Yesterday on talk radio a man was bewailing African American financial woes. I do not know who he was, but he sounded like a college professor or researcher (he was Black). The point he made was in the Black community every dollar spent was spent, on averge, one more time in the Black community. In the Asian (seven) and White (six) the rates are much, much higher. This, he said, was a factor in the continuing financial challenges which Blacks experience. Blacks are not benefiting Blacks the way other communities were, he said. He then said that mortgages are a major part of that and that there are no Black mortgage banks.
I am not indifferent to the special challenges which Blacks face, nor am I naive enough to think that racism has no impact. On the other hand, I also think behaviors and choices need to be factored in. I know that, around here, the government is an employer of a large number of African Americans. If you work for the government you get certain benefits. Owning banks is not one of them. So the solution to Black unemployment (i.e., the government) creates a new problem (no Black businesses). The radio man was not railing against government jobs.
Today is the feast of Bishop Charles Quintard. He was born in Stamford, Connecticut in 1824. He became a doctor, worked in Athens Georgia and ended up in Memphis. He became a priest in 1856 and was elected the second bishop of Tennessee in 1865. He served 33 years in this position. During the Civil war he was both a Confederate chaplain and a surgeon.
After the war he was instrumental in reconciliation and outreach to Blacks. In the prayer for today we prayed in thanksgiving for his example ("who opposed the segregation of African Americans in separate congregations and condemned the exclusion of poor people"). We did not focus on his medical work, his role in the military, he efforts on behalf of the University of the South, or any number of things with which he was occuppied in his long life. [side note, he donated the windows at St. Andrews, the parish I serve.] It was striking to me that the person writing the prayer was obviously motivated by a very particular agenda. It is an agenda which the Episcopal Church very publicly embraces (and this is not a critique of that point of view) so that is why I am able to notice it.
How the church chooses to remember him (five paragraphs on one page and a prayer on the other) is but a partial summary. That is the challenge. How do you summarize an entire life by a few words or a major social situation in a few minutes. Reality is much more complex. Whatever we say must be nuanced. We must remember that much is left unsaid. Yet, how can we say everything about everything? We need to summarize and need to use few words. Our hope is that while incomplete, the summary is still accurate.
I wish I was better at keeping that perspective. I wish I alwasy remembered that there is always more to the story. I have struggled with being wider and deeper on issues the last few years. It is not easy. I am not smart enough, nor educated enough, to get beyond pretty simplistic thought in almost everything (there are a few areas where I am okay!). Being aware of agendas and perspectives is important. It is valuable if we are to find the truth (rather than impose it). It takes more humility and hard work than most of us want to muster.
We live in a big world and we only see 'parts and pieces.' We are all "partialists." Everyone needs to hear the rest of the story. Jesus is the Truth. We know and love Him. He is our hope for someday grasping (and being grasped by) Truth. In the meantime we need to keep both eyes open and constantly ask the question, "what more is there to this." It does not mean giving up convictions and speaking out strongly. It does mean doing so with humility and care.
Showing posts with label Systems Theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Systems Theory. Show all posts
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Combative Christianity
My last post was a stroll down memory lane and an amazing experience of God speaking to me. The theme (arrows, spears, armor of God, Braveheart) was thoroughly martial. Pondering those contentious days I find myself evaluating my current state.
Christians are called to give their life to the Lord. We are to be willing to even die in our witness to Him. Martrdom is the crowning achievement of Christian fidelity. I grew up on stories about the great heroes of the faith who endured horrible suffering at the hands of others who demanded that the martyr rejects Jesus, deny God and turn his/her back on the church.
Within the Church at large (and in my denomination) there is an ongoing struggle over the Truth. To take a stand for the traditional faith is, in many places, viewed with hostility and confusion. The question is how does one enter the fray? Martyrs witness to the truth but then they die. What about those of us who are in debate, verbally wrestling with other viewpoints. We seek to win the day, to deliver some argument so logically flawless, so profound, so emotionally stirring, so Holy Spirit filled that the opponent, wide eyed, mouth agape declares, "I see the Light! I convert!" The problem is, human beings are inclined to not listen in debates. We filter out what does not support our views and spin that which does. We are increasingly less and less open as the conflicts become more heated.
Combative Christians are seduced by the desire to win. We also tend to demonize those whom we oppose. When we demonize we often also project. So the opponent becomes a handy location for us to dump all our garbage. By the time we have reached the yelling and screaming (or retreated into our safe little enclaves where we can trash the others) there is little hope for conversion or conversation.
On the other hand, advocates for 'just getting along' ignore the importance of the questions being debated. In the end, if Jesus is the only way to salvation, it is pretty darn important that we are clear exactly what that means. Where we stand on that question impacts the eternal destiny of every man, woman and child on the planet. To get it wrong would be a tragedy beyond anything horrible that has ever happened. It matters too much to ignore. And there is much more. In fact, there are dozens and dozens of other questions which are close to that in importance. Pretending like it does not matter is not a reasonable option.
The problem is every answer is not clear. There are degrees of certitude. There are also competing goods. So I choose not to kill neighbors who disagree with my soteriology (theology of salvation) and assume that they will do me the same kindness. I also acknowledge that The Church has not definitively and totally explained exactly what God's Word means on this question. So we say, "Only Jesus," but that means something different to a vast array of people (including Saints on either side and in between). The danger should be evident, the single most life-and-death issue with which we can ever be faced can become a matter of agree-to-disagree indifference. Relegated to a side table under a sign saying "who knows?"
So what to do? Return to hanging, flogging and burning at the stake? Subdivide into small (and increasingly smaller) self congratulating groups which agree with each other? Embrace the indifference of the contemporary age and immerse ourselves in our prefered distractions? [Or just blog? ha!]
The problem with fighting is we want to win. And fighting to win can end up betraying the Lord who died on a cross. Be assured, those who crucified The Master were convinced they were right. On the other hand, the problem with not standing for the faith is you become a coward, a betrayer of Jesus. So we listen to one another, we listen for God, we read The Word, we sit at the feet of the teachers (across time and geography) whose wisdom and insight bring us closer to the Lord, to the truth. And we do it alone and with others in the trusting hope that our God is faithful, and so we are called to be faithful as well.
Christians are called to give their life to the Lord. We are to be willing to even die in our witness to Him. Martrdom is the crowning achievement of Christian fidelity. I grew up on stories about the great heroes of the faith who endured horrible suffering at the hands of others who demanded that the martyr rejects Jesus, deny God and turn his/her back on the church.
Within the Church at large (and in my denomination) there is an ongoing struggle over the Truth. To take a stand for the traditional faith is, in many places, viewed with hostility and confusion. The question is how does one enter the fray? Martyrs witness to the truth but then they die. What about those of us who are in debate, verbally wrestling with other viewpoints. We seek to win the day, to deliver some argument so logically flawless, so profound, so emotionally stirring, so Holy Spirit filled that the opponent, wide eyed, mouth agape declares, "I see the Light! I convert!" The problem is, human beings are inclined to not listen in debates. We filter out what does not support our views and spin that which does. We are increasingly less and less open as the conflicts become more heated.
Combative Christians are seduced by the desire to win. We also tend to demonize those whom we oppose. When we demonize we often also project. So the opponent becomes a handy location for us to dump all our garbage. By the time we have reached the yelling and screaming (or retreated into our safe little enclaves where we can trash the others) there is little hope for conversion or conversation.
On the other hand, advocates for 'just getting along' ignore the importance of the questions being debated. In the end, if Jesus is the only way to salvation, it is pretty darn important that we are clear exactly what that means. Where we stand on that question impacts the eternal destiny of every man, woman and child on the planet. To get it wrong would be a tragedy beyond anything horrible that has ever happened. It matters too much to ignore. And there is much more. In fact, there are dozens and dozens of other questions which are close to that in importance. Pretending like it does not matter is not a reasonable option.
The problem is every answer is not clear. There are degrees of certitude. There are also competing goods. So I choose not to kill neighbors who disagree with my soteriology (theology of salvation) and assume that they will do me the same kindness. I also acknowledge that The Church has not definitively and totally explained exactly what God's Word means on this question. So we say, "Only Jesus," but that means something different to a vast array of people (including Saints on either side and in between). The danger should be evident, the single most life-and-death issue with which we can ever be faced can become a matter of agree-to-disagree indifference. Relegated to a side table under a sign saying "who knows?"
So what to do? Return to hanging, flogging and burning at the stake? Subdivide into small (and increasingly smaller) self congratulating groups which agree with each other? Embrace the indifference of the contemporary age and immerse ourselves in our prefered distractions? [Or just blog? ha!]
The problem with fighting is we want to win. And fighting to win can end up betraying the Lord who died on a cross. Be assured, those who crucified The Master were convinced they were right. On the other hand, the problem with not standing for the faith is you become a coward, a betrayer of Jesus. So we listen to one another, we listen for God, we read The Word, we sit at the feet of the teachers (across time and geography) whose wisdom and insight bring us closer to the Lord, to the truth. And we do it alone and with others in the trusting hope that our God is faithful, and so we are called to be faithful as well.
