega-church pastor Tony Evans. Shirer is a former Zig Ziglar motivational speaker who graduated from Dallas Theological Seminary and is now motivating evangelical women to find and live out their Christian calling, which includes submission to their husbands and male pastors. As the article points out Shirer's lived life with her husband Jerry doesn't look much like a traditional marriage. It appears in many respects that her career and her decisions are the driving force in their marriage. When asked to account for the perception that her life isn't consistent with the message she delivers she gave this example of how she submits to her husband:

Despite this routine, Priscilla insists that she submits to Jerry — especially in the family’s bigger decisions. “If I will follow him as he’s following the Lord, then the responsibility for navigating our family well falls on him, not me,” she said. “Gratefully, I’m married to a husband that values my opinion and values my ideas. . . . We have lots of discussions, there are times of discontent.” She recalled their fierce debate over what to name their youngest son, Jude. When they couldn’t agree, Jerry asked the advice of male mentors he calls his “accountability guys,” “strong Christian guys who I’ve put in my life.” (Promise Keepers and other “biblical manhood” ministries encourage men to form and submit to “accountability groups” to keep one another on a godly path.) When the men ruled in Jerry’s favor, Priscilla relented. “It was a tough pill for me to swallow for a minute,” she said. “But when he told me why, and told me he’d talked to several different people about it that we both trust, then I was able to just relinquish and not be upset. . . . What made all the difference in the world is he cared about what I was feeling.”

The article gives this bit of history about the role of women in evangelicalism:

In centuries past, evangelical women were not meek about their role in church. Early Baptists allowed women to preach during the Great Awakening, and women were among the most influential revivalists during the rise of Pentecostalism at the turn of the 20th century (though gender roles usually remained in force in the home). But many women lost their voice as these sects solidified into male-run denominations. Outside the pulpit, women took the lead in the great Victorian moral crusades and volunteered in droves for foreign missions. During the battles between fundamentalists and liberal-minded modernists in the early 20th century, however, conservative mission boards cracked down on the freedom of female missionaries. Denominations took control of service societies that women had run for decades. Evangelical women could teach children’s Sunday school — as unpaid volunteers — but not adult co-educational classes. They might run bake sales, but men usually decided how the church spent the money they earned.

In the 1970s, liberal organizations like the Evangelical Women’s Caucus embraced much of women’s and gay liberation, but most evangelicals joined a rear-guard action in defense of traditional sexual mores. They argued that “women’s liberation” was a myth: on the contrary, secular feminism enslaves. Women learn to worship the false idols of careerism and independence, brainwashed by propaganda techniques that the Christian author Mary Kassian, in her book “The Feminist Mistake,” compares with those used by Chairman Mao. Submission alone brings true freedom and empowerment. A “submitted woman” can quit struggling to do things God never intended her to do and focus on her feminine gifts. Her gifts might mean a career, as long as she has her husband’s blessing: evangelicals often cite the “Wife of Noble Character” mentioned in Proverbs 31, who “considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.”

In reality, conservative evangelicals turn a blind eye to “submitted wives” who split household duties with their husbands and hire baby sitters, as long as they recite the slogans of biblical womanhood...

Reading this article I find myself in agreement with KJ Dell'Antonia at Slate:

Shirer's lip service to the idea of male dominance enables marriages that are far less egalitarian than hers. Her message, as Jocelyn Anderson, author and Christian domestic violence victim would say, is "submission, submission, submission." But submission as an option—as Worthen puts it "embrac[ing] the submitted life"—is not truly submission. Deference, perhaps. But calling voluntary deference "submission" is like calling consensual sex "rape" just because there are handcuffs involved. It muddies the waters for everyone, and makes it more difficult for women who face demands for real submission to see things as they really are.

If Shirer's compromise works for her, that's fine. But she should be honest within her ministry and tell the women who flock to her appearances that a "complementarian" marriage works only if it's based on egalitarian beliefs. She's clearly chosen her role. She should use it to ensure that other women know that they also have a choice.

Snowy Day

2010-11-13T08:42:00.002-06:00

Winter has arrived in our back yard:

I Want to Kill People in this War, Not That One

2010-11-10T07:40:00.003-06:00

The New York Times reports on an effort to expand the definition of conscientious objection to allow for soldiers to opt out of certain wars:

But today, Nov. 10, a coalition of around 60 mostly left-leaning religious, veterans and anti-war groups are calling on Congress to expand the definition of conscientious objection to allow opposition to a particular war. Leaders of the coalition, the Truth Commission on Conscience in War, assert that broadening the definition would probably lead to more troops applying to become conscientious objectors. But it would also allow for greater religious freedom in the military and improve morale among the troops, they say.

“For many of us, it is a religious freedom issue,” said Rita N. Brock, one of the main organizers of the commission. “The only religious conscience protected now is for pacifists. But the majority of people are not pacifists. I’m not a pacifist. We have a relative view of when violence is appropriate and not appropriate.”

Ms. Brock, a former professor of religion and women’s studies whose stepfather fought in World War II and Vietnam, said one of the commission’s goals is to allow service members who oppose certain wars to remain in the military, serving either in noncombat roles or in conflicts they can support.

“We want to make it easier for them to follow their moral conscience and serve in the military,” she said. “We want to forestall moral injury, which is a Veterans Administration category of treatment.”

An obvious response to this is that these days the military is a volunteer organization. There is no draft. If you enlist you can reasonably expect in our current environment to be fighting in a war somewhere. If you can imagine a kind of conflict that you would find morally objectionable then you shouldn't enlist. If you are a Muslim you have to know going in that you will almost certainly be fighting in a conflict where fellow Muslims will be on the receiving end of your bullets.

On the other hand there ought to be some provision for a soldier whose thinking evolves to get out of the military or move into a non-combatant position.

I can't imagine this proposal will receive much support from the military or the new Republican-controlled Congress.

The Company We Keep

2010-11-09T21:25:00.006-06:00

Gallup finds support continues to be high in the US for the death penalty:

Bottom Line

The use of the death penalty has been declining worldwide, with most of the known executions now carried out in five countries -- China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. Anti-death penalty groups in the U.S. continue to fight the use of the death penalty, particularly when there are high-profile instances of its use, such as this year's execution in Virginia of Teresa Lewis, the first woman to be executed in that state in almost 100 years. Despite this, Gallup's latest update in October shows no diminution in the strong majority level of support for the death penalty in cases of murder within the U.S. (end quote)

Can you guess which one of these countries is known as the Christian one? I can't.

Disgrace Speech

2010-11-09T08:59:00.004-06:00

Our denomination's resident sociologist of religion Carl Bowman has recently suggested that he desires to see an end to "disgrace speech" in our denomination Disgrace speech is speech that summarily dismisses those we disagree with as somehow being less that worthy. Two of three examples he gives are:

1. “Homophobe.” Some progressives can’t conceive that a tradition-derived ordering of things might be central to the sacred understandings of others, so they reduce conservative commitments to psychological pathology, calling them “homophobes.” The label, and all references to homophobia, should be stricken from Brethren discourse. Even if cases exist where homophobia might be clinically diagnosed, those who invoke the label are rarely clinicians; instead they are progressive partisans who use the term casually and dismissively. The outcome is typically to reduce conservative convictions to irrational pathology. It disgraces them in this fashion.

2. “Biblical morality.” On the issue of homosexuality, conservatives typically invoke this term as an oblique counterpoint to its opposite, which is either “un-Biblical morality,” or “Biblical immorality.” Either way, applauding oneself for one’s “Biblical morality” transparently classifies as “un-Christian” the opposing view. Even if one believes deeply that the progressive view on an issue is indeed un-Christian, furthering one’s position publicly by trumpeting one’s “Biblical morality” has the primary consequence of disgracing others whose convictions and reading of the Bible are different. “Bibical morality” should be the substance of small group study and discussion, not a weapon to be brandished against others.

I agree. While I think that some of the conservative opposition to homosexuality stems from fear some of it also stems from sharp disagreement about biblical interpretation. I think they are wrong, but I don't think it is fair or helpful to just dismiss opposition as homophobic. In fact I am tempted to suggest that many conservatives are more guilty of un-Biblical morality than homophobia. I think they read the Bible far too selectively as they define what is moral or immoral. But in either case I agree that dismissive labeling isn't helpful.

Religion in American Life

2010-10-21T09:14:00.004-05:00

I haven't yet read American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us, by Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, but Peter Steinfels summarizes some of its key points in the recent American Prospect:

The evangelical wave has been ebbing for some time now and it is being replaced by the "nones":

The book's story is one of a religious earthquake and two aftershocks. The earthquake was the disaffection from religion occurring in "the long Sixties." Church attendance plummeted. So did the percentage of Americans saying that religion was "very important" in their life. At every stage of their life, boomers would always lag behind their parents by 25 percent to 30 percent in regular churchgoing. The authors know well that these were the years of the civil-rights, anti-war, and women's liberation movements, of pot, acid, the pill, Roe v. Wade, and Watergate. But with a refreshing directness and only a bit of embarrassment, they emphasize sex. Between 1969 and 1973, the fraction of Americans stating that premarital sex was "only sometimes wrong" or "not wrong at all" doubled, from 24 percent to 47 percent, a startling change in four years -- and then drifted up, never to decline. Attitudes toward premarital sex turn out to be one of the strongest predictors of a host of other political and religious changes, including that of the first great aftershock, the evangelical upsurge of the 1970s and 1980s.

That reaction to "the long Sixties" has been extensively analyzed. Less so the second great aftershock, the rise of the "nones" after 1990 when young people, in particular, began rejecting identification with any religion, though not necessarily with a variety of religious beliefs and practices. More and more young Americans, according to polls, came to view religion as "judgmental, homophobic, hypocritical, and too political," overly focused on rules rather than spirituality. "The Richter rating of this second aftershock is greater than that of the first aftershock and rivals that of the powerful original quake of the Sixties," Putnam and Campbell write.

People who go to church contribute more money and time to both religious and secular charities and tend to be more civically engaged:

Churchgoing Americans, it turns out, are twice as likely as their demographically matched secular neighbors to volunteer to help the needy and to be civically active. Not only do those in the most religious fifth of Americans give four times as high a proportion of their annual income to charity as those in the least religious fifth, but they give a higher proportion even to specifically secular causes. Neither this generosity nor this activism has to do with ideology. Cross-checking with other surveys, Putnam and Campbell conclude that on measures of generosity and civic engagement, religious liberals rank as high or higher than religious conservatives and higher than secular liberals.

It is not unusual for Americans to change their religious affiliation. Putnam offers himself as an example:

He and his sister were raised as Methodists. At marriage, he converted to Judaism. His children were raised as Jews; one married a Catholic who is now secular, and the other's spouse was secular but converted to Judaism. Putnam's sister married a Catholic and converted to Catholicism. Her three children became evangelicals! No wonder that so many Americans refuse to believe, regardless of the tenets of their religion, that those of differing conviction are bereft either of spiritual truth or hope of salvation.

Although the jury is still out on whether this will be true as we increasing have interactions with Muslims in America.

I'm Not a Witch, I'm You

2010-10-19T22:49:00.003-05:00

Elvira is much more believable than Christine O'Donnell:

Don't Ask, Don't Tell Undone by Judge

2010-10-19T22:36:00.003-05:00

Judge Virginia Phillips, a federal district court judge sitting in California's central district in Riverside, ruled Tuesday that she will not reverse a decision she ordered last week barring the U.S. military from enforcing the 1993 law signed by President Clinton known as Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

The Pentagon has told recruiters that for now they must comply. The Obama Administration says it will appeal. (Hopefully not with much gusto.) But once again an "activist" judge has moved the civil rights agenda forward. Thank God for activist judges who think that racial and sexual discrimination violate constitutional protections.

Mark Thompson at Time.com's political blog notes that Phillips was appointed by Clinton:

And that's just one of the strange twists about the coming collapse of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." While the ban was a compromise Clinton didn't want to make, it was a judge he appointed who apparently finally has undone it. And she did it in response to a lawsuit filed by a group calling itself the Log Cabin Republicans. Not only did Republicans file the suit that's likely to end in the law's demise, the organization itself was created following a successful 1978 effort by gay California conservatives to defeat a ban on gay teachers in the state's public schools. Their most important ally in that fight? A former governor named Ronald Reagan.

My Kind of Book

2010-10-19T13:38:00.003-05:00

Whatever happened to Thomas Covenant? I read and enjoyed all Stephen R. Donaldson's chronicles of the unbeliever and white-gold wielder Thomas Covenant as he found himself transported into another world where his leprosy was healed and he suddenly found himself with power and feelings and that he didn't want, and faced with the reality that choosing to not use his power or come to grips with his feelings was even more dangerous than claiming his new reality.

And then Covenant disappeared. The last book, the second in what was to be another trilogy, came out in 2007. Today via a blog post by Loren Rosson III I discovered that Covenant was finally back for one last time. So I went out on Amazon to download the book to my Kindle - done - and also took a moment to read the published reviews. This was the last sentence of the Publisher's Weekly review:

While an introductory plot summary does yeoman service bringing new readers up to speed, it may be hard for them to keep so many characters straight--or care about them--when most of their development took place in previous volumes published decades ago. The focus is on Linden rather than Covenant, whose passive and distracted presence mostly gives others something to react to, but that won't matter to Covenant's large and loyal following, for whom Donaldson delivers all the self-loathing, despair, guilt, pain, and stubborn determination they could ask for.

Self-loathing, despair, guilt, pain, and stubborn determination. Now that's my kind of book.

Paradise is Not Lost

2010-10-19T10:15:00.005-05:00

From my reading of Saving Paradise: How Christianity Traded Love for This World for Crucifixion and Empire by Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker, I am not quite ready to get the the death of Jesus yet and how focusing on it dramatically changed Christian faith. Another quote:

In the sixth century St. Apollinare Nuovo Church, at the edge of the old city (Ravenna, Italy), we found the earliest surviving life story of Jesus depicted in images. Near the ceiling on both sides of the basilica nave, thirteen rectangular mosaics marched from the chancel toward the main door. We examined each of the twenty-six panels closely. On the right wall near the chancel, an image of the last supper began the thirteen scenes of his Passion. At panel ten we encountered Simon of Cyrene carrying the cross for Jesus to Golgotha. We expected to see the Crucifixion on panel eleven. Instead, we were confronted by an angel who sat before the tomb. The apparition spoke to two women swaying forward like Gospel singers. We too leaned forward in astonishment and remembered what the angel had said: "I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here" (Matt. 28:5-6). The remaining panels showed the risen Christ visiting his followers in the stories of doubting Thomas and the road to Emmaus.

We found no crucifixion in any of Ravenna's early churches. The death of Jesus, it seemed, was not a key to meaning, not an image of devotion, not a ritual symbol of faith for the Christians who worshipped among the churches' glittering mosaics. The Christ they saw was the incarnate, risen Christ, the child of baptism, the healer of the sick, the teacher of his friends, and the one who defeated death and transfigured the world with the Spirit of life.

It seems that nowhere in early Christian art is there a focus on the death of Jesus. Not until the 10th century. This is one of these pieces of information that I find astonishing - that it is so and that I am just learning it now. Early church art focused on recreating paradise. When Christians walked into worship spaces they were reminded that with their baptisms they had re-entered paradise here and now and that their ethical living helped to make paradise a reality for themselves and others. Paradise was not lost. Their sin and the sin of the world did not so mar earthly life that they longed for the afterlife or even some kind of future eschatological moment. They were already living in a realized eschatology.

The afterlife was real of course, and full of saints. But even the saints were present in this life through icons and images. They were a part of this world's paradise made possible by the resurrection of Jesus and by those who lived resurrected lives.

One important insight to keep in mind here is that we are talking about a period in history where virtually everyone is illiterate. When we think of Christian history we tend to focus on the writings of early Christian leaders. As important as these writings are to get a sense of the emerging doctrinal decisions and the battles over who and what is orthodoxy, the vast majority of early Christians had their faith shaped by the art and liturgy of their worship spaces, which is why so much money was put into building beautiful spaces. And the predominant images found in those spaces were about living in paradise. Bread, wine, water, art, and the sharing of resources made paradise a reality.

I am also reminded of one helpful critique of liberal Christianity coming from the direction of the emergent folks. Too much of liberal Christianity is emotionally dry with its focus on word and intellect. There is more to life than being smart and right on the issues. We need to be engaged emotionally through music, poetry, and art and be reminded constantly that there is beauty in the world and that experiencing it is transformative in a way far deeper than any intellectual conversion experience. Which is not to say that engaging the mind cannot also be a thing of beauty - it is - but we want and need more. It seems the early Christians knew this.

On the Letter of Deepest Concern

2010-10-12T15:01:00.004-05:00

Folks at Open Circle are sometimes surprised to learn that a) we are out of step with our denomination on some of its official positions and b) that we are tolerated nonetheless. The good news here, at least from our perspective, is that we are not so hierarchically oriented that someone from the denomination can lower the boom on us in some way. And we have been through the wars in our Northern Plains District and the district has come around to at least tolerating the presence of congregations that are open and affirming on the "homosexual issue" as it is often referred to. In fact it is fair to say in our district that for the most part we are now fully welcomed.

But the denominational story is different. The denomination has taken a decidedly rightward turn over the last several decades. Many congregations and members have been heavily influenced by the evangelical backlash and by the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks that their members tune into on a daily basis.

Below is a copy of a letter sent by standing committee delegates of the Southern Pennsylvania District in response to the recent Annual Conference held at Pittsburgh, PA. The letter was approved by their District Board so it is fair to say it represent the sentiment of a majority of their district.

I have been advocating for some time among the progressive COB community that we stop attempting to win over the other side or even that elusive middle made up of congregations that are themselves divided over these issues. Instead of trying to change minds I think it would be more productive to make the case of freedom of conscience and a big tent denomination (admittedly something of an oxymoron in a denomination with membership rapidly declining to the size of some mega-churches)where congregation are free to follow their own consciences on matters that divide us while we work together on issue where we find agreement. The tone of this letter would seem to suggest that at least some of our conservative brothers and sisters don't see this as an option.

What I read in this letter is fear. In a healthy community having a child handed a rainbow scarf, which represent a different perspective, is a teaching moment not a cause for alarm. The same is true for listening to a sermon that you don't agree with. Over the years I have listened to lots of them at Annual Conference. It is what I would expect in a denomination that has a diversity of opinion.

I must say that I laughed out loud when I read the sentence that said "When I questioned Moderator Shawn about the message he said that Earle didn’t deliver the message that Shawn had asked him to." He didn't deliver the message that Shawn asked him to? What are we? North Korea? We are not, of course, or Earle who delivered the message would now be toiling away at a hard labor prison. But the idea that the moderator 'asks' a speaker to deliver a certain message or that a speaker is not free to preach what is on his or her heart and mind is completely antithetical to what the COB stands for. Or once stood for.

As the letter indicates we are now in the midst of listening sessions across our denomination on the issue of homosexuality. We will be hosting one of them in our district on October 23. I don't expect any minds to be changed by this exercise. Given the rapid decline of our denomination's membership I would like to think that we can agree to a truce and a big tent approach that makes room for diversity. So we can all focus on reaching out to our wider communities with what is the best of the COB. My prediction, though is that nothing will change. Conservatives will remain adamant that their truth is the only truth and liberals will continue to want to keep talking. And we will continue to lose glbt pastors and members who choose to be part of welcoming communities. (My dissatisfaction with fellow liberals in our denomination is much greater on this issue). And all the while our denominational decline will continue unabated.

A denominational split would be a much better option than the status quo. The letter mentioned above follows.

Southern Pennsylvania District Church of the Brethren

Standing Committee Delegates: Larry M. Dentler & John A. Shelly

(letter was approved & affirmed by the Southern Pennsylvania District of the Church of the Brethren District Board, meeting at Upton Church of the Brethren, July 24, 2010)

August 9, 2010

To: Annual Conference Office
2010 Annual Conference Officers
2010 Program & Arrangements Committee

Letter of Deepest Concern

Dear Sisters & Brothers,

As Standing Committee delegates for Southern Pennsylvania District we are writing this letter following 2010 Annual Conference. The decision to write this Letter of Deepest Concern comes after discussions with many of our constituents from Southern Pennsylvania District who attended Annual Conference in Pittsburgh. We write in humility for we know that Annual Conference involves a mind boggling myriad of details to care for. There is much about Annual Conference that we affirm and applaud as being inspirational, well planned, and exciting. But this year we come home with some very deep concern that was not just expressed by one or two but by many of those who attended Annual Conference from our District.

1) The 10 year old granddaughter of one of our families was in the exhibit hall. Persons at the Womaen’s Caucus booth gave her a rainbow scarf and told her, “You should wear this.” The little girl went back to her grandmother‘with a lot of confusion. This was very distressing for the family. Annual Conference should be a safe place for children, not a place where other persons’ controversial viewpoints are thrust upon them. Since this booth this year seemed to be singular in focus — handing out scarves to support homosexual acceptance – we believe that Womaen’s Caucus should either be denied further exhibit space or placed on a probationary status stating clearly that they were in violation of #2, #3, and #6 of “Expectations of Exhibitors” (2010 Annual Conference Booklet, pp.52,53) this year, and any future disregard for Program & Arrangements Policy will result in future denial of exhibit space.
———————–
p.2

2) The “rolling BMC booth” was present again this year. This seems to laugh in the face of the decisions of Program & Arrangements and Annual Conference policy. This seems to us to reflect a total disregard for the authority of church leadership. Persons find the in-your-face nature of the “rolling booth” to be embarrassing. We understand that we stress “no-force,” but we have also stressed respect for leadership. Something must be done!

3) When new fellowships and churches were welcomed we were introduced to Common Spirit in Minnesota. In only slightly shrouded language it was made clear that this is a congregation with a main focus on acceptance of homosexuality, in direct violation of the 1983 policy. We understand that new fellowships and congregations are acknowledged as part of District responsibility, but many delegates from our District felt that they were manipulated at this moment in Annual Conference. There was no time given to ask questions, and only a vote on accepting all four at once. These procedures lead to a gnawing, growing, festering belief that Conference officers are not being forthright and honest with the delegate body, and that we are being “set up.” I can’t tell you how many times we as our District’s Standing Committee delegates heard this kind of discontent and skepticism. Trust is eroding.

4) The moment causing the greatest concern for us was the sermon of Brother Earle Fike in Monday evening worship. Perhaps you noticed as we did that many persons left the convention center with tears. Others with faces gripped in anger. Have no doubt, this message will be noted as a milestone in the record of the debate before us. Anyone with conservative viewpoint on the human sexuality issue left feeling beat up and bruised. We affirm Brother Earle’s right to his viewpoint, but this message came across more as a “lobbying speech” than a message from God’s Word. This is especially true since, as many have noted, Earle completely ignored the fact that what brought acceptance was Zacchaeus’ repentance. This message came after we had been told repeatedly by the Conference Officers that there would be no speeches on this issue this year!

When I questioned Moderator Shawn about the message he said that Earle didn’t deliver the message that Shawn had asked him to. He also said that Annual Conference Director Chris had informed him,
———————————-
p. 3

upon receiving Earle’s manuscript, that “it was going to be controversial.” Why then was there not some intervention? This 30 minute “moment” did great harm to the unity of the Body, great harm to the spirit of the Annual Conference, caused further brokenness and division at a very moment when we are trying to encourage people to listen to each other!

Again, please hear us affirm that Brother Earle certainly has a right to his viewpoint. But to use the message time during worship for this one-sided “lobbying speech” with no chance for rebuttal or discourse, not only showed very poor taste by Earle, but extremely poor leadership by those who might have intervened, and was in reality ‘out of order’ in keeping with the Special Response Process before us, and as one District Executive noted, may well have been in violation of the Ministerial “Code Of Ethics” (Ethics in Ministry Relations – 1996, pp.AC80.5-7).

In our minds a very sincere public apology is in order from those in leadership to the Body of the Church. This did great damage, very likely even hindering the Special Response Hearing process which is just before us.

Let us conclude by saying once again that we celebrate and affirm all the hard work by many faithful servants to make Annual Conference the wonderful “family reunion” that it is. Our love for you as our leaders, and our love for our Church compels us to share these concerns at this tenuous moment in our history when the rumblings of division rattle around us. Please understand that we would be remiss in fulfilling our responsibility as our District’s Standing Committee delegates if we did not share our concern.

Your brothers & servants in Jesus’ love,

Larry M. Dentler
Bermudian Church of the Brethren, 279 Bermudian Church RD, East Berlin, PA 17316 / office ph: 717- 292-1861

John A. Shelly
7535 Talhe1m RD, Chambers g, PA 17202/ph: 717-375-2510

Abundant Life Here and Now

2010-10-12T07:39:00.004-05:00

I am currently reading Saving Paradise: How Christianity Traded Love for This World for Crucifixion and Empire by Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker. The authors begin with the observation that images of the crucified Christ don't appear in early Christian art for nearly a thousand years after the time of Jesus; then they become predominant. Why is this? What changes within Christianity bring it about?

The first Christian art from the catacombs through the building of worship spaces emphasized the restoration of paradise on earth as a result of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Images of loaves and fishes, water and wine, the rivers of life, trees and animals were used in Christian art to created the sensation of paradise restored. In the same way icons brought the heavenly paradise down to earth for those who touched and prayed to them. To become a Christian brought not only the promise of a future paradise but life in paradise now as part of a community that was attuned through spiritual disciplines to see and participate in paradise and to make it a reality through the practice of what the authors call ethical grace.

They suggest that this same spirit animates much of the New Testament. For example here is what they have to say about John 3:16:

Today this passage is invariably interpreted to mean that God placed Jesus in the world to die on the cross, but at no point does this story mention death. It does not use the Greek word paradidomai, the word that John's Gospel specifically uses to describe the action of those who "gave" or "handed over" Jesus to be crucified. John 19:16 makes it clear that Pilate, not God, "handed him over to them to be crucified." Jesus' words to Nicodemus are about birth and life, not death and afterlife. They reiterate the themes of Creation and the power to be born of God that we spoke of in Chapter 1. God loves the world, the kosmos, and loves the Son, to who he gives "the Spirit without measure" (John 3:34).

In John's Gospel Jesus incarnates wisdom, turns water into wine, feeds the multitudes, demonstrating in various ways that he has come to restore paradise, abundant life, to this life.

Unfortunately, the authors say, paradise is eventually replaced with images of the suffering and tortured Jesus. When and why that happens in a future post.