Friday, September 23, 2011
GLBT's sticky argument (2)
(Following up on yesterday, so read it first). On September 14th our local paper ran an article by David Brooks, "The erosion of shared moral frameworks." Brooks reflected on the findings from a group of sociologists who studied America's youth. His point is that today's youth, while not decadent, are inept in discussing moral issues. Two-thirds were unable to describe a moral dilemma. Brooks reflects upon their inablility to think in moral terms. It is very disconcerting. He concludes that things were different in the past: "A shared religion defined rules and practices. Cultures structured people's imaginations and imposed moral disciplines. But now more people are led to assume that the free-floating individual is the essential moral unit."
This does not mean that people were better in the past. Sinful humans sin. The problem of sin is always there. The problem is the younger among us are incapable of deciphering what sin is, beyond obvious things like murder. The bigger problem is the total ascendency of the individual/personal over the corporate/communal.The ethical system in which I was educated in seminary had a helpful balance between individual conscience and institutional expectations. The concept of an informed conscience was a key element. A person was expected to engage the revelation of God's will as found in Scripture and discerned by and articulated through the Church. I know the Protestant approach negates the latter as unhelpful, and many Protestant friends speak of Church Tradition as a negative. Yet, clearly, the current conflict over interpretation of Scripture is grounded in "free-floating individuals" and the result has been rather chaotic.
The adovcates for Man-Boy love (called NAMBLA, a group which no longer "officially" exists) was originally an active agent in gay rights advocacy. Lesbians were resistant to this and as the gay rights advocates became 'less radical' and more mainstream NAMBLA was expelled from their organizations. One can only wonder to what degree the decisions were made for practical purposes (in pursuing acceptance of homosexuality). I have no doubt that many homosexuals whom I know would be offended by NAMBLA. I also am not surprised that Lesbians would find it offensive. The only point I make is that there is an overlap, and a significant overlap, of the movement to 'normalize' GLBT relationships and the aims of NAMBLA.
Because the existing moral code is under attack, not only by secularists, but also by those within the church, we live in a time where much change is taking place. What is most worrisome is that the conservative evangelicals, long criticized for their "intolerance" are manifesting the same erosion of values that their Liberal/Progressive opponents are advocating. It is based, at least in part, on the general decline of churches into collections of "free-floating individuals." The ecclessiology of many committed Christians minimizes the value of church and negates catholicity. An emphasis on personal salvation is interpretted through the predominant cultural lense (what is in it for me?) and the rejection of the church's authority to teach reduces each person to an isolated decision maker. Shaped by assumptions which are non-Christian and limited by mediocre skills in moral analysis and decision making, the church youth are little better equipped to answer life's challenges than their non-believing neighbors. In the end, the Bible is not always terribly helpful to such an individual. There is much in the Bible which confuses. There is a need to intrepret the texts and such interpretations can be very divergent, very, very divergent. And when we listen to no voive but our own (and those who say what we want to hear) the likelihood of hearing the text say what we want to hear increases tenfold.
The success of the GLBT coalition has been astounding. For the better part of a decade it has been front and center of news stories and popular entertainment. (e.g., a popular show among teens, Glee, revels constantly in gay themes). Progressives would applaud such openness. I am not so enthusiastic. Instead, I continue to see (helpful) boundaries disappear. The efforts to normalize the GLBT has moved the limits of toleration ever closer to acceptance of the 'next thing'. The current movement to change age of consent and rethink the issue of sex between adult and child is the beginning, not the end, of a process. To the extent that they have undermined traditional moral teaching, the adovocates of GLBT stand responsible for this latest tragedy. The failure of honesty and the refusal to analyze their own arguments (and the consequences of their claims) has produced an environment of new danger. Calling traditional morality "hate speech" has made it less possible to speak the truth in love to the advocates of child sex. Molesters revel in all this. They have hope that the weakened standing of the traditional moral code will provide them with the opportunity to normalize their perversions. I do not see how the Progressives can answer this advance. After all, when you claim that no one has a right to judge another, you open the door to everything. Well, the door is open and everything is on its way in.
This does not mean that people were better in the past. Sinful humans sin. The problem of sin is always there. The problem is the younger among us are incapable of deciphering what sin is, beyond obvious things like murder. The bigger problem is the total ascendency of the individual/personal over the corporate/communal.The ethical system in which I was educated in seminary had a helpful balance between individual conscience and institutional expectations. The concept of an informed conscience was a key element. A person was expected to engage the revelation of God's will as found in Scripture and discerned by and articulated through the Church. I know the Protestant approach negates the latter as unhelpful, and many Protestant friends speak of Church Tradition as a negative. Yet, clearly, the current conflict over interpretation of Scripture is grounded in "free-floating individuals" and the result has been rather chaotic.
The adovcates for Man-Boy love (called NAMBLA, a group which no longer "officially" exists) was originally an active agent in gay rights advocacy. Lesbians were resistant to this and as the gay rights advocates became 'less radical' and more mainstream NAMBLA was expelled from their organizations. One can only wonder to what degree the decisions were made for practical purposes (in pursuing acceptance of homosexuality). I have no doubt that many homosexuals whom I know would be offended by NAMBLA. I also am not surprised that Lesbians would find it offensive. The only point I make is that there is an overlap, and a significant overlap, of the movement to 'normalize' GLBT relationships and the aims of NAMBLA.
Because the existing moral code is under attack, not only by secularists, but also by those within the church, we live in a time where much change is taking place. What is most worrisome is that the conservative evangelicals, long criticized for their "intolerance" are manifesting the same erosion of values that their Liberal/Progressive opponents are advocating. It is based, at least in part, on the general decline of churches into collections of "free-floating individuals." The ecclessiology of many committed Christians minimizes the value of church and negates catholicity. An emphasis on personal salvation is interpretted through the predominant cultural lense (what is in it for me?) and the rejection of the church's authority to teach reduces each person to an isolated decision maker. Shaped by assumptions which are non-Christian and limited by mediocre skills in moral analysis and decision making, the church youth are little better equipped to answer life's challenges than their non-believing neighbors. In the end, the Bible is not always terribly helpful to such an individual. There is much in the Bible which confuses. There is a need to intrepret the texts and such interpretations can be very divergent, very, very divergent. And when we listen to no voive but our own (and those who say what we want to hear) the likelihood of hearing the text say what we want to hear increases tenfold.
The success of the GLBT coalition has been astounding. For the better part of a decade it has been front and center of news stories and popular entertainment. (e.g., a popular show among teens, Glee, revels constantly in gay themes). Progressives would applaud such openness. I am not so enthusiastic. Instead, I continue to see (helpful) boundaries disappear. The efforts to normalize the GLBT has moved the limits of toleration ever closer to acceptance of the 'next thing'. The current movement to change age of consent and rethink the issue of sex between adult and child is the beginning, not the end, of a process. To the extent that they have undermined traditional moral teaching, the adovocates of GLBT stand responsible for this latest tragedy. The failure of honesty and the refusal to analyze their own arguments (and the consequences of their claims) has produced an environment of new danger. Calling traditional morality "hate speech" has made it less possible to speak the truth in love to the advocates of child sex. Molesters revel in all this. They have hope that the weakened standing of the traditional moral code will provide them with the opportunity to normalize their perversions. I do not see how the Progressives can answer this advance. After all, when you claim that no one has a right to judge another, you open the door to everything. Well, the door is open and everything is on its way in.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Thinking Through our Points
We live in a contentious time. Arguments and debates are all around us. Unfortunately, we do not seem to be very good at it. The failure to think through our positions and to look into our own arguments creates many problems. I want to illustrate with two recent, non-theological, "arguments" I have recently encountered and then draw a theological point.
There has been a recent flurry of debate about paying college football players. Actually, there is not much debate, mainly I have heard the radio guys/guests pontificating on why they should be paid. Now it is the nature of talk radio to create 'buzz' and controversy. But it is still instructive to hear the argument.
Last week the local Progressive Weekly contained an editorial. The author was demonstrating (in his mind) how stupid the people who do not believe in global warming are. He began with a list of summer events which, to him, obviously proved that global warming is real. There have been tornadoes, huricanes, droughts and an earth quake the last few months. What else could it be????? My first impulse is to recall the numerous tornadoes, floods, droughts and hurricanes which have impacted the planet every year for countless centuries, but I was not able to enter that argument at all. I was too stunned by the inclusion of the "earthquake." Earthquakes are not a strong arguing point for his position, and by including it it made me think that this guy is just an idealogue spouting his stuff because it is what his team (Team Progressive) is advocating. In general, it is a bad idea to say stupid things when you are trying to demonstrate how stupid the other side is.
Thinking through college football and global warming are important. The decisions made will cost, literally, billions of dollars and impact all of us. The same is true for numerous other decisions we make. Theology is equally impacted by this phenomenon.
Recently I hear a discussion about thrill seeking. One man said it is dumb to put your life at risk to thrill seek. Another man said that he thought it was okay. I leave out much of a longer conversation, but wanted to identify his main pro-danger argument. "When God decides your time is up, your time is up."