The thesis of this book reminds me of my trip to Rome several years ago. As we visited the catacombs and churches and the Vatican Art Museum to see early Christian art our guide, Grady Snyder, kept asking us "what are you not seeing here?" There were no crosses anywhere to be found. The promise of new life not a focus on Jesus' suffering and death was what attracted converts to Christianity.

It seems to me that this is or should be one of the predominant themes of progressive Christianity. I think we got to get ourselves back to the garden.

The Absurdity of Our Current Political Discussion

2010-10-05T09:09:00.003-05:00

Tax cuts for the rich: why is this what we are talking about?

The economic challenges we face are myriad and daunting. The unemployment rate is hovering near 10 percent. Our energy policy is stuck in the 20th century. We’ve got crumbling infrastructure all over the place. The budget is projected to remain badly out of balance. And perhaps most troubling, the middle class is barely keeping its head above water. Tax cuts for rich people address precisely none of these pressing issues. They would actually make matters worse in some cases.

Why, then, are we even discussing the possibility of cutting taxes for rich people? Is it because they’ve been hit particularly hard by the recession? Hardly. When the National Bureau of Economic Research announced recently that the Great Recession came to an end in June of last year that news must have come as quite a shock to the millions of Americans who are still out of work, working fewer hours for less pay, and struggling to make ends meet. But it probably didn’t surprise people at the top of the income ladder. They’ve been recovering quite nicely...

It should come as no surprise, then, that income inequality is fast approaching record levels. The richest 5 percent of Americans claimed almost 22 percent of all income in 2009, and the top fifth took home fully half of the nation’s income. The poorest fifth, meanwhile, earned just 3.4 percent of all the income, and the share of national income going to the vast middle dipped as well. Income inequality in 2009 was higher than at any point since at least 1967, according to one measure.

All those facts and figures reinforce what most people already know: The middle class took this recession right on the chin while the rich suffered no more than a glancing blow. And yet somehow in Washington the talk is all about tax cuts for rich people.

As I said in a recent post one of the big reasons we are talking about tax cuts for the rich is that almost all of our legislators in Washington are rich. The rich are their friends. The rich have easy access to Washington legislators, much easier than the middle class or poor. And so when they whine about their "high" taxes they get listened to.

Grouse Display

2010-10-05T08:44:00.003-05:00

There were grouse everywhere in northern MN where I was camping at Bear Head Lake State Park. I was watching a female ruffed grouse when a male pranced in on display. She was apparently less impressed than me as she hopped up into a tree. He pranced around shaking his feathery mane, lifting one leg and then the other. About 15 minutes later another male came in also displaying. They danced around the tree where she was perched, completely oblivious as I watched and walked around them taking pictures.

Backyard Visitor

2010-10-05T08:35:00.003-05:00

Last week I spent a few days in northern MN camping, hiking, and enjoying the wildlife. This morning the wildlife visited our house. I watched this eagle sail over the house dogged by crows before landing in a neighbor's tree.

Our Classless Rich

2010-09-21T10:42:00.004-05:00

Mark Dayton is running for Governor. He was a so-so Senator and for this he is being pilloried in attack ads (particularly for being the only Senator so send his staff home after 9/11). Mark Dayton is also very rich, his family being founders of department stores Dayton and Target among others. A key campaign plank of Dayton's is that he is going to raise taxes on himself and his fellow wealthy Minnesotans and shift the tax rate back to what it once was when the wealthy in the state paid a slightly higher percentage of their income in state taxes than the way it is now when they pay less, in percentage terms, than their middle class fellow citizens. It seems like a fair and sensible plan. But of course he is being pilloried for this as well. His plan is a "job killer." It is funny how we have lowered the tax rates on the wealthy during the last decade and don't have more jobs to show for it. But that is another story.

Whatever Mark Dayton's faults as a Senator and as a person, he has class. He represents what is mostly a bygone notion among the rich today - wealth however come by is a privilege and there is a concomitant duty to give back to the community a proportionally larger share of money and service than would be expected of those who are working long hours to put bread on the table for their families.

His name came to mind when I read this post by Michael O'Hare on the classless rich of our era:

Real class is what the economic aristocracy of our country has almost entirely lost. The American rich are wallowing in a moral slough, grasping for more and more money they have no clue what to do with, and venting their frustration that climbing over each other to new heights of wretched excess brings no satisfaction by lashing out at every social institution, and at a government whose largesse is never enough for them. Andrew Carnegie may have had his miners shot at Homestead, but he came to regret it and he also said it was sinful to die rich. He walked the talk; there are Carnegie libraries, a university, concert halls, and more all across America, still creating value. (All the Vanderbilts, not so much.) But Larry Ellison has his name on nothing and for all his billions, has absolutely no class and no idea that he lacks it, and a whole class of cowboy millionaires and billionaires have the fatal idea that he is a target to emulate. No, money isn’t a way of keeping score; great schools and passing laws that make us all better off and building a subway system for New York and a high-speed rail line in California is a way of keeping score. Anyone who thinks he’s self-made, and single-handedly created all the value he’s come to possess, has no class, no more class than a Gulf sheik who thinks the accident of living on top of an oil pool makes him admirable and distinguished. Keeping track of (and taking care of) all the people without whose labor and pioneering you couldn’t have done anything, that’s how to keep score.

What is really disappointing to me is to see how well this describes so many Democrats in Congress these days.It is bad enough that you practically have to be a multi-millionaire to be a Senator. It is worse that there are very few Nelson Rockefeller-like rich Republican Senatorsany more (i.e. ones with class) But is just pathetic to watch Democratic Senators talk about the need to make sacrifices like raising the Social Security age in order to do something about the deficit, and then turn around and support extending the Bush tax cuts for their classless rich cronies. Talk about having no class.

The Beginning of the End

2010-08-04T18:22:00.004-05:00

For opponents of gay marriage. The significance of today's ruling by the California Federal Appeals Court that Prop 8 was unconstitutional is not only that it is what supporters of gay marriage like me hoped for, but more importantly that it was decided by a judge appointed by Ronald Reagan and argued jointly on behalf of the plaintiffs by noted conservative and liberal attorneys. This puts a lie to Family Research Council president Tony Perkins who said after the ruling that "far Left" was "using liberal courts to obtain a political goal they cannot obtain at the ballot box." What liberal court would that be?

This case will likely make its way to the Supreme Court, and everybody knows the current Court leans far right, but it is difficult to imagine the swing votes on this court siding with social conservatives. Getting the constitutionality of gay marriage into the federal courts is the best thing that could have happened. It is very much reminiscent of past courts striking down discriminatory laws in the civil rights era.

Religious communities will continue to be able to choose to not marry gays and lesbians, which is their wrong choice but protected right. But eventually they will no longer be able to legislate their view of morality on the rest of us. I am very much looking forward to the day when I can officially officiate at gay weddings.

Ban the Burqa?

2010-08-03T13:27:00.003-05:00

Claire Berlinski has a thoughtful post in the National Review online about the evolution of her thinking on the veiling of women. She lives in and reports from Turkey. This was her thinking when she moved:

One woman here told me of her humiliation in childhood when her family was ejected from a swimming pool because her mother was veiled. I believed her. All stories of childhood humiliation sound alike and are told in the same way. It was perverse, she said to me, that she should be free to cover her head in an American university but not in a Turkish one. It seemed perverse to me as well. It would to any American; politically, we all descend from men and women persecuted for their faith. I was, I decided, on the side of these women.

...The argument that the garment is not a religious obligation under Islam is well-founded but irrelevant; millions of Muslims the world around believe that it is, and the state is not qualified to be in the business of Koranic exegesis. The choice to cover one’s face is for many women a genuine expression of the most private kind of religious sentiment. To prevent them from doing so is discriminatory, persecutory, and incompatible with the Enlightenment traditions of the West. It is, moreover, cruel to demand of a woman that she reveal parts of her body that her sense of modesty compels her to cover; to such a woman, the demand is as tyrannical, humiliating, and arbitrary as the passage of a law dictating that women bare their breasts.

This is her thinking now:

There are already many neighborhoods in Europe where scantily dressed women are not safe... Parents in these neighborhoods ask gynecologists to testify to their daughters’ virginity. Polygamy and forced marriages are commonplace. Many girls are banned from leaving the house at all. According to French-government statistics, rapes in the housing projects have risen between 15 and 20 percent every year since 1999. In these neighborhoods, women have indeed begun veiling only to escape harassment and violence. In the suburb of La Courneuve, 77 percent of veiled women report that they wear the veil to avoid the wrath of Islamic morality patrols. We are talking about France, not Iran.

...The debate in Europe now concerns primarily the burqa, not less restrictive forms of veiling, such as the headscarf. The sheer outrageousness of the burqa makes it an easy target, as does the political viability of justifying such a ban on security grounds, particularly in the era of suicide bombings, even if such a justification does not entirely stand up to scrutiny. But the burqa is simply the extreme point on the continuum of veiling, and all forced veiling is not only an abomination, but contagious: Unless it is stopped, the natural tendency of this practice is to spread, for veiling is a political symbol as well as a religious one, and that symbol is of a dynamic, totalitarian ideology that has set its sights on Europe and will not be content until every woman on the planet is humbled, submissive, silent, and enslaved.

...Veiling cannot be disambiguated from the problem of Islam’s conception of women, and this conception is directly tied to gender apartheid and the subjugation and abuse of women throughout the Islamic world, the greatest human-rights problem on the planet, bar none. Nor can the practice of veiling be divorced from the concept of namus — an ethical category that is often translated as “honor,” and if your first association with this word is “honor killing,” it is for a reason: That is the correct association. The path from veiling to the practice of killing unveiled women is not nearly so meandering as you might think.

It could be that I am stretching here, but I couldn't help but read this and think of the Church of the Brethren tradition of women having their heads covered. It is mostly gone but still practiced in some parts of the Brethren world. The argument for it, of course, is that it is scriptural. But the deeper question is how much is this scriptural argument in its context and in its present day practice is tied up with a patriarchal view of women that sees them as either inferior or dangerous?

I am sympathetic to the women who argue from whatever religious tradition that veiling is an act of liberation or personal religious choice. The problem is that there are often men who are a part of these traditions who see it as a woman's appropriate duty to God and religion. And they too often have the power in families and religious communities. Our free choices are rarely as free as we think they are.

Speaking of Moral Examples

2010-07-21T09:59:00.003-05:00

I have intentionally been out of the 24 hour news and blogosphere cycle for awhile. As I dip my toes back in one of the first stories I read concerns Shirley Sherrod, the USDA official who was forced out of office after a Washington Times columnist and Fox News regular passed on a snippet of an old speech she gave that had her talking about not wanting to help a white farmer because of his race. Sherrod is black.

Apparently without even checking the facts of the story the Obama Administration dropped her like a hot potato. But if you actually watch the extended clip of her speech you see that she was telling the story of how she had to overcome her learned prejudices and learn to treat all people equally. She is telling a great story about her growth as a moral person.

Shirley Sherrod is exactly the kind of person we need working in government. It is embarrassing anyone in the Administration took seriously something from Fox News and disgraceful that she was let go. Hopefully Obama will quickly make amends.

On Being a Good Example

2010-07-21T08:27:00.003-05:00

Yesterday I started reading Philip Gulley's If the Church Were Christian: Rediscovering the Values of Jesus. In his opening chapter he tells the story of being a young person in church hearing a preacher say "Some people will tell you Jesus is only an example for how we should live. But anyone can be an example."

Thirty years later Gulley says he knows better than ever that this isn't true. Living the kind of virtuous life that makes one a worthy example for others to follow is very difficult. To say that it somehow diminishes the story of Jesus if he is 'only' a moral example is to ignore the simple fact that we rarely encounter individuals who so embody the qualities associated with Godly virtue. In our lifetimes we are fortunate if we come under the influence of a few who come close.

If Jesus was one of these rare individuals - and I suspect he was - it is not hard to understand why he would have attracted both followers and enemies. Authentic individuals who actually live by the highest values attract company. We want to be in their presence. We want to learn from them. We want to be like them.

They also attract enemies because they have authentic power, not supernatural power or power obtained through violence, wealth or stealth, but the kind of power that comes naturally from becoming during their life-times a brighter and clearer light, the kind of light that stands in sharp contrast to and exposes the corruption and dishonesty and violence that so often are the tools of those who are in power.

It has been my experience that taking Jesus off the Only Son of God pedestal and making him fully human actually makes it much for difficult to be a follower. What we are being called to do as followers is not to believe in him but to live as he lived. Imagine what the world would be like if Christians simply lived more simply, or forswore the use of violence of any kind. The world as we know it today would truly be turned upside down. We would say the kingdom of God has come on earth.

Am I asking too much? The world is fallen and we need the grace of God to save us? Then we are looking for the easy way out - or up. Making Jesus into our ticket to heaven is cheap grace. Letting him be an uncommonly virtuous son of God who challenges the rest of us sons and daughters of God by word and example to live as he lived calls us to a lifetime of growth and transformation.

Oh, that Jesus would 'just' be an example that we spent our lifetimes emulating.

Fish Story

2010-06-11T17:41:00.003-05:00

We have a children's story in worship every week and thankfully I have nothing to do with scheduling it and we have many people willing to take a turn on the schedule. But last week when the children came forward for a story no adult stood up so I took an impromptu turn.