That claim, that God decides when you die, is certainly one which most of us believe. But when you hear it used to justify life threatening thrill seeking it causes one to ask, what do we really believe? The world of "theological bumper sticker arguments" has not produced much fruit in the last couple of decades. The decline in faith has been accelerated by the way faith has been expressed. I am not sure I am a good example of thinking through my arguments, but I do recognize the need to ask, "If I think 'X' what follows from it?" That is where investigating our own thoughts and beliefs is vital.
There has been a recent flurry of debate about paying college football players. Actually, there is not much debate, mainly I have heard the radio guys/guests pontificating on why they should be paid. Now it is the nature of talk radio to create 'buzz' and controversy. But it is still instructive to hear the argument.
- College football makes lots (millions/billions) of money.
- The institutions and coaches makes lots of money. The players are the reason people watch.
- Therefore the players should be paid.
Last week the local Progressive Weekly contained an editorial. The author was demonstrating (in his mind) how stupid the people who do not believe in global warming are. He began with a list of summer events which, to him, obviously proved that global warming is real. There have been tornadoes, huricanes, droughts and an earth quake the last few months. What else could it be????? My first impulse is to recall the numerous tornadoes, floods, droughts and hurricanes which have impacted the planet every year for countless centuries, but I was not able to enter that argument at all. I was too stunned by the inclusion of the "earthquake." Earthquakes are not a strong arguing point for his position, and by including it it made me think that this guy is just an idealogue spouting his stuff because it is what his team (Team Progressive) is advocating. In general, it is a bad idea to say stupid things when you are trying to demonstrate how stupid the other side is.
Thinking through college football and global warming are important. The decisions made will cost, literally, billions of dollars and impact all of us. The same is true for numerous other decisions we make. Theology is equally impacted by this phenomenon.
Recently I hear a discussion about thrill seeking. One man said it is dumb to put your life at risk to thrill seek. Another man said that he thought it was okay. I leave out much of a longer conversation, but wanted to identify his main pro-danger argument. "When God decides your time is up, your time is up."
That claim, that God decides when you die, is certainly one which most of us believe. But when you hear it used to justify life threatening thrill seeking it causes one to ask, what do we really believe? The world of "theological bumper sticker arguments" has not produced much fruit in the last couple of decades. The decline in faith has been accelerated by the way faith has been expressed. I am not sure I am a good example of thinking through my arguments, but I do recognize the need to ask, "If I think 'X' what follows from it?" That is where investigating our own thoughts and beliefs is vital.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Economics and Salvation
My daughter is taking economics this year. Sometimes I read the books assigned, which I did this week. It is interesting reading and I am excited for her to be in the class. Some time ago I read Freakonomics, which really opened my eyes to a broader understanding of the field. Probably, if I weren't in theology, economics would be something I would seriously consider pursuing. It has components of math, psychology, philosophy and history. It is also focused on the basic issues of life.
Like many folks, I have observed a great deal of news coverage on the congressional budget debates. I have a personal distaste for debt which drives me to pay things off early. I get fifteen year mortgages and add to the payment for that reason. So, a guy like me has a very difficult time understanding why it is a good idea to continually add billions of dollars of debt each year. I also understand that national economics is more complex than my personal financial life. Even so, I am upset that each year we pile on more and more debt. The polluting influence of politicians doing their spin thing only makes it worse....
The word economy for me is forever changed because of an expression, "economy of salvation," which I first heard in seminary. The process whereby God does His saving work is in a context of a web of relationships. The interactions can be subtle and discreet, yet make huge impacts. Perhaps this is what Jesus was getting at when he talked about mustard seeds becoming large bushes. Or yeast in dough.
We are all in debt to God, and it isn't just sin. If we were sinless, we would still be in debt. "All things come of Thee O Lord" we frequently pray on Sunday. We owe God for everything we have. Sinning just compounded the entire process. Debts never disappear. When someone writes off a debt, they eat it. The debt is still there, it just isn't paid off by the one who owed it. But the debt remains. The one owed the debt just does not collect. The debt holder is the one who pays the debt. On a cosmic scale, God writes off the debt, which means God pays it off. The cost is seen on the Cross. Like all economic systems it is more complex. The cross does not explained everything. We do not understand how it works. We just know it does.
In the days ahead, when our nation collapses under the fiscal irresponsibility, there will be great suffering. There is also greater suffering in store for the sinful choices we make. Unfortunately, humans have a remarkable capacity to ignore approaching doom. People ignore the truth. People ignore the future cost of decisions. Perhaps that is why Jesus spoke so much about Judgment?
Like many folks, I have observed a great deal of news coverage on the congressional budget debates. I have a personal distaste for debt which drives me to pay things off early. I get fifteen year mortgages and add to the payment for that reason. So, a guy like me has a very difficult time understanding why it is a good idea to continually add billions of dollars of debt each year. I also understand that national economics is more complex than my personal financial life. Even so, I am upset that each year we pile on more and more debt. The polluting influence of politicians doing their spin thing only makes it worse....
The word economy for me is forever changed because of an expression, "economy of salvation," which I first heard in seminary. The process whereby God does His saving work is in a context of a web of relationships. The interactions can be subtle and discreet, yet make huge impacts. Perhaps this is what Jesus was getting at when he talked about mustard seeds becoming large bushes. Or yeast in dough.
We are all in debt to God, and it isn't just sin. If we were sinless, we would still be in debt. "All things come of Thee O Lord" we frequently pray on Sunday. We owe God for everything we have. Sinning just compounded the entire process. Debts never disappear. When someone writes off a debt, they eat it. The debt is still there, it just isn't paid off by the one who owed it. But the debt remains. The one owed the debt just does not collect. The debt holder is the one who pays the debt. On a cosmic scale, God writes off the debt, which means God pays it off. The cost is seen on the Cross. Like all economic systems it is more complex. The cross does not explained everything. We do not understand how it works. We just know it does.
In the days ahead, when our nation collapses under the fiscal irresponsibility, there will be great suffering. There is also greater suffering in store for the sinful choices we make. Unfortunately, humans have a remarkable capacity to ignore approaching doom. People ignore the truth. People ignore the future cost of decisions. Perhaps that is why Jesus spoke so much about Judgment?
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Everything Happens for a Reason
In a few hours we will arrive at the hospital and begin the process of inducing the birth of my son. Every moment of every life is, literally, hanging by a string. Babies, however, seem to more intensely symbolize all of that. They seem more at risk, the unknown seems more palpable with them. One ponders the possibilities more often, the potential problems loom larger.
When things go badly, it is common to hear "everything happens for a reason." I wrote last week about God's actions among us. Does God directly cause everything? Does God micromanage every event, dictating everthing thought, word and deed of everyone at everytime? If He does, then what I am about to say, "I don't think so," is not true, but I have no choice. God made me say it. His eternal plan is to make me think incorrectly. Your own responses would also be dictated, fashioned and determined by God before time and for all time.
That is why I say anyone who believes God controls "everything" would never make an argument for their position. Logic would not be able to sway anyone about anything. Logic requires freedom, to listen, to analyze, to weigh arguments and counter arguments. There is choice involved. Choice rerquires the presence of some degree of freedom.
I believe God intervenes. I believe in miracles. I also believe there are times where it is quite subtle. My understanding of systems helps me see that minor adjustments can produce huge outcomes. God could impact major events in and through minor players. I believe He does. I do not believe, however, that He conrtols every, single thing.
I believe God has a plan. I do not think His plan controls every detail. His creation has been given space to develop. The basic elements are in place for things to happen. Humans are "co-creators" in the sense that He has pulled back and given us space to make choices.
No sin is God's direct will. I do not think that God lays down commandments (e.g. "Thou shalt not kill") and then creates any number of humans whom He then makes into killers. The barbarism of the Nazi death camp is not "the mysterious work of a loving God whose ways are too difficult for us to understand." It is the product of human evil, directly opposed to God's plan for all people to live together in loving community. I was taught that evil occurs through the "permissive will of God." In other words, God allows things to happen. We are not puppets.
If God controls everything then He does not save. If, on the other hand, the world has some independent function (all dervived from God and sustained by God) then there is a sense in which He saves. Prayer makes sense in a world where things are haywire. Prayer makes sense in a world where God's absence (a Biblical theme) is the problem. Prayer makes sense in a world where God intervenes. If God is already controling everything and everything happens because He wants it that way, then prayer is really meaningless (although we have to pray because that is how He constructed the universe)
I think that Genesis teaches us that, from the beginning, the world is a wild place in need of dominion. From the beginning, God set us humans into a context where we can make choices, for good or ill. From the beginning, He "leaves the scene" providing us the ''room'' to think, feel, desire and choose.
Everything happens for a reason. The ultimate, underlying cause of everything is God. But events are also generated by an endless number of other factors, including us. The world operates under laws. Past choices and events impact the future context of other choices and events. The sins of the fathers are visited upon the children.