What to talk about? Well I told a story from my fly-fishing experience the previous week. I asked the children if they ever fish or like to fish. Then I told them that I like to fish and I usually make it a practice to 'catch and release' the fish I catch, and I explained what that meant.

Then I related that during the past week I had caught a fish that did not survive as I brought it into my net. I talked about being sad about the fish dying. I then told them that I kept the fish, brought it home, and ate it for dinner.

I asked them if they liked to eat fish or burgers or chicken. I asked them if they knew that the meat they ate was once a living animal. I talked some about how important it is for us to know that we live in a web of life where some animals give their lives so that other animals can live. I finished up by talk about my feelings of reverence for life and explained what that word meant to me.

Did they get it? I had one parent relate to me that their child had not a clue what I was talking about apart from fishing. I had another parent tell me that they thought I was making a commercial for PETA. Ha. I had another parent tell me that just the previous week their child had said to them after watching a tv show that had chickens running around that the child had said "chicken, we eat chicken" which had prompted an interesting conversation and gratitude from the parent that I had picked up the subject while it was fresh on the child's mind.

I have vivid childhood memories of working on relatives farms and learning first hand that the animals I enjoyed (cows) or feared (pigs) would soon be on the dinner table. I have the same kind of childhood memories from fishing and hunting. I learned about the cycle of life; I learned about reverence as I watched animals die so that I could eat.

I also have vivid memories of taking my suburban raised daughter to a farm when she was a youngster and her breaking into tears as she protested that "my milk does not come from a cow it comes from the store." Living in an urban area there can be a certain disconnect between the food we eat and the real life and work that brings us that food.

I think we have a responsibility in our religious communities to somehow make that connection. Whether it is our food or our consumer lifestyle or our energy consumption: some animal or some plant or some person is giving their life so we can live. I think about that every time I go fishing.

The Tragic Nature of Human Life for the Earth

2010-06-11T10:25:00.003-05:00

Andrew Sullivan links to gruesome video and sobering statistics on the number of birds killed by wind farms:

The American Bird Conservancy estimated in 2003 that between 10,000 and 40,000 birds were killed each year at wind farms across the country, about 80 percent of which were songbirds and 10 percent birds of prey. "With the increased capacity over the last seven years, we now estimate that 100,000 – 300,000 birds are killed by wind turbines each year," said Conservancy spokesman Robert Johns. By our math, that comes to 274 to 822 birds a day killed by wind farms across the country.

For some reason this Henry James saying came to mind:

Every man who has reached even his intellectual teens begins to suspect that life is no farce; that it is not genteel comedy even; that it flowers and fructifies on the contrary out of the profoundest tragic depths--the depths of an essential dearth in which its subjects roots are plunged...The natural inheritance of everyone who is capable of spiritual life is an unsubdued forest where the wolf howls and the obscene bird of night chatters.

I don't know how it is possible to ponder what it means to be human for the rest of life on the planet and not have a sense of tragedy. We are fouling the Gulf of Mexico with our oil and this is only the most immediate and visible cost of our addiction to oil. We are doing the same thing to our mountains and streams with coal mining.

We are told we need to move to more earth-friendly forms of energy: like wind. Wind farms are sprouting up all around the country. And killing staggering numbers of birds.

There is no escaping the conclusion that even when we are acting at our best, which isn't very often, we are exacting a terrible toll on the planet. And there really isn't much we can do about it except to strive to keep our environmental footprint to a minimum, protect and preserve as much of nature as we can, and grieve for the birds and fish who die so we can live.

How Diverse Can a Church Be?

2010-06-09T14:33:00.004-05:00

James McGrath asks this question on his blog: how diverse can a church be? I think there are couple of ways of thinking about an answer. One is that it depends a lot on the emotional health an intelligence of the people in leadership at the church. Emotionally healthy people have clearly self-defined values and boundaries and are not threatened by people who have different beliefs. If the leadership is healthy they can model healthy dialogue and conflict and the congregation can tolerate, perhaps even welcome, a certain amount of diversity. On the other hand if the leadership isn't emotionally healthy then they will probably be threatened by diversity and seek to enforce adherence to a more narrow theology or doctrinal position. (And this has nothing to do with liberal or conservative theology; it is true across the spectrum. Emotionally healthy leadership seems to attract more diversity of thought and opinion around whatever the spiritual orientation is.)

Another way to think about it is what I learned from evangelical church planters whose training I attended nearly 20 years ago. At the time there was no training available for liberal church planters, at least not that I was aware of. The one teaching that was driven home over and over was that the group of people planting the church must all agree on essential matters of theology and doctrine. Therefore, I was taught, it was very important to hammer out a set of core values that clearly define where you stand on how you read scripture, understand Jesus, think about culture-war issues like homosexuality, etc. The leadership needs to agree on these issues and then when the church gets underway new members also need to be in essential agreement. It is better to say to someone "You know there is another church down the road that might better meet your needs" rather than be so desperate for new people that you welcome those who have fundamental disagreements about core issues. I heard these trainers say that there would be more than enough diversity to deal with even among those who are in agreement on core values.

For the most part we followed this advise as we started Open Circle. I knew starting the church that there were certain issues that were important to me that I no longer wanted to have to be fighting about in a congregation: gays would be welcome, I would not be interpreting scripture in a literal way, and Christianity was not the only valid spiritual path. I was clear about these issues as I talked to potential members and those who stayed were in agreement on these issues. When we had enough of a core group we worked out a set of core values and then we clearly published these in all of our literature. We still do.

In some ways our congregation is not very diverse. We are mostly white, theologically and politically liberal. In other ways we are quite diverse. We have a lot diversity in religious background: Catholic, many flavors of Protestant, pagan, atheist, Jewish. We have a growing diversity in age. We started out with mostly boomer individuals and families; now we run the gamut from young families to seniors, singles, cohabitating and married couple with and without children, gay and straight. We have city dwellers, suburbanites and folks coming from small towns and the country, some driving 30 miles to get to church.

I have found it to be true that even with clearly defined core values there is plenty of diversity that presents continuing opportunities for dialogue and challenges for the congregation as we chart our way forward. We have constant conversations around the issues like these: what does it mean to be a Christian or a follower of Jesus today; how do we relate to our denomination, The Church of the Brethren; how do we best deploy our people resources to serve church and community? We have some strong differences of opinion in the congregation about these issues.

I wish we were more racially diverse than we are and interestingly enough, we were more racially diverse when we started than we are now 17 years later. I am not sure why that is but I would guess that part of it has to do with the fact that I do not have great cross-cultural skills and it is not one of the passions that drives me as a pastor, like say being welcoming to glbt folk does.

It is interesting to note that my answer to this question doesn't even touch on some of the issues found in this response.

Two Words for Harry Reid

2010-06-09T09:17:00.003-05:00

Everything I read this morning seems to suggest that Nevada Senator Harry Reid was the big winner in last night's Republican party primary as the looniest candidate, Sharron Angle, won. I have two words of warning for Reid: Michelle Bachmann.

An Inadequate Response to Trouble and Disaster

2010-06-08T14:08:00.003-05:00

I am with Bob Herbert on the joblessness crisis and the lack of adequate response from Obama and Congress:

Policy makers have acted as if they are unaware of the magnitude of this crisis. They have behaved as though somehow, through some economic magic perhaps, or the power of prayer, this ocean of joblessness will just disappear. That’s a pipe dream.
Even if we somehow experienced a sudden, extraordinary surge in job growth (which no one is expecting), it would take a very long time just to get back to the level of employment that we had when the recession started in late-2007.
...For all the money that has been spent so far, the Obama administration and Congress have not made the kinds of investments that would put large numbers of Americans back to work and lead to robust economic growth. What is needed are the same things that have been needed all along: a vast program of infrastructure repair and renewal; an enormous national investment in clean energy aimed at transforming the way we develop and use energy in this country; and a transformation of the public schools to guarantee every child a first-rate education in a first-rate facility.
This would be a staggeringly expensive and difficult undertaking and would entail a great deal of shared sacrifice. (It would also require an end to our insane waste of resources on mindless and endless warfare.) The benefits over the long term would be enormous.
Bold and effective leadership would have put us on this road to a sustainable future. Instead, we’re approaching a dead end.

The problem is that even though there is lots of anger on the street that anger is mostly misdirected, i.e. the Tea Party, or misinformed like those who are blaming Obama for not being angry enough about the gulf oil spill. But for all the throw the bums out anger on the street the politicians in Washington don't feel that anger every day; what they feel every day is touch of money that streams into their campaign coffers from the big players in finance and business who have everyday access to Washington politicians. These people are not personally hurting. What is a little unemployment to them? What they worry about and pay for access to talk about is regulations and tax breaks and the threat of inflation that is out there somewhere if we don't tame the deficit. So we get a tepid response to the real and festering unemployment crisis. And despite an epic disaster in the gulf it is still drill-baby-drill, put off only briefly until the cameras go away from the gulf.

There is only one person who has the bully pulpit and who could make the case for a real jobs bill and a real energy policy. I am still hopeful but also increasingly worried that another crisis (or two) is going to be wasted.

The Un-Empty Nest

2010-06-08T12:46:00.003-05:00

Meagan moved back home last night from St. Peter as she ends a job in Mankato and begins a new job next week in Bloomington. Fiance Michael and monster dog Kato are residing at Michael's parents' home in Burnsville. Suddenly a bedroom is cluttered, we are buying milk again and there is already a whirlwind of activity in and out.

She voiced her unhappiness about this situation last night and it is hard not to share it. However, she is very fortunate in this economy to have found a decent paying job and her mother and I are hopeful that she will be able to save some money leading up to next summer's wedding. Then we can go back to being the empty-nesters we have grown accustomed to being.

Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up

2010-05-21T08:42:00.004-05:00

Was Jesus a cynic-like sage or an apocalyptic prophet? Crossan or Allison? Maybe he was both. Adam Gopnik offers this analogy in an article in The New Yorker What Did Jesus Do?:

And yet a single figure who “projects” two personae at the same time, or in close sequence, one dark and one dreamy, is a commonplace among charismatic prophets. That’s what a charismatic prophet is: someone whose aura of personal conviction manages to reconcile a hard doctrine with a humane manner. The leaders of the African-American community before the civil-rights era, for instance, had to be both prophets and political agitators to an oppressed and persecuted people in a way not unlike that of the real Jesus (and all the other forgotten zealots and rabbis whom the first-century Jewish historian Josephus names and sighs over). They, too, tended to oscillate between the comforting and the catastrophic. Malcolm X was the very model of a modern apocalyptic prophet-politician, unambiguously preaching violence and a doctrine of millennial revenge, all fuelled by a set of cult beliefs—a hovering U.F.O., a strange racial myth. But Malcolm was also a community builder, a moral reformer (genuinely distraught over the sexual sins of his leader), who refused to carry weapons, and who ended, within the constraints of his faith, as some kind of universalist. When he was martyred, he was called a prophet of hate; within three decades of his death—about the time that separates the Gospels from Jesus—he could be the cover subject of a liberal humanist magazine like this one. One can even see how martyrdom and “beatification” draws out more personal detail, almost perfectly on schedule: Alex Haley, Malcolm’s Paul, is long on doctrine and short on details; thirty years on, Spike Lee, his Mark, has a full role for a wife and children, and a universalist message that manages to blend Malcolm into Mandela. (As if to prove this point, just the other week came news of suppressed chapters of Haley’s “Autobiography,” which, according to Malcolm’s daughter, “showed too much of my father’s humanity.”)

The whole article is a good read.

Oxymoron Watch

2010-04-30T08:18:00.002-05:00

Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary E. Landry on how cooperative BP has been in responding to the oil spill:

BP, from Day 1, has attempted to be very responsive and be a very responsible spiller.

It appears that this is could be an epic environmental disaster for the gulf coast. The only silver lining is that it should kill the Obama plan to open up new coastlines for drilling.

Atheist Delusions

2010-04-29T16:18:00.004-05:00

I have been reading David Bentley Hart's Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and its Fashionable Enemies. Hart is taking on the so-called New Atheists who argue that Christian history is marked by its violence, ignorance, and opposition to science. I am only about half-way in but I find Hart making some good points.

One is that the Christian way of life was a marked upgrade from the pagan way of life that preceded it. He makes basically the same point here that Rodney Stark makes when Stark talks about how the Christians and pagans responded so differently when the Roman empire was visited by the plagues. The pagans fled for the hills, including the pagan doctors. The Christians stayed and took care of the sick. The result was that many of the pagans who survived converted to Christianity. It was a better way of living.

Why did the Christians stay and take care of the sick? Because at the heart of the Christian story there is a suffering God. On the surface it sounds like a terrible marketing strategy: my God gets hung on a cross, suffers and dies; how great can he be? It is a stumbling block. But in practice it leads to care for the suffering because this is where God is present. So widows are cared for, orphans are cared for, sick people are cared for. Christians are to stop supporting the games where humans suffer and die for sport. Christianity treats humans with more dignity; human consciousness evolves thanks to Christianity.

Christian culture brings us not only hospitals and better care for the suffering but a flourishing of the arts: literature, music, painting and sculpture. Creativity is encouraged; beauty is valued. And so the argument goes. The end of the pagan era was not the end of a golden era replaced by a thousand years of night until the enlightenment once again lit the mind on fire. The Christian era was in many ways a huge step up for humanity.