There is still plenty of mystery and God's activity is infinitely subtle, beautiful and. at times, difficult to discern. I do not think He directly causes rape and murder, or makes people suffer torture at the hands of evil people. The world to come will be better because in the world to come there will be an absence of the things which make us so sad. It is called "the reign of God" by Jesus. I think it means that God is, in some sense, not reigning right now. That is why Jesus refers to "the Prince of this world." Here and now, some other entitiy (human and demonic) has power. We await deliverance into the hands of the Lord and His Messiah.
Well, the phone just rang. It is 3 a.m. and our appointment has been postponed. We were instructed to call back later to find out our new time. The work of God? Who knows what all is going on? So many moving parts. So many players involved. So many factors. There is an irony to it all.
I do think it consistent to believe God is watching over us. That God is present, whether things go "well" or not. I do believe that we can choose to invite God into the process. The frustrations of being delayed, the stress of not sleeping or the worries about the unknown are an environment within which we can encounter God. God really gives us freedom and room to live and choose. I believe that God does not control every single detail because I believe in love. You see, God cannot make us love Him (or each other). Love, trust, relationship all require that we be free. Otherwise it is a sham. I think the world is real. I think God gives us options. I think God wants us to choose to love and serve Him.
When things go badly, it is common to hear "everything happens for a reason." I wrote last week about God's actions among us. Does God directly cause everything? Does God micromanage every event, dictating everthing thought, word and deed of everyone at everytime? If He does, then what I am about to say, "I don't think so," is not true, but I have no choice. God made me say it. His eternal plan is to make me think incorrectly. Your own responses would also be dictated, fashioned and determined by God before time and for all time.
That is why I say anyone who believes God controls "everything" would never make an argument for their position. Logic would not be able to sway anyone about anything. Logic requires freedom, to listen, to analyze, to weigh arguments and counter arguments. There is choice involved. Choice rerquires the presence of some degree of freedom.
I believe God intervenes. I believe in miracles. I also believe there are times where it is quite subtle. My understanding of systems helps me see that minor adjustments can produce huge outcomes. God could impact major events in and through minor players. I believe He does. I do not believe, however, that He conrtols every, single thing.
I believe God has a plan. I do not think His plan controls every detail. His creation has been given space to develop. The basic elements are in place for things to happen. Humans are "co-creators" in the sense that He has pulled back and given us space to make choices.
No sin is God's direct will. I do not think that God lays down commandments (e.g. "Thou shalt not kill") and then creates any number of humans whom He then makes into killers. The barbarism of the Nazi death camp is not "the mysterious work of a loving God whose ways are too difficult for us to understand." It is the product of human evil, directly opposed to God's plan for all people to live together in loving community. I was taught that evil occurs through the "permissive will of God." In other words, God allows things to happen. We are not puppets.
If God controls everything then He does not save. If, on the other hand, the world has some independent function (all dervived from God and sustained by God) then there is a sense in which He saves. Prayer makes sense in a world where things are haywire. Prayer makes sense in a world where God's absence (a Biblical theme) is the problem. Prayer makes sense in a world where God intervenes. If God is already controling everything and everything happens because He wants it that way, then prayer is really meaningless (although we have to pray because that is how He constructed the universe)
I think that Genesis teaches us that, from the beginning, the world is a wild place in need of dominion. From the beginning, God set us humans into a context where we can make choices, for good or ill. From the beginning, He "leaves the scene" providing us the ''room'' to think, feel, desire and choose.
Everything happens for a reason. The ultimate, underlying cause of everything is God. But events are also generated by an endless number of other factors, including us. The world operates under laws. Past choices and events impact the future context of other choices and events. The sins of the fathers are visited upon the children.
There is still plenty of mystery and God's activity is infinitely subtle, beautiful and. at times, difficult to discern. I do not think He directly causes rape and murder, or makes people suffer torture at the hands of evil people. The world to come will be better because in the world to come there will be an absence of the things which make us so sad. It is called "the reign of God" by Jesus. I think it means that God is, in some sense, not reigning right now. That is why Jesus refers to "the Prince of this world." Here and now, some other entitiy (human and demonic) has power. We await deliverance into the hands of the Lord and His Messiah.
Well, the phone just rang. It is 3 a.m. and our appointment has been postponed. We were instructed to call back later to find out our new time. The work of God? Who knows what all is going on? So many moving parts. So many players involved. So many factors. There is an irony to it all.
I do think it consistent to believe God is watching over us. That God is present, whether things go "well" or not. I do believe that we can choose to invite God into the process. The frustrations of being delayed, the stress of not sleeping or the worries about the unknown are an environment within which we can encounter God. God really gives us freedom and room to live and choose. I believe that God does not control every single detail because I believe in love. You see, God cannot make us love Him (or each other). Love, trust, relationship all require that we be free. Otherwise it is a sham. I think the world is real. I think God gives us options. I think God wants us to choose to love and serve Him.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
The Sins of the Fathers
Yesterday I was shocked at the loss of life to the east of us, as storms tore through Alabama and other states. I saw video of crumpled cars along an interstate. A weeping lady stammered, "One minute you are there and the next minute you are gone." Her pain was palpable. We were also hammered by endless storms, but our threats were proven wrong. We were spared.
Much of yesterday was spent dealing with the exccessive rain. It flooded our streets and courtyard. It also filled the basement with a couple inches of muddy water. Electricians were called to fix the problem with the sump pumps. As of 7:00 this morning there is still standing water and I am not sure when the problem will be completely taken care of.
The decision, some thirty years ago, to build a parish hall in the basement, was a bad idea. I have been here ten years and the consensus throughout that time remains the same: back a concrete truck up to the windows and start pouring! We have had numerous less radical "solutions" over the years and have spent endless hours debating the issue. Many hours have been spent constructing first one, then another, mode of correction. As I waded through the water yesterday I was clear that if it rains long enough and hard enough we are going to have trouble. Mopping up the basement is frustrating. It is probably never going to be completely fixed.
The people who designed this building thought they were being good stewards. They did the best they could with limited resources. It is a problem of a small parish. Few people with little financial backing have to make decisions on what to do within the limits of the situation. The decision to make a basement was a bad one. Ever since then other people have also paid the price for this mistake. Innocent people, who had no voice or vote, will gather and mop and clean. More time and more money will be spent.
The word "sin" in Hebrew means "to miss the mark." It is a broader word than simply moral evil or breaking a commandment. It includes errors. We make decisions every day which will impact others for years to come. We may not intend harm, yet other people may pay dearly for our choices. Too often in our individualistic culture we ignore that fact. We act like sin is a personal, private affair. It isn't. This is why in the ancient church confession, repentance and reconciliation were publicly celebrated. We owe it to the community which suffers from our sins. Yes, we owe it to each other, as well, of course, to God.
I read the reflections of the Underground Pewster the other day. He shared the statistical decline of our church. From 2002 to 2010 the average Sunday attendance has dropped from almost 870,000 to under 725,000. His analysis can be found at http://lowly.blogspot.com/.
Our Easter attendance this year was fifty less than it had been the last two years. The good news is we have seen about one hundred more folks this year. So we are better than last year. The not so good news is we still have not made up the loss from the year prior (we have seen about fifty less than 2009). So what? Well, churches need people to do ministry. Churches need people to make a difference in the world. There was a time when we had to add chairs and make people stand. We were growing and it was pretty excited. Then the Episcopal church chose to ordain Gene Robinson. Within two years we saw a fall off which has continued pretty much to this day. Young families no longer come to our church as they once did. We still have a healthy parish (well over 225 in attendance), but the days of 270 are long gone. Choices made by church leaders, national and local, effect the future. Things I say and do have impact, some positive, some negative.
My prayer is I am not building any "basements" for future church leaders who will serve here. My hope is that there will be future church leaders here. Current trends are not positive. If we lose another 150,000 folks in the next eight years, the Episcopal church will be very small (under 500,000 worshippers). Based on our church's stated goals, I see no reason to think we won't continue to lose (and probably increase the rate). The fathers and mothers are making lots of unhelpful decisions. There are lots of sins (in every sense of the word) being perpetrated.
In this parish, we will proclaim Jesus is (universal) Lord, embrace the orthodox faith, focus on generous outreach, in depth bible study, regular prayer and community. We will try to build up faith, hope and love. We will listen to His word and respond. If the sins of the fathers rest on the children, it is also true that the fidelity of the fathers (and mothers) can provide a basis for blessings! I believe that God has given us responsibility in our world. I believe our choices matter. I also believe God has not abandoned us. Here is to hope!
Much of yesterday was spent dealing with the exccessive rain. It flooded our streets and courtyard. It also filled the basement with a couple inches of muddy water. Electricians were called to fix the problem with the sump pumps. As of 7:00 this morning there is still standing water and I am not sure when the problem will be completely taken care of.
The decision, some thirty years ago, to build a parish hall in the basement, was a bad idea. I have been here ten years and the consensus throughout that time remains the same: back a concrete truck up to the windows and start pouring! We have had numerous less radical "solutions" over the years and have spent endless hours debating the issue. Many hours have been spent constructing first one, then another, mode of correction. As I waded through the water yesterday I was clear that if it rains long enough and hard enough we are going to have trouble. Mopping up the basement is frustrating. It is probably never going to be completely fixed.
The people who designed this building thought they were being good stewards. They did the best they could with limited resources. It is a problem of a small parish. Few people with little financial backing have to make decisions on what to do within the limits of the situation. The decision to make a basement was a bad one. Ever since then other people have also paid the price for this mistake. Innocent people, who had no voice or vote, will gather and mop and clean. More time and more money will be spent.
The word "sin" in Hebrew means "to miss the mark." It is a broader word than simply moral evil or breaking a commandment. It includes errors. We make decisions every day which will impact others for years to come. We may not intend harm, yet other people may pay dearly for our choices. Too often in our individualistic culture we ignore that fact. We act like sin is a personal, private affair. It isn't. This is why in the ancient church confession, repentance and reconciliation were publicly celebrated. We owe it to the community which suffers from our sins. Yes, we owe it to each other, as well, of course, to God.
I read the reflections of the Underground Pewster the other day. He shared the statistical decline of our church. From 2002 to 2010 the average Sunday attendance has dropped from almost 870,000 to under 725,000. His analysis can be found at http://lowly.blogspot.com/.
Our Easter attendance this year was fifty less than it had been the last two years. The good news is we have seen about one hundred more folks this year. So we are better than last year. The not so good news is we still have not made up the loss from the year prior (we have seen about fifty less than 2009). So what? Well, churches need people to do ministry. Churches need people to make a difference in the world. There was a time when we had to add chairs and make people stand. We were growing and it was pretty excited. Then the Episcopal church chose to ordain Gene Robinson. Within two years we saw a fall off which has continued pretty much to this day. Young families no longer come to our church as they once did. We still have a healthy parish (well over 225 in attendance), but the days of 270 are long gone. Choices made by church leaders, national and local, effect the future. Things I say and do have impact, some positive, some negative.
My prayer is I am not building any "basements" for future church leaders who will serve here. My hope is that there will be future church leaders here. Current trends are not positive. If we lose another 150,000 folks in the next eight years, the Episcopal church will be very small (under 500,000 worshippers). Based on our church's stated goals, I see no reason to think we won't continue to lose (and probably increase the rate). The fathers and mothers are making lots of unhelpful decisions. There are lots of sins (in every sense of the word) being perpetrated.
In this parish, we will proclaim Jesus is (universal) Lord, embrace the orthodox faith, focus on generous outreach, in depth bible study, regular prayer and community. We will try to build up faith, hope and love. We will listen to His word and respond. If the sins of the fathers rest on the children, it is also true that the fidelity of the fathers (and mothers) can provide a basis for blessings! I believe that God has given us responsibility in our world. I believe our choices matter. I also believe God has not abandoned us. Here is to hope!
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Biggest Problem with Contemporary Church
On Fridays in Lent we have an hour and a half "mini-retreat." Following Morning Prayer a group of us gather in the parish hall to pray over and reflect upon the daily readings. This past Friday I left afterward to grab some lunch and pick up my briefcase (and CALENDAR!) which I had left at home that morning. I came out to find Mike and Lisa working on the Dogwood tree. It is in bloom so the dead branches are most noticable. Mike was trimming and cutting and sawing.
Two hours later as I was going through my e-mails (what did priests do before e-mail!?!) I noticed one from Juli, our resident photographer. She had taken a photo of the church with the headline: A new picture of the church with the Dogwood in bloom. As is typical, her photo was lovely. It was also out of date. You see she took a picture around 10:00 that morning. By the time her photo arrived in the e-mail Mike had already done his work. The picture she took was of a tree which now looks different.
That, in a nut shell, is the problem with the contemporary church. It is always going out of date. Just as it announces to the world that it is cutting edge and up to date, someone comes along with the next new thing and the church finds itself having to reconfigure everything. The shelf life of "popular" is pretty short. Today's hot new style is tomorrow's "oh, so out of it" fashion faux pas. We live in a time where we are so much speedier and still we cannot keep up.
When I was a boy in the 70's when you took a picture, you had to wait for the whole roll to be shot before you could take it in to be developed. Then to distribute it to all your friends would take days, or weeks. And it would be costly, as each photo, each envelope, each stamp added up. Today, Juli can in a few minutes and at no extra cost shoot and send and in seconds deliver to dozens (or hundreds of friends) with her computer.
Instantaneous!
But with all that speed, she still could not send out a photo that was truly up to date and contemporary.
What church Fathers called the apostolic faith was not intended to be cutting edge or 'new-and-improved.' The early preachers certainly thought that in Jesus God was doing a new thing, but the new thing was grounded in the old thing that God had been doing, over and again, since Adam and Eve. We encounter the truth of the Triune God in the words recorded in Scripture, and the tradition and teaching of the church provides commentary on that Word. Our security is in ancient Revelation. Our reflections today allow us to understand and apply that message of hope in our own times. But it is our times which must be conformed to the message and not the message to the times.
I was at our national convention where the Epsicopal Church made a public declaration that it was breaking with traditional morality and the teaching of Scripture. Numerous speakers proclaimed that the spirit was doing a new thing. Countless delegates told me privately (and all of us publicly) that the Episcopal Church was now up to date. Young people, we were told, want a church which shares their value system. They hunger for a church which expresses the message that God is relevant. I heard, again and again, that in the days ahead a huge throng of these young people would flow into the Episcopal church because it was contemporary! I will not bore you with details, I will simply say that these (false) prophets of the coming golden age of contemporary bliss have proven to be wrong. Total attendance is down well over 10% since then and shows no sign of improvement.
But we continue on that road! The last few years we have rallied around the UN Millenial goals. We were given alternative stations of the cross. Why reflect on Jesus' passion when we have so many contemporary issues to meditate upon. The current new thing is "Green" and we have begun to proclaim the Judgment of Global Warning (oooppppss! I mean Climate change, gotta keep up). The good news is recycling is the way and renewable solar energy will be our salvation. The earth is our mother (not the church) and ecology is our theology. I am a proponent of aiding the poor of our world (our church budget allocates half our income toward aiding others) and our parish tries to practice good stewardship of resources and we do recycle. The problem is, in trying to be "with it" we are forgetting about Jesus and focusing on other things instead of Him.
And the problem is, by the time the "marketing department" figures out the next new thing, and then gets the word out to the bishops, and the bishops gather to meet, and then the bishops bring it home, and then the local leaders are trained and brought up to date and sent out to bring the parishes and missions on board, well, by the time all that has taken place it is no longer the "new thing" at all.
The problem with the contemporary church is it is trying to be up to date with "this" world (and not anything ancient). The problem is "this world" is passing away. The world is always old, even when contemporary. Jesus and His word is forever. As a citizen and life-long occupant of this world, I am drawn into the 'contemporary' and seduced by the 'relevant". The struggle is to find the TRUTH, not the new. The battle is to submit to the authority of the Lord and His Spirit, not to follow the present age and its spirit. The newest and most contemporary falsehoods are still a lie. The contemporary church, full of its own sense of "being cool," has never seen that the new thing is a very old thing. A very old, sick and destructive thing, which dressing in a diaper and being declared contemporary does not change or improve.
Two hours later as I was going through my e-mails (what did priests do before e-mail!?!) I noticed one from Juli, our resident photographer. She had taken a photo of the church with the headline: A new picture of the church with the Dogwood in bloom. As is typical, her photo was lovely. It was also out of date. You see she took a picture around 10:00 that morning. By the time her photo arrived in the e-mail Mike had already done his work. The picture she took was of a tree which now looks different.
That, in a nut shell, is the problem with the contemporary church. It is always going out of date. Just as it announces to the world that it is cutting edge and up to date, someone comes along with the next new thing and the church finds itself having to reconfigure everything. The shelf life of "popular" is pretty short. Today's hot new style is tomorrow's "oh, so out of it" fashion faux pas. We live in a time where we are so much speedier and still we cannot keep up.
When I was a boy in the 70's when you took a picture, you had to wait for the whole roll to be shot before you could take it in to be developed. Then to distribute it to all your friends would take days, or weeks. And it would be costly, as each photo, each envelope, each stamp added up. Today, Juli can in a few minutes and at no extra cost shoot and send and in seconds deliver to dozens (or hundreds of friends) with her computer.
Instantaneous!
But with all that speed, she still could not send out a photo that was truly up to date and contemporary.
What church Fathers called the apostolic faith was not intended to be cutting edge or 'new-and-improved.' The early preachers certainly thought that in Jesus God was doing a new thing, but the new thing was grounded in the old thing that God had been doing, over and again, since Adam and Eve. We encounter the truth of the Triune God in the words recorded in Scripture, and the tradition and teaching of the church provides commentary on that Word. Our security is in ancient Revelation. Our reflections today allow us to understand and apply that message of hope in our own times. But it is our times which must be conformed to the message and not the message to the times.