Another point, on Christian opposition to science, Hart essentially asks this question: in what culture did Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler to name just a few history-making scientists, make their history? Christian culture. Where did they do their work? In universities created and funded by Christian institutions. Where they had remarkable freedom to study and write as they pleased. Hart talks at some length about Galileo's silencing at the hands of Pope Urban VIII over the issue Galileo's support of Copernicus' heliocentric theory. Hart repeats an argument I have read before that Galileo's problem was not in holding a view of the earth's place in the universe that the church found threatening. His problem was that he was a pompous ass who needlessly offended his erstwhile friend and patron the Pope. Even then his punishment was very mild. The pope and the church were not anti-science.

Hart acknowledges the reality of violence at the hands of Christians against Jews, witches, and Muslims, and he discusses the causes and consequences of the "dark ages" in western Christianity after the fall of the Roman empire. He notes, though, that Christian culture thrived in the East, and that this was gifted to the Muslims in their conquests and expansions. He traces the movement of ancient literature and learning back to the West during the Crusades. And that is as far as I have gotten.

One thing I will say for Hart and I am not sure this is a complement, he can match Dawkins and Hitchens snark for snark. The cultured despisers have no monopoly on the ability to hurl witty epithets at opponents.

Although I haven't finished the book my hunch is that Hart is worried about our future as we move into a post-Christian world that is losing its grounding in Christianity's great idea that charity and self-less love is the heart of God and the heart of a better way of living. I don't know the answer to that. Are we falling backward or are we evolving into a better future? I would say there is no way of knowing.

I wonder, though, if it is possible to be a practicing Christian but not a believing Christian and keep hope alive. The theology of Christianity doesn't work so well for me anymore, at least if that theology includes some kind of belief in a supernatural world, but the incarnational side that has God becoming human (in us all) and more particularly God being present in suffering and our calling to respond to that with love and service, that works for me. It is enough for me but is it enough for Christianity and for our culture?

I wonder to what hope there is when so many Christians identify their Christianity with militarism and capitalism. Christianity was once a better idea. It might still be but how would we know when you can't tell Christians apart from anyone else?

Ross sisters - Solid Potato Salad

2010-04-29T15:53:00.002-05:00

A friend sent along a copy of this YouTube clip of the Ross sisters performing in 1944. at first I was surprised by the scanty costumes, although even the belly button is covered. Then I was amused at the subject of the music, although they more than do justice to potato salad. And then about one minute in I was pretty much blown away. You don't see this on American Idol.

Capitalism Works When...

2010-04-29T15:19:00.003-05:00

It is heavily regulated. E.J. Dionne gets it right:

It is, indeed, naive to expect Wall Street to act as charitably as the Salvation Army, and you have to respect Fabulous Fab's brutal candor about this. Which brings us back to socialism.

Marx's predictions about the inevitable collapse of capitalism have been wrong so far because the system has worked reasonably well, thanks to the rules and redistributive programs established after the Great Depression.

The lesson is that the surest way to save capitalism is to regulate it in the public interest. The surest way to create socialists is for everyone to experience the economic consequences of counting only on the goodness in the hearts of Mr. Potter and Fabrice Tourre.

It was the unwinding of the post-Depression financial regulations, which allowed the free hand of the market to run loose, that brought us the worst recession since the Great Depression. There is a classic lesson here about human nature and it always amazes me that conservatives who supposedly believe in the lessons of human nature don't believe they apply in the economic arena. Or they don't care.

Capitalism only works well when it is heavily regulated by the government.

On the Nest

2010-04-21T15:17:00.003-05:00

My Mallard is on the now on the nest pretty much 24/7. I saw her last evening under one of the bird feeders for a few minutes eating then she was back on the nest. She is well protected by the wood pile and the straw that she has piled up around her. I can't get a picture of her except like this one, using a mirror to view out the window - which is above my head - of the back garage door.

The Work of the Devil

2010-04-21T13:42:00.003-05:00

Two Washington Post articles on the Catholic Church and the clergy abuse scandal include details of the devil's work. The first is about a planned Latin Mass in DC at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. The event organizers, the Paulus Institute, invited a former Vatican official to lead the mass. However the selection of Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos of Colombia has outraged victims' rights group because the Cardinal once praised a French bishop for not telling police about a priest who had sexually assaulted children. Paul King, president of the Paulus Institute knows what is going on here:

At first, King said, divine providence seemed to shine on their efforts. Scheduling conflicts at the Basilica -- the largest Catholic church in North America -- had made it impossible to hold the event in 2008 and 2009. So it was with care that organizers picked April 24, 2010, for their Mass. Weeks later, they realized it coincided with the fifth anniversary of Benedict's papal inauguration.
"It seemed like even the date was selected by God. It was like God himself was blessing our Mass," King said.
Now, he says, a more sinister force seems to be at work. "We've perceived things that are obviously the work of the devil," he noted darkly. "The disruption of this Mass by protesters, for example, is not something we invited."

The second article notes that Thomas Paprocki, an auxiliary bishop in the Archdiocese of Chicago, who was announced Tuesday as the church's ninth bishop of Springfield, IL, said three years ago that the principal force behind the waves of abuse lawsuits was "none other than the devil."

What century are we living in?

Who to Support for MN Governor

2010-04-15T18:36:00.002-05:00

For those living in MN Dave Mindeman has a great post today on the merits and problems with the DFL candidates. Dave is doing some of the best political blogging in the state.

Spring Clean Up

2010-04-15T17:39:00.005-05:00

Spring has come early to Minnesota; warm weather in March has us running about two weeks ahead of schedule. I have been slowly making my way around our gardens cleaning up last year's perennials, removing straw from around the more than 50 shrub roses we have planted and trimming back the dead branches.

There is one area just off the brick patio out back that I haven't touched yet.

What you are looking at here is my winter wood pile that I keep on the patio for outdoor fires. Immediately to the right of it is a small bed that has our only two hybrid roses as well as an herb garden of perennial lavender, thyme, and lemon balm. In Minnesota hybrid tea roses need to be buried completely underground using the Minnesota Tip Method. I usually bury these two but we were back and forth to PA in the late fall as Mary Ann's father declined and I didn't get it done. I piled some straw around them and then we were blessed with heavy snow. I piled it high on the roses and was pleasantly surprised to find them alive this spring.

In any case I usually clean up this area first since it is right off the deck and patio, but not this year. Here is why:

One of our resident Mallards has chosen this spot to lay her eggs. It's kind of amazing to me that she doesn't seem to spend time on them during the day but she comes in every evening and spends the night. Every year Mallards lay eggs somewhere on our property or on a neighbors. They never make it; crows or foxes or skunks get the eggs. We will see if these fare any better this year.

Rowling on Going From Poor To Rich and Paying Taxes

2010-04-15T16:40:00.003-05:00

J.K. Rowling has a great piece in the TimesOnline about her indebtedness to the British welfare state and why now that she is rich she doesn't support the party of the rich or simply move out of country to avoid paying taxes:

But wait, some will say. Given that you have long since left single parenthood for marriage and a nuclear family; given that you are now so far from a life dependent on benefits that Private Eye habitually refers to you as Rowlinginnit, why do you care? Surely, nowadays, you are a natural Tory voter?

No, I’m afraid not. The 2010 election campaign, more than any other, has underscored the continuing gulf between Tory values and my own. It is not only that the renewed marginalisation of the single, the divorced and the widowed brings back very bad memories. There has also been the revelation, after ten years of prevarication on the subject, that Lord Ashcroft, deputy chairman of the Conservatives, is non-domiciled for tax purposes.

Now, I never, ever, expected to find myself in a position where I could understand, from personal experience, the choices and temptations open to a man as rich as Lord Ashcroft. The fact remains that the first time I ever met my recently retired accountant, he put it to me point-blank: would I organise my money around my life, or my life around my money? If the latter, it was time to relocate to Ireland, Monaco, or possibly Belize.

I chose to remain a domiciled taxpayer for a couple of reasons. The main one was that I wanted my children to grow up where I grew up, to have proper roots in a culture as old and magnificent as Britain’s; to be citizens, with everything that implies, of a real country, not free-floating ex-pats, living in the limbo of some tax haven and associating only with the children of similarly greedy tax exiles.

A second reason, however, was that I am indebted to the British welfare state; the very one that Mr Cameron would like to replace with charity handouts. When my life hit rock bottom, that safety net, threadbare though it had become under John Major’s Government, was there to break the fall. I cannot help feeling, therefore, that it would have been contemptible to scarper for the West Indies at the first sniff of a seven-figure royalty cheque. This, if you like, is my notion of patriotism. On the available evidence, I suspect that it is Lord Ashcroft’s idea of being a mug.

That's a great quote for tax day.

Jennifer Knapp Comes Out

2010-04-15T16:20:00.003-05:00

Via Andrew Sullivan I see this Christianity Today interview with singer Jennifer Knapp:

Traveling alone or with your partner?
Knapp: With my partner.
Have you been with the same partner for a long time?
Knapp: About eight years, but I don't want to get into that. For whatever reason the rumor mill [about me being gay] has persisted for so long, I wanted to acknowledge; I don't want to come off as somebody who's shirking the truth in my life. At the same time, I'm intensely private. Even if I were married to a man and had six children, it would be my personal choice to not get that kind of conversation rolling.
I understand. But I'm curious: Were you struggling with same-sex attraction when writing your first three albums? Those songs are so confessional, clearly coming from a place of a person who knows her need for grace and mercy.
Knapp: To be honest, it never occurred to me while writing those songs. I wasn't seeking out a same-sex relationship during that time.
During my college years, I received some admonishment about some relationships I'd had with women. Some people said, "You might want to renegotiate that," even though those relationships weren't sexual. Hindsight being 20/20, I guess it makes sense. But if you remove the social problem that homosexuality brings to the church—and the debate as to whether or not it should be called a "struggle," because there are proponents on both sides—you remove the notion that I am living my life with a great deal of joy. It never occurred to me that I was in something that should be labeled as a "struggle." The struggle I've had has been with the church, acknowledging me as a human being, trying to live the spiritual life that I've been called to, in whatever ramshackled, broken, frustrated way that I've always approached my faith. I still consider my hope to be a whole human being, to be a person of love and grace. So it's difficult for me to say that I've struggled within myself, because I haven't. I've struggled with other people. I've struggled with what that means in my own faith. I have struggled with how that perception of me will affect the way I feel about myself.

I am struck by the persistent questions about her relationship with her partner and wonder if she would get the same kinds of questions if she was straight. But more than that I really like Jennifer Knapp's response that she has been living her life with joy and being gay isn't a struggle for her; or it wouldn't be if the church of Jesus acted like Jesus and welcomed her for the person she is.

The Church and Social Justice

2010-04-15T10:31:00.004-05:00

The Washington Post On Faith section is currently featuring a discussion about Glenn Beck's recent statement that Christians should flee churches where social justice is featured. Southern Baptist leader Al Mohler comes to Beck's defense:

My concern is very different. As an evangelical Christian, my concern is the primacy of the Gospel of Christ -- the Gospel that reveals the power of God in the salvation of sinners through the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The church's main message must be that Gospel. The New Testament is stunningly silent on any plan for governmental or social action. The apostles launched no social reform movement. Instead, they preached the Gospel of Christ and planted Gospel churches. Our task is to follow Christ's command and the example of the apostles.

The New Testament is stunningly silent on any plan for government or social action. Interesting response. Yes it is true that the New Testament writers don't have much to say about a government plan for social justice. Their government was the pagan Roman Empire and and in the eyes of the empire Christians were a new and suspicious religious movement. Government leaders did not recognize Christianity as legitimate; there was occasional government sanctioned persecution of Christians. The message of the NT writers was either lay low and don't make trouble or pray for the day when Jesus will return and punish the great whore Babylon. It is entirely unsurprising to find the NT silent on any plan for government social action.

What about the Old Testament, though. What about the prophets who railed against religious and political leaders for their injustice? They certainly had a vision for government social action on behalf of the poor and widows. Why isn't that pertinent to the discussion of whether Christians who now find themselves with a political voice and access to political power shouldn't use their voice and power to establish justice through government action? I am always confused about how some evangelical Christians pick and choose their moments to look to the Hebrew Bible for support.

And then there is Mohler's next sentence: The apostles launched no social reform movement. Read this passage from Acts:

Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles. All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people.

This sounds a lot like a social reform movement to me. It sounds a lot like a socialist reform movement to me. It sounds like the kind of reform movement you would launch when there is no government sponsored social safety net and you are on your own. It also sounds like a template you might then transfer to the government when, lo and behold, you one day find yourself running it.

I think it is fair to say that early Christians felt a divine imperative to implement social justice reforms within their movement. I think if Rodney Stark is correct they not only did a good job of taking care of their own but they extended that care and hospitality to pagans and this helped win converts to the movement.

But I do not think it is fair to say that because the NT is silent on government-run social welfare programs that Christians should oppose them. There is a Christian social justice imperative rooted in the Hebrew scriptures and reinforced in the NT. There is an explicit reference to ends but not means. We ought to be open, then, to whatever is the most effective method of carrying out that imperative. The unparalleled success of Social Security of lifting the burden of poverty from seniors is but one example of social justice done well by the government, and done in a much more comprehensive way than any patchwork of church charities could ever do. Thanks to liberals, including liberal Christians. Thanks to liberals, including liberal Christians the same will soon be true of health care.

Al Mohler is wrong. Walter Rauschenbusch was right.