I was at our national convention where the Epsicopal Church made a public declaration that it was breaking with traditional morality and the teaching of Scripture. Numerous speakers proclaimed that the spirit was doing a new thing. Countless delegates told me privately (and all of us publicly) that the Episcopal Church was now up to date. Young people, we were told, want a church which shares their value system. They hunger for a church which expresses the message that God is relevant. I heard, again and again, that in the days ahead a huge throng of these young people would flow into the Episcopal church because it was contemporary! I will not bore you with details, I will simply say that these (false) prophets of the coming golden age of contemporary bliss have proven to be wrong. Total attendance is down well over 10% since then and shows no sign of improvement.
But we continue on that road! The last few years we have rallied around the UN Millenial goals. We were given alternative stations of the cross. Why reflect on Jesus' passion when we have so many contemporary issues to meditate upon. The current new thing is "Green" and we have begun to proclaim the Judgment of Global Warning (oooppppss! I mean Climate change, gotta keep up). The good news is recycling is the way and renewable solar energy will be our salvation. The earth is our mother (not the church) and ecology is our theology. I am a proponent of aiding the poor of our world (our church budget allocates half our income toward aiding others) and our parish tries to practice good stewardship of resources and we do recycle. The problem is, in trying to be "with it" we are forgetting about Jesus and focusing on other things instead of Him.
And the problem is, by the time the "marketing department" figures out the next new thing, and then gets the word out to the bishops, and the bishops gather to meet, and then the bishops bring it home, and then the local leaders are trained and brought up to date and sent out to bring the parishes and missions on board, well, by the time all that has taken place it is no longer the "new thing" at all.
The problem with the contemporary church is it is trying to be up to date with "this" world (and not anything ancient). The problem is "this world" is passing away. The world is always old, even when contemporary. Jesus and His word is forever. As a citizen and life-long occupant of this world, I am drawn into the 'contemporary' and seduced by the 'relevant". The struggle is to find the TRUTH, not the new. The battle is to submit to the authority of the Lord and His Spirit, not to follow the present age and its spirit. The newest and most contemporary falsehoods are still a lie. The contemporary church, full of its own sense of "being cool," has never seen that the new thing is a very old thing. A very old, sick and destructive thing, which dressing in a diaper and being declared contemporary does not change or improve.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Drawing the Line: Bible 2
A reminder, my primary audience is people who are struggling with 'the faith question.' I hope that I can be of support to others who are in the faith walk as well.
There is a raging debate on the authority of Scripture. At times the debates seem to boil down to one of two positions: Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God or are you a faithless Modernist? I think that neither of these options is accurate. In fact, many Christians have lost their faith in recent years because they were only given these two options. They hunger for a middle way which was never identified.
So back to the two options. The extreme version of the Modernist view is that the Bible is a collection of religious writings witnessing to religious experiences from an ancient people. As such, the things they wrote were authoritative to them, but we live in a different world. (The Jews believe God chose them, but so does every other people so the Bible can't be right!) Anything that does not fit into our world view is tossed out as not relevant. Moral norms that do not fit contemporary norms are ignored (or villified) as holdovers from a flawed culture. As I read somewhere recently, many of these folks treat the Bible like a High School term paper, and not a very good one at that.
On the other hand, others make claims about the infallible nature of the text. They demand that because we are under the authority of Scripture: Every detail is historically accurate. Every word is straight from God's mouth. To quote a bumper sticker I saw many years ago: "God said it. I believe it. That settles it."
Where do I find myself in this? Well, as you might guess, the first view makes me sick and I think it is flat wrong. It replaces God with "Me" as the final authority. (Or worse, the current popular culture.) I prefer the second view. I much prefer it. It is clean and simple and a great way to be obedient. It is also, unfortunately, not exactly true. I tried really hard for a long time to hold that position. It just doesn't work.
If I have integrity, then I must admit that there are places where the Biblical accounts are not always historically accurate (based on a Positivist view of history). This freaked me out in a huge way for many years. I had bought into the premise that either the Bible is totally true and accurate in every detail or it is untrustworthy as a witness and useless. I bought into the assumption that God is perfect so therefore the Bible shares in His nature and it is perfect. I battled for the Bible because it was my only hope for knowing God. (I also did this because I had adopted the Modernist world view and tried to fit the doctrine of inspiration and authority into Modernist thought categories)
Then I learned about more about Jesus. The Jesus of my youth was God. Period. I knew He suffered on the cross, we were real clear on suffering. I saw Jesus crucified before my eyes, sometimes in graphic detail, at most churches I attended. But the humanity I knew about Jesus was pretty super-human. He was (in my understanding) God dressed up like one of us. It was many years later that I learned that this is heresy. Probably lots of the Progressive types in our churches today had a similar journey of understanding. Unfortunately, what happened to them, repeats the battles of the early church. Those people tried to correct their view that Jesus is 'only God' and ended up in a place where He is reduced to 'only human.' It is an understandable error. In any system, there is a tendency to "over correct" and to then err in the other direction. I think that the analogy of Jesus is helpful for understanding the Bible. It is God's Word, YES! (thanks be to God!) but it is also a fully human book. It was not God delivered from the sky. It was written by human hands (under God's inspiration). That fact makes it a bit trickier than the bumper sticker makes it look.
To use another analogy, from the old catechism of my youth:
Q. Who made me?
A. God made me.
Q. How did God make me?
A. Umm, well. you see there is this thing.... O, just go home and ask your mom and dad
I made up that last part, but I hope you see the point. Did God make me or did my parent's sex act? It is not terribly difficult to say both, is it? What about the Bible? Who authored the Bible? GOD!!! How did God author the Bible? Through a very long, human shaped process that looks just like human authorship. How then do we read the Bible? With the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit!
Where to draw the line on the Bible? It is fully human, yet fully conveys God's word. Is it trustworthy even if there are discrepencies? I have based my life on it and I believe it!
And we make choices about one another because of our different views of the Bible.
There is a raging debate on the authority of Scripture. At times the debates seem to boil down to one of two positions: Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God or are you a faithless Modernist? I think that neither of these options is accurate. In fact, many Christians have lost their faith in recent years because they were only given these two options. They hunger for a middle way which was never identified.
So back to the two options. The extreme version of the Modernist view is that the Bible is a collection of religious writings witnessing to religious experiences from an ancient people. As such, the things they wrote were authoritative to them, but we live in a different world. (The Jews believe God chose them, but so does every other people so the Bible can't be right!) Anything that does not fit into our world view is tossed out as not relevant. Moral norms that do not fit contemporary norms are ignored (or villified) as holdovers from a flawed culture. As I read somewhere recently, many of these folks treat the Bible like a High School term paper, and not a very good one at that.
On the other hand, others make claims about the infallible nature of the text. They demand that because we are under the authority of Scripture: Every detail is historically accurate. Every word is straight from God's mouth. To quote a bumper sticker I saw many years ago: "God said it. I believe it. That settles it."
Where do I find myself in this? Well, as you might guess, the first view makes me sick and I think it is flat wrong. It replaces God with "Me" as the final authority. (Or worse, the current popular culture.) I prefer the second view. I much prefer it. It is clean and simple and a great way to be obedient. It is also, unfortunately, not exactly true. I tried really hard for a long time to hold that position. It just doesn't work.
If I have integrity, then I must admit that there are places where the Biblical accounts are not always historically accurate (based on a Positivist view of history). This freaked me out in a huge way for many years. I had bought into the premise that either the Bible is totally true and accurate in every detail or it is untrustworthy as a witness and useless. I bought into the assumption that God is perfect so therefore the Bible shares in His nature and it is perfect. I battled for the Bible because it was my only hope for knowing God. (I also did this because I had adopted the Modernist world view and tried to fit the doctrine of inspiration and authority into Modernist thought categories)
Then I learned about more about Jesus. The Jesus of my youth was God. Period. I knew He suffered on the cross, we were real clear on suffering. I saw Jesus crucified before my eyes, sometimes in graphic detail, at most churches I attended. But the humanity I knew about Jesus was pretty super-human. He was (in my understanding) God dressed up like one of us. It was many years later that I learned that this is heresy. Probably lots of the Progressive types in our churches today had a similar journey of understanding. Unfortunately, what happened to them, repeats the battles of the early church. Those people tried to correct their view that Jesus is 'only God' and ended up in a place where He is reduced to 'only human.' It is an understandable error. In any system, there is a tendency to "over correct" and to then err in the other direction. I think that the analogy of Jesus is helpful for understanding the Bible. It is God's Word, YES! (thanks be to God!) but it is also a fully human book. It was not God delivered from the sky. It was written by human hands (under God's inspiration). That fact makes it a bit trickier than the bumper sticker makes it look.
To use another analogy, from the old catechism of my youth:
Q. Who made me?
A. God made me.
Q. How did God make me?
A. Umm, well. you see there is this thing.... O, just go home and ask your mom and dad
I made up that last part, but I hope you see the point. Did God make me or did my parent's sex act? It is not terribly difficult to say both, is it? What about the Bible? Who authored the Bible? GOD!!! How did God author the Bible? Through a very long, human shaped process that looks just like human authorship. How then do we read the Bible? With the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit!
Where to draw the line on the Bible? It is fully human, yet fully conveys God's word. Is it trustworthy even if there are discrepencies? I have based my life on it and I believe it!