Tea Party Demographics

2010-04-15T08:02:00.003-05:00

The New York Times surveys Tea Party members and finds, surprise surprise, that they are mostly white, wealthy, and well-educated. They describe themselves as angry at Obama and Washington. What are they angry about? Over half of those surveyed thinks that Obama's policies favor the poor over the wealthy and the middle class. Of course they are also angry about all those bank bailouts. Those poor bankers.

They want smaller government but they also don't want anyone touching their Social Security and Medicare. 9 out of 10 think that Obama is doing a bad job and some of them think he is a socialist and a Muslim:

“I just feel he’s getting away from what America is,” said Kathy Mayhugh, 67, a retired medical transcriber in Jacksonville. “He’s a socialist. And to tell you the truth, I think he’s a Muslim and trying to head us in that direction, I don’t care what he says. He’s been in office over a year and can’t find a church to go to. That doesn’t say much for him.”

One bright note from the survey: many of them don't think Sarah Palin is qualified to be President.

Is There Another Level of Reality?

2010-04-13T16:07:00.004-05:00

Rod Dreher raises questions about a new report on the use of psychedelic drugs:

Over the years, as I've read about varieties of mystical experience, I've thought about whether or not the temporary chemical changes psychedelic drugs bring about in our brains cause us to hallucinate things that aren't there -- clearly true in some cases -- and whether or not they cause our brains to become more perceptive to realities that actually are there, but which can't be perceived under normal circumstances. How would you tell the difference?

...I am still left with big questions about all this. First (and to repeat), do psychedelic drugs actually open up a door of perception into dimensions of reality that are closed to our brains under normal conditions, or do they only cause hallucinations? (And how would you know the difference?). Second, given the commonplace testimony from psychedelic drug users to experiences that closely resemble mystical episodes of insight that saints and spiritual geniuses in various religious traditions have had, is it advisable for people in search of enlightenment to assist their quest with hallucinogenic drugs? Why or why not?

(On that last question, my intuition is that it would be the difference between someone making a million dollars through years of hard, disciplined labor, and someone winning the lottery. The money is the same, but the lottery winner has no context in which to place his bounty, and, as studies have shown, is far more likely to have his life ruined by the gift. That said, if medical research can show that using hallucinogenics can help terminally ill or badly depressed people find a sense of purpose, positive meaning or peace with their condition, why on earth would anyone want to deny them that?)

You can count me as a skeptic about whether psychedelic drugs open the user up to another level of reality imperceptible to the brain not on drugs. I think there is only one reality in this life and I think our goal ought to be to learn to live in it with a clear head. Healthy spirituality is all about learning to let go of illusions and delusions and living well in the now.

Having said that I am sympathetic to the use of drugs for terminally ill and depressed people that relieve their physical and psychic pain so they can be more present in the here and now. If psychedelic drugs help by altering the brain chemistry in such a way that the here and now is more enjoyable then they should be part of a physician's arsenal. And I am certainly not opposed to the recreational use of mild stimulants. I like my coffee and beer and although I don't use marijuana I think it should be decriminalized.

It's the notion that there is some other more real or true level of reality that I am skeptical about. Let's make it our goal to grow deeper and happier in this all too fleeting moment of reality.

Super Bugs and Weeds

2010-04-13T14:36:00.005-05:00

A new scientific study by the National Research Council says that for many farmers the use of genetically modified crops had helped to cut the use of pesticides and herbicides, reduced the need for tilling which leads to soil erosion, and improved yields. The two biggest uses for genetic modification are "Roundup Ready" crops which are resistant to Roundup and its chemical knock-offs which allow farmers to spray the weed killer around the crops without risk of damage to the crops, and "BT" seeds which contain bacterial genes allowing the plants to produce an insecticide.

What is interesting to me, though, is that Roundup ready seeds have been in use for only ten years and already the weeds are adapting:

Overuse of this seductively simple approach to weed control is starting to backfire. Use of Roundup, or its generic equivalent, glyphosate, has skyrocketed to the point that weeds are rapidly becoming resistant to the chemical. That is rendering the technology less useful, requiring farmers to start using additional herbicides, some of them more toxic than glyphosate.

You can bet Monsanto, maker of Roundup, and its competitors are working on new formulations. But it sounds just like the stories of over-use of antibiotics and how rapidly bacteria have morphed into antibiotic-resistant super bugs.

Weeds and bacteria and probably real flying bugs are just as "smart" as we are in their own way. They want to survive and multiply too and it is pretty amazing how quickly they are able to adapt and thrive as tougher-to-kill species. Somehow I doubt that this is a battle that we will win in the end. Some super bug will come back to bite us big time eventually.

While I am not opposed in principle to the use of genetically engineered seeds it would be far better if we could find a way to farm and live without going there. The more we grow our own food and the more we support local and organic farming the lighter our environmental footprint. I don't know if we need genetically modified crops to feed the world. I know that I don't need them and neither do you. We have a choice about what we grow and eat.

Big Ben Beef Jerk

2010-04-13T14:22:00.006-05:00

It's not easy being a Steeler's fan these days. The face of the franchise is quite possibly a criminal who just got away with rape, or at the very least he's a cad. I can't imagine that the Rooney family is going to stand by and not respond with a suspension if it doesn't come from the NFL first. I see the company that brought us Big Ben Beef Jerky has ended its marketing relationship with Roethlisberger. What they should do is just change the name to Big Ben Beef Jerk and promise to donate the proceeds of each unit sold to a women's sexual abuse awareness organization.

More on Beauty and the Church

2010-04-08T14:48:00.002-05:00

Rod Dreher posted part of an interview with Barbara Nicolosi-Harrington, an orthodox Catholic who teaches screen-writing in L.A., where she was asked about the clash of values between Hollywood and the church. I thought she had an interesting take:

Again, not to get myself burned in effigy, but Christians feel as alienated from Hollywood as Hollywood people feel watching EWTN or CBN. Hollywood has a value of excellent production value, of talent, and the pagan world absolutely believes in talent, this mysterious gift that comes from they-know-not-where. We know where it comes from; they don't know where it comes from, but they believe in it.

The Church does not believe in talent anymore. We think the most important thing is that everyone feels welcome. So we sit at church and suffer through Doris and Stan, who can't sing, because we don't want to be mean. They would never get a job in Hollywood, because Hollywood has integrity about the beautiful. Or if it's not "the Beautiful" in the classical sense, at least, they value the non-lame.

So when you speak of a tension of values, well, there is the value of the Beautiful, which Hollywood understands and the Church does not, and then there are the values specifically of what is good for human beings. What is it that leads them to their fulfillment, their ultimate destiny, fulfilling their nature? Those things are missing, content-wise, in what you're seeing in a lot of the media.

But in the end, which is more harmful: true words cast in an ugly frame, or untrue words cast in a beautiful frame? I think Hollywood will get people into heaven faster. Even if they have the message wrong, people in the end will turn off some of that. What will really impact them will be the harmony, the wholeness, the completeness of a work.

I think there needs to be a balance in the life of a church. The message that all are welcome and all are encouraged to share their gifts is the right message. There is nothing wrong with encouraging people to sing and read and act in worship even if they aren't great. Everyone needs to feel welcomed and valued.

But the church also needs to care about quality and, yes, beauty. It really makes a difference in worship. I have vivid memories of musical horrors in my first church pastorate. While there was a competent organist she was often traveling. The fill-ins and the special music were often positively atrocious. There was no balance between uplifting music and "non-lame."

When I came to Open Circle I insisted from our beginning that we shell out the money needed to have a professional keyboardist. We got lucky and got one with a great voice as well. To be able to sit in worship on Sundays and experience quality music every Sunday makes worship what is should be - uplifting and inspiring.

Churches don't do themselves any favor when they try to save money by using local talent. Yes there are exceptions but by and large you get what you pay for.

Beauty

2010-04-08T14:32:00.001-05:00

My newsletter article this week:

Dostoevsky said that man, in the end, will be saved by beauty -- or nothing. What he meant by that I think is that there is nothing in the world with the power to change hearts and inspire minds like beauty. Music, stories, poetry, film, photography, the natural world - all have the capacity to lift our hearts and inspire our own creativity. They touch us at a deep level; they inspire us to find our own talents and add our own beauty to the world.

I am a political animal. I read and watch and think politics. Occasionally I dive in and get involved. I think politics is important. Politics is about the distribution of power and resources and it matters to me that power and resources not be concentrated in the hands of a few. Good politics levels the playing field, knocks down walls and ceilings of injustice, puts food on the table for families.

But the older I get the more I am convinced of the limit of politics. By itself, the practice of modern politics tends toward the corrosive. It wears people down. Spend a day watching FOX or CNN and I think you will know what I mean.

It is interesting to me to think about how much the church, and here I am thinking specifically about Christianity in America, has come to see so much of its mission as political. That is what the culture wars are all about - fighting over who has the power to decide what values will predominate in the public square. Both conservative and liberal Christians have joined the fight. We often define our Christianity and our faith by our responses to these political battles.

I do not share with my Anabaptist ancestors or even some of my friends the belief that we should not even be participating in politics. Again, I think it is important and I think the church should encourage political involvement. Justice matters.

I think, though, that our passion for justice needs to be balanced by attention to beauty. If it seems strange to think about beauty as a church task, remember that there was a time when the church was considered the chief patron of the arts, in music, literature, architecture, art. Of course they were also often the only game in town, the only institution with the resources to support artists.

But there was something else going on as well. The church placed a high value on beauty because it believed that creativity and beauty were characteristics of God and God's creation. To experience and create beauty brought us closer to God. The experience and creation of beauty are not peripheral to what it means to be Christian or spiritual.

What got me thinking about beauty? The music in church on Sunday and the beauty that is breaking out all around us this spring. Both were and are inspiring. I hope you have a beautiful day.

The Star Came to Rest over Minneapolis

2010-04-07T16:58:00.002-05:00

Two intellectual heavy-weights of the Republican Party shared the stage this afternoon in the twin cities. FOX News' Sean Hannity was here covering the event live, lending more gravitas to the celestial event.

Our Brain on Costco

2010-03-31T13:59:00.002-05:00

What our brain is doing when we shop at Costco:

Consumers aren't always driven by careful considerations of price and expected utility. We don't look at the electric grill or box of chocolates and perform an explicit cost-benefit analysis. Instead, we outsource much of this calculation to our emotional brain, and rely on relative amounts of pleasure versus pain to tell us what to purchase. (During many of the decisions, the rational prefrontal cortex was largely a spectator, standing silently by while the NAcc pleasure centers and insula secretes aversive feelings argued with each other.) Whichever feeling we feel most intensely tends to dictate our shopping decisions. It's like an emotional tug-of-war.
Retail stores manipulate this cortical setup. They are designed to open our wallets: the frivolous details of the shopping experience are really subtle acts of psychological manipulation. The store is tweaking our brain, trying to soothe the insula and stoke the NAcc. Just look at the interior of a Costco warehouse. It's no accident that the most covetous items are put in the most prominent places. A row of high-definition televisions surrounds the entrance. The fancy jewelry, Rolex watches, iPods and other luxury items are conspicuously placed along the corridors with the heaviest foot traffic. (The fresh food is always located in the back of the store, so that we have to parade past the profitable aisles of temptations.) And then there are the free samples of food, liberally distributed throughout the store. The goal of Costco is to constantly prime the pleasure centers of the brain, to keep us lusting after things we don't need. Even though we probably won't buy the Rolex, just looking at the fancy watch makes us more likely to buy something else, since the coveted item activates the NAcc. We have been conditioned to crave a reward.

But it's not enough to just excite the NAcc: retailers must also inhibit the insula. This is where Costco really excels. When consumers are repeatedly assured that low prices are "guaranteed," or told that a certain item is on sale, the insula stops worrying so much about the price tag. In fact, researchers have found that even when a store puts a promotional sticker next to the price -something like "Bargain Buy!" or "Hot Deal!"-but doesn't actually reduce the price, sales of the item will still dramatically increase. These retail tactics lull our brain into buying more things, since our normal response to price tags is pacified.

Fortunately we don't have a Costco nearby yet, just a Sam's Club and I am betting they haven't figured any of this out yet. I do love the free food samples, though.

When the Economy is Bad...

2010-03-30T17:30:00.002-05:00

HT: Christianity Today Blog

If We Approached Slavery Like We Aproached Health Care

2010-03-28T15:40:00.005-05:00

Minnesota state Senator John Marty, a candidate for governor, (and son of church historian Martin Marty) isn't thrilled with the new federal health care bill:

If the country had approached slavery like we have approached health care," he says, "we'd still have slavery, but Democrats would be bragging that the slaves only work 40 hours a week now. We haven't fixed the problem. There will still be people dying from lack of health care, and going broke.

Where Has Obedience Gone

2010-03-26T15:55:00.003-05:00

This is why I could never be Catholic:

So, we had a trade organization — the Catholic Health Association — which calls itself “Catholic” and we had religious Sisters who call themselves Catholic, saying, “Sorry, bishops, you got it wrong, here is the teaching of the Church.” The Lord Jesus Christ, unworthy though the bishops are, called the bishops to lead the people in faith; He did not call anybody in the Catholic Health Association and he did not call any of the Sisters in Network.

The bishops are called to teach, sanctify, and govern. But, as I said before, with regard to the Holy Father, if people will not recognize authority, then they cannot lay responsibility at the feet of those to whom they are disobedient. The pope and the bishops are only responsible when their authority is accepted. The then-Cardinal Ratzinger himself has said, in our contemporary world, the word “obedience” has disappeared from our vocabulary and the reality of obedience has been anathematized.