And we make choices about one another because of our different views of the Bible.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Drawing the Line: Marriage 2
(There is so much emotion involved in this issue it is almost impossible to talk about.)
In Christian morals we are taught that we are to love God and love our neighbor. In current culture, love is a feeling. "Love is a feeling" leads to the assumption that more intense feelings are more sincere forms of love. So to "lose that loving feeling" is to stop love. The biblical model for love (and this is way simplified) is more connected to the will and to action. When we love our enemy it does not mean that we are suddenly swept away with 'warm bubblies' for them. Love is the decision to seek the best for another, to treat them as I would want to be treated. Love is also associated with obedience in the Bible. To love God is to obey God.
Why is obedience so hard? Because we have not ordered our desires according to God's desires. The word Original Sin is helpful here. When someone is living right, their desires are in right order. Right order means that we desire the right thing, in the right amount, in the right way. Right order also means that we choose to do things which are right. Hence, sin comes from "disordered appetites." In other words, we strongly desire to do things which we are not supposed to do.
Years ago, when I engaged in regular discussions/debates about this issue, I once had someone write to me "you are saying there is something wrong with me." I was struck dumb. I never, ever doubted that there is something seriously wrong with everyone. EVERYONE. In discussion, it was clear that this young man did not believe that. An analogy. I wear glasses. I started neeeding glasses as a young child, around fourth grade. I did not know I needed glasses. The way I saw the world was the only way I had seen it. When I got my glasses, I literally walked down the street in awe of the world. I was especially amazed at trees. You could see each leaf. It felt like a miracle. By extension, I live in a world where my perception is affected by my "vision." Each of us, every one of us, all of us are morally flawed. We have desires which are not 'right' and we engage in actions which are not 'right.' The teaching of the church is God's gift to people who do not see clearly. Without my glasses I can honestly argue about how I see things, but only a fool would trust me to drive a car. It is not my fault that I cannot see better. It is not a choice. It is certainly not fair. It is wrong that other children made fun of me, including my own siblings ("four eyes!"). It is not fair that my glasses fog up when I enter a room in the winter, or that rain blurs my vision because the glass gets drops on it. It is however, the way things are. And there are much worse things to be in America than visually challenged.
So why stay in the Episcopal church? Well, mainly because it is good preparation for what is coming. Society is changing. I have many friends who tell me how sweet it is to be in a church where this issue is not a problem. As I see it, there is increasing push to make it criminal to not accept gay marriage. Not sure any church is safe. Looking at recent trends it is pretty unnerving. Church-going progressives are much easier than secular progressives. I also think I have a duty to stand for the truth. I am doing that. But the truth is so-called conservatives have had sex out of marriage, have divorced and have had marriages where they prevented the conception of children. Jesus said it is what is in your heart: Lord have mercy! Does anyone feel confidant that their hearts are clean? Sometimes there is gay bashing going on and some of it is because Conservatives are unwilling to face their own sin. I never hear about churches taking a stand against gluttony and obesity. I never hear about churches telling unrepentant gossips that they cannot use the church facility or receive communion. I never hear about "covet" detectors checking out the congregation for people who are greedy to have someone else's car or home or job. Fact is, there is some truth to the charge that the position we espouse is in some cases fueled as much by unease about gays as by theology.
On the other hand, Progressives always pull a bate and switch. They talk about love, as if the traditional position outlaws love between two men or two women. We are talking about sex acts. Two men who love each other passionately, EXCELLENT! Two men having sex together, sorry, misses the mark. Human body design is pretty clear. (Unless you totally disconnect sex and procreation which is not Christian) To destroy the institution of marriage in order to make that possible is SIN. And someone who says this is not necessarilly homophobic. In fact, most people I know are not homophobic. Many of them have gay children. They have gay friends. They just are compelled to not ignore God's word because of those relationships/feelings.
I think this debate will end badly for people like me. In the name of "inclusion and love" folks like me will be denied access to a living in many places. We will be accussed of hate crimes. We will be ostracized. It is what happens in revolutions. Fact is, it is already happening and with greater frequency. The ruling class is accused of oppression and the reform government takes over. A few years later, a new ruling class imposes its will on people. Based on the Epsicopal church, progressives are not nicer people, they are as vicious and cruel and unfair as conservatives. They deny that which makes them even more dangerous.
The horror in all this is church history reveals that when believing Christians are in charge there is oppression, unfairness and abuse of power. However, when the society is governed by other values, which are inherently non-Christian, it becomes a nightmare. The law of unintended consequences cannot be escaped. Neither can this issue. No matter where you go to church and who you have fellowship with, there are sinners there. Each of us must make a decison which sinners we are willing to worship alongside. Each of us must determine where God would have us do this. In the end, God is our only hope. He will judge. He will save. Tomorrow on to other issues!
In Christian morals we are taught that we are to love God and love our neighbor. In current culture, love is a feeling. "Love is a feeling" leads to the assumption that more intense feelings are more sincere forms of love. So to "lose that loving feeling" is to stop love. The biblical model for love (and this is way simplified) is more connected to the will and to action. When we love our enemy it does not mean that we are suddenly swept away with 'warm bubblies' for them. Love is the decision to seek the best for another, to treat them as I would want to be treated. Love is also associated with obedience in the Bible. To love God is to obey God.
Why is obedience so hard? Because we have not ordered our desires according to God's desires. The word Original Sin is helpful here. When someone is living right, their desires are in right order. Right order means that we desire the right thing, in the right amount, in the right way. Right order also means that we choose to do things which are right. Hence, sin comes from "disordered appetites." In other words, we strongly desire to do things which we are not supposed to do.
Years ago, when I engaged in regular discussions/debates about this issue, I once had someone write to me "you are saying there is something wrong with me." I was struck dumb. I never, ever doubted that there is something seriously wrong with everyone. EVERYONE. In discussion, it was clear that this young man did not believe that. An analogy. I wear glasses. I started neeeding glasses as a young child, around fourth grade. I did not know I needed glasses. The way I saw the world was the only way I had seen it. When I got my glasses, I literally walked down the street in awe of the world. I was especially amazed at trees. You could see each leaf. It felt like a miracle. By extension, I live in a world where my perception is affected by my "vision." Each of us, every one of us, all of us are morally flawed. We have desires which are not 'right' and we engage in actions which are not 'right.' The teaching of the church is God's gift to people who do not see clearly. Without my glasses I can honestly argue about how I see things, but only a fool would trust me to drive a car. It is not my fault that I cannot see better. It is not a choice. It is certainly not fair. It is wrong that other children made fun of me, including my own siblings ("four eyes!"). It is not fair that my glasses fog up when I enter a room in the winter, or that rain blurs my vision because the glass gets drops on it. It is however, the way things are. And there are much worse things to be in America than visually challenged.
So why stay in the Episcopal church? Well, mainly because it is good preparation for what is coming. Society is changing. I have many friends who tell me how sweet it is to be in a church where this issue is not a problem. As I see it, there is increasing push to make it criminal to not accept gay marriage. Not sure any church is safe. Looking at recent trends it is pretty unnerving. Church-going progressives are much easier than secular progressives. I also think I have a duty to stand for the truth. I am doing that. But the truth is so-called conservatives have had sex out of marriage, have divorced and have had marriages where they prevented the conception of children. Jesus said it is what is in your heart: Lord have mercy! Does anyone feel confidant that their hearts are clean? Sometimes there is gay bashing going on and some of it is because Conservatives are unwilling to face their own sin. I never hear about churches taking a stand against gluttony and obesity. I never hear about churches telling unrepentant gossips that they cannot use the church facility or receive communion. I never hear about "covet" detectors checking out the congregation for people who are greedy to have someone else's car or home or job. Fact is, there is some truth to the charge that the position we espouse is in some cases fueled as much by unease about gays as by theology.
On the other hand, Progressives always pull a bate and switch. They talk about love, as if the traditional position outlaws love between two men or two women. We are talking about sex acts. Two men who love each other passionately, EXCELLENT! Two men having sex together, sorry, misses the mark. Human body design is pretty clear. (Unless you totally disconnect sex and procreation which is not Christian) To destroy the institution of marriage in order to make that possible is SIN. And someone who says this is not necessarilly homophobic. In fact, most people I know are not homophobic. Many of them have gay children. They have gay friends. They just are compelled to not ignore God's word because of those relationships/feelings.
I think this debate will end badly for people like me. In the name of "inclusion and love" folks like me will be denied access to a living in many places. We will be accussed of hate crimes. We will be ostracized. It is what happens in revolutions. Fact is, it is already happening and with greater frequency. The ruling class is accused of oppression and the reform government takes over. A few years later, a new ruling class imposes its will on people. Based on the Epsicopal church, progressives are not nicer people, they are as vicious and cruel and unfair as conservatives. They deny that which makes them even more dangerous.