This is Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin chastising Catholics who disagreed with the bishops on the health care vote.

HT Andrew Sullivan

On Disbelieving Pastors

2010-03-26T14:04:00.005-05:00

I said I was going to respond to this article.

For eight years out of seminary I served a Church of the Brethren congregation in northern Ohio. I still remember the Sunday after worship when a parishioner came up to me and told me that my recent sermons were "undermining the faith of our children." I don't remember what I was preaching on; but I distinctly remember the responses I was getting at the time.

Just out of seminary I spent the first half of my tenure at that church getting my pastoral legs under my feet. I spent the second half of my time there beginning to find my own faith. It was a messy process for me. Looking back on my time there it is not surprising to me that some people sitting in the pews must have been wondering why they were paying this pastor to raise question that might challenge their faith.

To be fair to me in many ways I was just tinkering around the edges, sharing a little bible scholarship about sources and sitz im leben and discrepencies in the Greek text of the NT, etc. My own biblical studies were being re-invigorated by the work of the Jesus Seminar, but I wasn't giving them full doses. And I wasn't sharing anything about my own deeper questions about Jesus and the reality of God.

To be fair to them they were a very traditional Brethren congregation. They were mostly pacifist and service oriented, the best of my tradition. They were also mostly union folks and liberal on economic issues, definitely a plus. But they held very traditional and moderately evangelical views on sin and salvation, the "purpose" of Jesus, and the authority of the Bible. And the issue of homosexuality was a "live" issue in that congregation but the subject was taboo. I didn't preach about it from the pulpit but I was talking about it a lot with individuals and families. From their perspective I am sure it felt like I was messing with their faith.

I began to realize during my last few years that I could not keep doing what I was doing. I couldn't say one thing from the pulpit - the safe thing, the traditional thing - and think something else. I couldn't not talk about some issues because it made some people uncomfortable. I couldn't lead the congregation in prayer to God when I wasn't sure there was anybody up there listening.

So I decided to resign. The fateful moment actually was brought about by a congregational vote to turn down an offer made by a local company to take a piece of the church's large property and build on it a child-care center paid for by that company who would also share the building with the church. It was in my view a huge no vote to mission and to the viability of the congregation. It was time for me to go.

At first I interviewed at several other churches. But in each case I realized that it wasn't going to work. They were asking me questions about biblical authority and the virgin birth and I wasn't going down that road again. So because of my wife's employment and education situation where we were in Ohio, I began to look for other work there.

When I got the call from a denominational representative to consider planting a church in the twin cities I initially said no. He said he was sending me the material anyway. So it came and I began to realize that this might be an opportunity for me to be a pastor and to be honest about my faith. If I started from the very beginning saying "this is what I believe" then those who came would know what they were getting into and those who stayed would stay because they appreciate this way of being a person of faith.

Seventeen years later I am still saying "this is what I believe" on Sunday mornings. Not "this is what the Bible says you should believe" or "this is what you must believe to be a Christian" or "this is what I believe" (but secretly I don't). I have found it to be a recipe for growing a thriving liberal Christian community where some non-Christians also find a spiritual home. I have also found it to be a recipe for sleeping well at night.

I sympathize with pastors who feel trapped because their own faith experience doesn't match the faith experience of the congregations they serve. I was there once. And I don't think there is one right response to being in this situation. Some pastors have the cross-cultural skills to make it work. They love the people they are with for who they are and have the vision and persistence to work at bringing people along little by little over time. (I realize this may sound patronizing and it is certainly true that growth happens in both ways. But I also make no apologies for saying that it is part of the pastor's job to "bring people along," i.e to grow; and bringing people along towards a more open and progressive vision is in my view a good thing.)

Other pastors don't have the temperament or the skill set. Or they simply have lost their faith. For them there is no sleeping well at night. I know some of them. For their own sake and for the sake of their congregations it would probably be better if they found a new career, or better yet started a new church where they could figure out their faith among like-minded people.

Feeding on Fear

2010-03-26T13:48:00.003-05:00

I just received a fundraising appeal from a liberal organization that begins its pitch this way:

We knew that power concedes nothing. So did President Obama. So did the members of Congress who courageously voted for reform, knowing that the special interests and the extreme right wing would retaliate swiftly.

The attacks are fierce. Deceptive ads are hitting the airwaves in swing districts. GOP lawmakers are pushing to repeal reform -- and preventing the Senate from performing basic functions. A few Republican attorneys general have launched a baseless attack to overturn the legislation. But that's not even the worst of it.

A conservative blogger posted the home address of Congressman Tom Perriello, urging tea partiers to "drop by." Other members have had death threats. Democratic offices have been vandalized...

This is one of several similar emails I have received in the last few days from liberal groups. I don't like it one bit. I get that this is a proven method for raising money. I get that the right wing does it too. And I am not disputing the veracity of the charges leveled here. The Republicans are pretty much unhinged from reality right now; some of them are treading in dangerous and possibly illegal waters.

But do we have to stoop to the same level? Do we have to ratchet up the rhetoric to a fever pitch so we can meet them mano a mano in the gutter? If we want cooler heads to prevail on the other side shouldn't we model it on ours?

I don't give money to any organization - political or religious - that uses fear as a motivating tool.

Amish Forgiveness

2010-03-26T12:48:00.003-05:00

Apparently the Lifetime Movie Network has taken some liberties with the facts of the story of the 2006 Nickel Mines Amish school shooting. The movie Amish Grace, which will air this Sunday, is based on a book by the same name. The movie has an Amish mother showing up at the home of the deceased shooter the day after the killings and confronting the wife of the gunman. The authors of the book say this never happened:

True, Amish people did show up at gunman Charles Roberts' home within hours of the shooting that left five girls dead. They also visited his parents and parents-in-law, all of whom lived within a few miles of the West Nickel Mines School.
But the Amish people didn't go there to express rage or sling blame. They visited the Roberts family because of their compassion for his kin--victims of the tragedy who were also suffering immense emotional pain. One Amish neighbor consoled Charles Roberts' father with a hand on his shoulder and four simple words: "We love you, Roberts." A few days later, at Roberts' burial, parents of some of the Amish girls he had killed showed up and hugged his widow. It was, said one Amish man, "simply the right thing to do."

The authors make a guess that the movie channel chose a different beginning because it more closely mirrors the typical English? reaction to being harmed: first rage and then hopefully forgiveness as time passes. This, say the authors, is not the Amish way. Deeply ingrained teachings and practices of forgiveness as a first response were lived out at Nickel Mines. It apparently made a difference:

The Amish response was "the beginning of the healing process," Ms. Roberts (mother of the gunman) continues. She describes how it compelled her and her husband to visit all the Amish families whose daughters had been shot, and to invite all the mothers and the surviving girls to her home for tea.

Ms. Roberts continues to host teas and swimming parties for the surviving girls, four of whom have resumed relatively normal lives. Her closest relationship, however, exists with Rosanna, the one survivor who doesn't swim because she's seriously disabled. To this day, Ms. Roberts visits with Rosanna for several hours every Thursday evening.
Perhaps the real story of Amish grace is as touching as the Lifetime movie version of it. But as we note in our book, the story of Amish forgiveness is not about remarkable individuals finding "within themselves" the ability to forgive. It's about a community that valued forgiveness and reconciliation so highly before the shooting happened that scapegoating the Roberts family on October 2, 2006, wasn't even thinkable.

That this kind of behavior is taken to be remarkable in our "Christian" nation says something about the nature of our Christianity.

A Pope in Trouble

2010-03-25T08:22:00.003-05:00

I am beginning to think that the stories of cover-up of child sex abuse by priests in America, Germany, and Ireland are going to bring down this pope:

Top Vatican officials — including the future Pope Benedict XVI — did not defrock a priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys, even though several American bishops repeatedly warned them that failure to act on the matter could embarrass the church, according to church files newly unearthed as part of a lawsuit.
The internal correspondence from bishops in Wisconsin directly to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, shows that while church officials tussled over whether the priest should be dismissed, their highest priority was protecting the church from scandal.
The documents emerge as Pope Benedict is facing other accusations that he and direct subordinates often did not alert civilian authorities or discipline priests involved in sexual abuse when he served as an archbishop in Germany and as the Vatican’s chief doctrinal enforcer.

Change We Can Believe In!

2010-03-21T21:46:00.002-05:00

Finally we have health care for all. What a great night for our country.

Scores that Matter

2010-03-19T14:59:00.003-05:00

Well I had Minnesota as a sentimental pick to upset Xavier in the first round of the NCAA men's tournament. It wasn't to be as the Gophers shooting went stone cold in the second half. My whole bracket is pretty much going up in smoke.

I have the games on and the volume muted so I can watch the scores. But I have also been following two other scores that are much more important heading into this weekend. The second and most important score is the vote on the health care bill which is currently scheduled for Sunday. The odds are for its passage are looking better and better as several wavering Dems have indicating they will vote yes.

Part of the reason for that is because of the first big score on the health care bill that came back yesterday from the Congressional Budget Office. The reporters and analysts have been all over this and I have nothing to add except to say that this process - of writing a bill and getting it scored by the CBO and making it at the very least deficit neutral - is what good government looks like.

Republicans rail against big government and promise to shrink it but never do when they are in power. Our last two Republican presidents vastly expanded the size and scope of the federal government. And I have no problem with that because I think we need a big government to meet the many needs of a big country. But Republicans are proven first-rate hypocrites when it comes to the what they say about the size of government when they are out of power and what they do when they are in power.

But what is even worse, at least under the most recent President, is that while they were expanding the size of government they were hiding the costs. The true cost of military budgets to support two wars were off the books, not included in the regular budget. When they passed the prescription drug benefit they silenced the chief actuary charged with figuring out its cost, threatening to fire him if he told Congress that the price was going to be far higher than what the President said it was going to be. Not a peep of protest was heard from the Republican Congress. Why? Because they didn't really care about the size of the government or the deficit. What they cared about was staying in power.

Now out-of-power Republicans are complaining about the process that is going to bring us this bill's passage, and about secret deals made with some legislators made to get their votes. But the truth is the process has been remarkably visible, straight-forward, and honest. The secret deals have been exposed and removed. Republicans were given every opportunity to participate; remember that the process was dragged out for months to allow the bi-partisan 'gang of six' to see if they could come up with a bill that would get Republican support. (The final bill looks much like what the gang of six came up with but still no Republican support.) Most importantly the bill has been vetted by the CBO and it passes muster as an enormous government expansion that pays for itself. It is possible to be cynical and cast aspersions on the accuracy of the CBO but then who are you going to trust to give an impartial reading on the cost of bills? They are widely recognized as non-partisan and accurate with their forecasts. And imagine what Republicans would be saying if the CBO numbers had come back with big deficit-busting numbers. They would have quoting the CBO report to everyone.

From a progressive's perspective this bill is far from perfect. Single payer or at the very least a robust public option would have been preferable. But the process of getting to this moment, slow and painful as it has been and reaching an end that is not perfect, has been an exercise in good government. The final score matters; I want the bill to pass. But how we get there also matters.

Disbelief in the Pulpit

2010-03-17T15:07:00.002-05:00

Via James McGrath I want to call attention to this interesting discussion in the Washington Post based on this article: Preachers who are not Believers. I don't have time today but I plan on commenting on it soon.

Happy St. Patrick's Day

2010-03-17T14:57:00.003-05:00

I'm not Irish and apart from marking the day with a good Irish Stout the holiday kind of passes me by. But there is one very good reason to celebrate this day. In Minnesota the sun rose this morning at 7:21 a.m. and it sets this evening at 7:21 p.m. Spring officially begins in 3 days but by the sun's reckoning up here in the north it has already arrived. And it is a beautiful day to boot.

Make My Day

2010-03-17T14:30:00.002-05:00

The Washington Post is reporting that some Republicans are mounting a repeal movement in the face of the increasing likelihood that Dems are going to pass health care legislation:

Can Republicans win election this fall by campaigning to repeal the health-care legislation now nearing passage in Congress?
Even as House Democrats search for the votes to send the bill to President Obama, dozens of Republican lawmakers and candidates have signed a pledge to back an effort to repeal the bill, should the GOP take control of either house of Congress after this fall's elections.

Started by the conservative activist group Club for Growth, the "Repeal It" movement first won the backing in January of some of the most conservative Republicans in Congress, such as "tea party" favorite Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). It has since expanded to include some of the party's Senate candidates in liberal-leaning states such as New Hampshire and Illinois.

I think this is a great idea. I hope every Republican candidate runs on repealing health care. I can imagine the slogans: No insurance for your children with cancer! Bring back the donut hole! If you lose your job you don't deserve health insurance!

Back in the real world there is not a single Republican running in remotely close-contested elections who is going to campaign on repealing health care this fall. It would be political suicide. It is all bluster.

12,000 Calories a Day

2010-03-16T17:29:00.003-05:00

If this was your typical daily diet how big would you be:

In a typical day I'll eat four burgers and fries, a loaf of bread with peanut butter and jam, four servings of meatloaf and mashed potato, a large pizza, a chocolate cake with ice cream and cream, 12 cupcakes, two cheesecakes and fizzy drinks.

This is the diet of New Jersey woman who weighs in at over 600 pounds and is trying to get to 1000. She has set up a website where men pay to watch her eat. She is 42 years old and says she is happy and healthy. She also loves sushi and says she can eat 70 big pieces in "one go."

It's a free country, as many say in America. Unfortunately, though, her health care costs are not free. According to the article it will likely be the taxpayers of NJ who will be paying the tab for her gluttony. I have a problem with that. It is one thing to struggle with weight and deal with all of the social and medical consequences. It is another thing entirely to intentionally destroy your body and stick others with the bill for taking care of you.

Rod Dreher is even less charitable.

Rework Takes on Karl Rove

2010-03-16T16:52:00.006-05:00

I haven't read Rework which has been on the bestseller NYTimes bestseller list. But Karl Rove's book recently knocked it off the top spot and the author's of Rework have struck back with this amusing video:

I downloaded a sample of the book to my Kindle. Here is the publishers promo:

From the founders of the trailblazing software company 37signals, here is a different kind of business book one that explores a new reality. Today, anyone can be in business. Tools that used to be out of reach are now easily accessible. Technology that cost thousands is now just a few bucks or even free. Stuff that was impossible just a few years ago is now simple.That means anyone can start a business. And you can do it without working miserable 80-hour weeks or depleting your life savings. You can start it on the side while your day job provides all the cash flow you need. Forget about business plans, meetings, office space - you don't need them.

With its straightforward language and easy-is-better approach, Rework is the perfect playbook for anyone who's ever dreamed of doing it on their own. Hardcore entrepreneurs, small-business owners, people stuck in day jobs who want to get out, and artists who don't want to starve anymore will all find valuable inspiration and guidance in these pages. It's time to rework work.

Update: Make that Amazon's top spot, not the NYTimes.

NCLB Supporter Changes Mind

2010-03-16T13:17:00.002-05:00

Diane Ravitch is Research Professor of Education at New York University and once a supporter of No Child Left Behind. She has a new book out on the subject and writes in The New Republic why she has changed her mind:

As I assayed the evidence about No Child Left Behind (NCLB), I concluded that it has failed. The testing regime that NCLB installed in every public school has not improved American education. By mandating that scores in reading and math must constantly rise, the federal law has removed any incentive to teach the arts, science, history, literature, foreign languages, geography, civics, or any other non-tested subject.

NCLB requires that all students must be proficient in reading and math by 2014. When the legislation was signed in 2002, this goal was wildly unrealistic--and now, it is merely laughable. The target date is only four years away, but no state is remotely close to 100 percent proficiency. Indeed, in 2008, 35,000 of the nation’s schools bore the stigma of "failing" because they weren't making sufficient progress toward that utopian target.

What NCLB has done with its proficiency deadline is set a timetable for the demolition of American public education. In an effort to meet NCLB’s unattainable goal and avoid the "failing" label, most states have dumbed down their standardized tests or their definitions of proficiency. Many states claim that large majorities of their students are “proficient” in reading or math, but their claims are refuted by federal assessments (called the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP) that are given to all students in fourth and eighth grades every other year. For example, Texas reported that 85 percent of its students in those grades were proficient readers based on year-end state testing, but, on the NAEP, only 29 percent were. Nationwide, NAEP scores have gone up in math since 2003, but the rate of improvement has been less than before the passage of NCLB. In eighth-grade reading, there was no improvement at all from 1998 to 2007.

She has reached a similar verdict on the charter school movement.

Don't Eat the Viking

2010-03-08T12:54:00.005-06:00

I'm reading this article on the pesticides, hormones, and plastics that we may be ingesting in our foods and how it may be contributing to our obesity epidemic. This is how they analogize about eating hormone-laden beef:

To bring this all home, imagine you've been in a terrible plane crash in the Andes, like those poor souls depicted in the movie "Alive." The only way to survive is to pick one of the dead folks to eat. You're given the choice of an obese, grotesquely muscled, man-boob-toting Minnesota Vikings lineman with shrunken testicles who's been injecting himself with hormones for a dozen years, or someone of normal size and body type and hormonal function. (One of the Kardashian sisters, maybe.) Which would you choose?

Well, every time you eat conventionally raised beef, you're choosing the Viking.

Makes you think twice about biting into that hamburger. They are calling these chemicals run amok in our diet obesogens. Interesting article.

Cat Confessions

2010-03-08T12:23:00.004-06:00

I was awakened in the middle of last night by a loud noise. One of our cats, Sampson, was in the bed and jumped up at the sound. I sat up, looked out the window, listened a moment, and laid back down. No sooner had I dozed off when cat number two, Sadie, jumped onto my chest and started meowing in my face. I rubbed her head, she started purring and laid down in bed.

I got up this morning to find a plant knocked over and the ceramic pot shattered all over the floor. Apparently Sadie was confessing her sin and felt that by petting her I was granting her absolution.

HT for photo to Thomas Verenna.

Sauteed Chickpeas

2010-03-02T20:20:00.003-06:00

Mark Bittman recently featured a sauteed chickpea recipe. I went looking for the Spanish chorizo called for but couldn't find it in local grocers. I will keep looking. In any case he said the chickpeas turned from mealy to crispy in the pan and were great alone. So I rinsed, dried, and sauteed a can up tonight and he was right. They were great. I put them into a salad with Romaine lettuce, avocado, mushrooms, and olive oil and vinegar. That was dinner tonight.

Cheater's Bible

2010-03-02T16:53:00.002-06:00

Today I received via UPS a copy of The UBS Greek New Testament: A Reader's (or cheater's) Edition. It has a translation of all vocabulary words occurring 30 times or less in the NT at the bottom of the page. It's great for someone like me who isn't working in the Greek NT every day but has a decent handle on the vocabulary and grammar. What I don't know or remember is right there on the page.

Senator Judd Gregg Says Use Reconciliation

2010-02-26T08:09:00.004-06:00

I hope this video gets played over and over:

Please Rob Me

2010-02-25T19:25:00.004-06:00

Do you tell your friends on Twitter or Facebook where you are? If so, you may be telling potential thieves where you are not. Please Rob Me calls attention to all those public posts where people are inviting unwanted guests into their homes. Your tweet might be there.

Is It a Waste of Time if they don't Convert to Christianity?

2010-02-25T16:01:00.006-06:00

Here is a question posted today at the Christianity Today blog:

If you aided someone for years and years and they never became a Christian, would you consider your efforts wasted?

The back story for this question is an AP report that appeared out of Haiti regarding tensions between evangelical Christians and practitioners of Voodoo. The story included these comments by Frank Amedia of Touch Heaven Ministries: “We would give food to the needy in the short term but if they refused to give up Voodoo, I'm not sure we would continue to support them in the long term because we wouldn't want to perpetuate that practice. We equate it with witchcraft, which is contrary to the Gospel.”

As it turns out the AP report took the comments of Mr. Amedia way out of context and he issued a clarification which you can read on the CT blog post. But he did say that eventually or "long term" as he says, his ministry might stop feeding them if they continued to practice Voodoo.

Hence we get the question from CT about whether our efforts would be "wasted" if we didn't get a conversion. This kind of question is a reminder to me of one of the many reasons I am not an evangelical Christian. I don't even understand the question. If I fed someone who lost everything in an earthquake and they didn't starve to death I would consider my mission accomplished. If I needed to keep feeding them for years in order to keep them from starving I would do it without question and not consider my efforts wasted regardless of whether they ever converted to my faith or not.

I am reminded of going to an evangelism training session many years ago put on by someone in our denomination. The topic was friendship evangelism and they showed a movie where Christians befriended their neighbors in order to get them to convert. Their motives weren't subtle; they - the actors playing Christians in the movie - talked about them in their table conversation as they plotted their strategy with their neighbors. Let's be friends with our neighbors so we can get them to convert. Let's have them over for dinner, go golfing with them, spend as much time as it takes to soften them up and when the moment is right pop the salvation question. I came home from the session feeling like I needed to take a shower.

I am not opposed to sharing my story when someone asks "why are you doing this.?" But the reason I am doing this - feeding the hungry, helping to rebuild homes after floods, sending money or Church World Service kits to Haiti, etc. - is because it is the right thing to do. It is what Christians do; it is what people of other faiths and no faiths do too. With no ulterior motives. I have been blessed. Out of the blessings I have experienced I want to help out others who are in need. It is that simple.

BTW it has been my experience that the AP is a really unreliable source for news, whether it is local, national or international.

She Wore Her Dead Sister's Teeth

2010-02-25T15:38:00.004-06:00

I have outsourced watching the health care debate to the progressive bloggers and pundits and have been checking in occasionally to see how it is going. Via Karen Tumulty at Swampland this is the best (worst?) story I have seen. From New York Congresswoman Louise Slaughter:

Thank you Mr. President and thanks to my colleagues who are here. I am timely and will not take up a lot of time, but I do have to say some things.

The first is the preexisting conditions have to go. It is cruel and capricious and done only to help the bottom line. This was not even anything we talked about 10 or 15 years ago, but I mentioned that all Americans should be treated the same. Let me give you a history.

Eight states have declared that domestic violence is a preexisting condition on the grounds I assume that if you have been unlucky enough to get yourself beaten up once, you might do it again. Forty-eight percent is the higher cost for women to buy their own insurance. Believe you me that is really discrimination.

In 1991 women were not included in the health trials because we had hormones. It wasn't until we had a critical mass of women here that said this will not do for more than half the population of the United States who pay taxes and we made certain that diseases like osteoporosis and cervical cancer and uterine cancer were looked at. Up to that point, 1991, all research at the institutes of health was done on white males. Think about that a minute, if you will.

We couldn't do that because we said can you stop doing that? It took legislation. Doing this will take legislation. I have been through this before. I was here when we had the Clinton debate. It started some of you will remember by Lee Iacocca who said we cannot export automobiles. There is a $1,000 cost for health care in every one of them. My competitors are way ahead of them. They are eating my lunch. That was one of the main reasons that we decided we had to do something about that. In the 13 to 15 years since that happened, we have done nothing about health care, and don't export so much anymore and the automobile business is basically gone. We have done nothing to encourage entrepreneurs. We need to think about the economic benefits of doing this. They will reduce trade policies and let us make something else in the United States and really want to make sure that it succeeds and this would be a great part of that. I think it's terribly important that we do that.

Also since the Clinton health care plan, we have seen awful things. We saw hospitals abandoned to the streets. Critically ill, elderly, mentally ill persons and there was no great cry out there. Now I understand there is actually a proposal which god knows I hope never sees the light of day that shot down Medicare and turned it into a voucher system. Obviously we were not paid the full cost health care as they go to the public market to try to find something. What are we going to be doing then? Once again abandon our elderly and mentally ill and our seriously ill to the streets. We are better people than that. It would be a good thing for us while we are here in this room together to think about what's important here. Not nitpick, but think about all the people out there every day, the number of people that have excess deaths because they have no health insurance.

I have a constituent that you won't believe and I know you won't, but her sister died, this poor woman had no dentures. She wore her dead sister's teeth which of course were uncomfortable and did not fit. Do you believe that in America that's where we would be? This is the last chance as far as I'm concerned on the export business. We have fallen behind and no longer the biggest manufacturer in the world and lost our technological edge. We have an opportunity to do that, but the major part of the success of that is getting this health care bill passed. Thank you very much.

You can watch the video at the link. Another video worth watching is Congressman Anthony Weiner on the floor of the House yesterday calling the Republican Party a "wholly owned subsidiary of insurance companies." Republicans moved to have the language stricken from the record so he came back and repeated it in a different way. Happened again and he came back for a third time and gave it another twist. It was pretty amusing. Video here.

Keeping It Together After a Tragedy

2010-02-24T16:13:00.005-06:00

I haven't watched much of the Olympics but upon reading about the performance of Canadian skater Joannie Rochette after her mom unexpectedly died of a heart attack two days earlier, I watched the performance online. I found it to be moving.

It's Great to be One of the Chosen Ones

2010-02-24T15:53:00.003-06:00

Amusing quote from my reading today:

As a general proposition, of course, it remains true that the majority of humankind is destined for damnation, and that the minority of the saved are very lucky; but in practice, we are confident that we belong in this minority; and that the universe is unfolding as it should. (From A Secular Age by Charles Taylor)

Taylor is talking about the unfolding Protestant reformation, especially the Calvinist variety, as it grew increasingly confident in its own ability to do the inner personal work of salvation and order society for the common good. So the next sentence after this quote is: "The declarations that we are helpless sinners become more and more pro forma."

But I am proof-texting here because the quote made me laugh. And... because lot's of Christians still believe it to be true that the vast majority of the world is going to hell but they are not.

Hometown Skier Wins Gold

2010-02-17T17:02:00.006-06:00

If I wasn't so lazy I would walk up the street and take a picture of Buck Hill which is not far from my house. It is just a little ski hill. But somehow it turns out Olympic caliber skiers. Lindsey Vonn, who just won the Gold Medal in the Alpine Skiing Womens Downhill at British Colombia, grew up here in Burnsville and learned to ski at Buck Hill. The 1998 Olympic Winter Games in Nagano, Japan, saw two Buck Hill skiers on the US Olympic Team. Both Kristina Koznick and Tasha Nelson started their skiing careers as members of the Buck Hill Ski Racing Team. Ski Magazine calls Buck the "Legendary capital of American ski racing."

It's just a little hill. Pretty amazing. Congratulations to Vonn.