The horror in all this is church history reveals that when believing Christians are in charge there is oppression, unfairness and abuse of power. However, when the society is governed by other values, which are inherently non-Christian, it becomes a nightmare. The law of unintended consequences cannot be escaped. Neither can this issue. No matter where you go to church and who you have fellowship with, there are sinners there. Each of us must make a decison which sinners we are willing to worship alongside. Each of us must determine where God would have us do this. In the end, God is our only hope. He will judge. He will save. Tomorrow on to other issues!
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Bloodshed
The convention is over. As has been the case the last several years, it was a low key affair without conflict. One highlight for me was worship. I was able to stop for some time and simply praise and thank God. The music was sublime and the setting was wonderful. One prayer did give me pause, it was a prayer modeled after the Lord's prayer from a perspective which is deeply affected by sexism. As I often say, today's solution is tomorrow's problem. In an effort to address the problem of how we treat women, the author of this prayer (from another continent!) ended up using language which is Modalism. That means it divides God into three functions (creator, redeemer, sanctifier) instead of three persons. See, the One God is three persons and all three are involved in each function. I am less distressed than others about using the Lord's Prayer as a model. After all, the English version we use is a translation of a Greek prayer found in the bible. And the Greek prayer is a translation of the Aramaic original. Based on my study of the Greek, I make my own modification most of the time. However, the translation we had in our worship went in the wrong direction, as I understand it, so I simply prayed it closer to the original.
Another positive, I thought that there was serious discussion about a focus on basic Christianity. Many voices shared a concern about things which I hold dear. I was able to share my beliefs in a setting which was not hostile and people listened and heard. Something which I had said last year at convention found their way into this year's document. That is progress. Several years ago it was very contentious. At times it was so heated that the atmosphere was like combat.
There was, however, for me, an experience of bloodshed. As I left on Saturday, I was able to go to the Germanown Lifeblood Center. I have a special type of blood which is used in transfusions for babies. My iron counts had been running low so my doctor told me to give it a rest for awhile. It has been several months since I last gave. However, the Lifeblood folks have called regularly because there is a shortage for the babies. I decided to give again a couple of weeks ago. Unfortunately, my schedule is pretty full most of the time. On Saturday I had a small window of opportunity. So I ran by and gave. I met a nice Catholic woman from St. Augustines. She was giving as a start off to Lent. The nurse attended St. Mary's where I started out as a priest. After giving blood I grabbed a sandwich and went to church to pray with our healing group. At five o'clock we had eucharist. Around five forty I read the words of Jesus, what we call the consecration. "This is my Body, given for you. This is the cup of my blood, shed for you. Do this in memory of Me" Sometimes in my head I sort of reflect on this using diferent language. I think things like, "I give My body and blood for you, now you go do the same thing, give your body and blood for Me, give your body and blood to others." I do not change the words at the service. But I do twist their meaning, just a bit, for myself.
Whenever I give blood, at some point as the bag fills I pray for all those who will interact with it. I pray for the babies who will get it. I pray for their families. I figure whenever a baby needs blood the family has got to be stressed. I thank Jesus for letting me do this in memory for Him. I thank Him for His bloodshed for us. I thank Him for the insight. And I find myself in a very good mood. It is faith, or hope, or joy. So there was bloodshed this weekend, but not at convention! It was shed by me, in imitation of Him. Today, again, you and I will literally and figuratively give our lives over to others, for His sake. My prayer is that the awareness will put you in a good mood, too!
Another positive, I thought that there was serious discussion about a focus on basic Christianity. Many voices shared a concern about things which I hold dear. I was able to share my beliefs in a setting which was not hostile and people listened and heard. Something which I had said last year at convention found their way into this year's document. That is progress. Several years ago it was very contentious. At times it was so heated that the atmosphere was like combat.
There was, however, for me, an experience of bloodshed. As I left on Saturday, I was able to go to the Germanown Lifeblood Center. I have a special type of blood which is used in transfusions for babies. My iron counts had been running low so my doctor told me to give it a rest for awhile. It has been several months since I last gave. However, the Lifeblood folks have called regularly because there is a shortage for the babies. I decided to give again a couple of weeks ago. Unfortunately, my schedule is pretty full most of the time. On Saturday I had a small window of opportunity. So I ran by and gave. I met a nice Catholic woman from St. Augustines. She was giving as a start off to Lent. The nurse attended St. Mary's where I started out as a priest. After giving blood I grabbed a sandwich and went to church to pray with our healing group. At five o'clock we had eucharist. Around five forty I read the words of Jesus, what we call the consecration. "This is my Body, given for you. This is the cup of my blood, shed for you. Do this in memory of Me" Sometimes in my head I sort of reflect on this using diferent language. I think things like, "I give My body and blood for you, now you go do the same thing, give your body and blood for Me, give your body and blood to others." I do not change the words at the service. But I do twist their meaning, just a bit, for myself.
Whenever I give blood, at some point as the bag fills I pray for all those who will interact with it. I pray for the babies who will get it. I pray for their families. I figure whenever a baby needs blood the family has got to be stressed. I thank Jesus for letting me do this in memory for Him. I thank Him for His bloodshed for us. I thank Him for the insight. And I find myself in a very good mood. It is faith, or hope, or joy. So there was bloodshed this weekend, but not at convention! It was shed by me, in imitation of Him. Today, again, you and I will literally and figuratively give our lives over to others, for His sake. My prayer is that the awareness will put you in a good mood, too!
Friday, March 4, 2011
Environmental Theology
So just got home from a long day of convention. There was all the typical business of convention with a smattering of reports. One really awesome one, which our parish supports, is a half way house in Humboldt, Tennessee. They were wiped out by flooding but have been rebuilt by the generous efforts of many churches in the local area. There have been several divine interventions which just make you smile. It is so lovely when things just fall into place. As I have written before, either you believe in coincidences or you believe in God. It is a choice at some point.
This year we spent several hours talking about Green Theology. Our speaker, who is a very nice young man, shared with us numerous biblical references to our relationship to the earth. He rightly, in my opinion, explained that salvation includes the world and the Lord God is coming here to establish the kingdom. He even critiqued Gnosticism!
The issues of how to live in the world are very serious. I think all of us can agree with the commitment to not pollute or waste. The problem is the world is complex. I think that we forget that today's solution is tomorrow's problem. The decision to recycle is one thing, making decisions on climate change is something altogether different. I know that we have had ice ages in the past and we recently experienced a time of seriously cooler temperatures, called the mini-ice age, since the Middle Ages. I am not sure what can be done about global warming. I am sure that rich people buying carbon credits so that they can burn all the energy they want is not the answer. I am also sure we are making decisions today which will affect tomorrow. The problem is, some ideas look good today and may make it worse tomorrow. The world is a weird place. Logic is not always accurate. Good intentions are not enough. Fortunately, I do not have to give good advice on this one, it is over my head. But I do know that environmental theology runs the risk of becoming nature worship. Indifference to the world runs the risk of becoming abusive and sinful. There are always risks. It is part of the struggle of life on our journey of faith.
This year we spent several hours talking about Green Theology. Our speaker, who is a very nice young man, shared with us numerous biblical references to our relationship to the earth. He rightly, in my opinion, explained that salvation includes the world and the Lord God is coming here to establish the kingdom. He even critiqued Gnosticism!
The issues of how to live in the world are very serious. I think all of us can agree with the commitment to not pollute or waste. The problem is the world is complex. I think that we forget that today's solution is tomorrow's problem. The decision to recycle is one thing, making decisions on climate change is something altogether different. I know that we have had ice ages in the past and we recently experienced a time of seriously cooler temperatures, called the mini-ice age, since the Middle Ages. I am not sure what can be done about global warming. I am sure that rich people buying carbon credits so that they can burn all the energy they want is not the answer. I am also sure we are making decisions today which will affect tomorrow. The problem is, some ideas look good today and may make it worse tomorrow. The world is a weird place. Logic is not always accurate. Good intentions are not enough. Fortunately, I do not have to give good advice on this one, it is over my head. But I do know that environmental theology runs the risk of becoming nature worship. Indifference to the world runs the risk of becoming abusive and sinful. There are always risks. It is part of the struggle of life on our journey of faith.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Root Canal
I went to the dentist yesterday and got the news! I have a dead tooth and a dying tooth. He asked me if I had ever had trauma to the teeth. "Well, let me think...." In second grade I got hit in the mouth by an 8th grader and it chipped the front right. The one next to it was pushed back a bit when my face and the back of someone's head collided. I cannot remember who. I do not recall when. It is all part of my distant past, a time I refer to as "my youth."
So I found myself pondering many things:
Life is a series of losses and gains. We change jobs and we move. Or we keep our jobs and stay put but other people go. New people show up and some become friends. Friends leave and become memories. All the events have impact on us. Sometimes it takes a very long time for the consequences to be manifest. A blow to the mouth half a century ago will impact my time, my wallet and it will probably not be totally pain free. It makes me realize how significant small things can be. Fortunately, I have the money to pay for it and when it is done my mouth will have teeth in it. Still, it is amazing to think the connections in our lives. It makes me want to avoid inflicting any trauma on others. I also wonder about emotional traumas from my youth. Are they manifesting themselves now, too? In light of that, I need to be real careful about how I treat people!
So I found myself pondering many things:
- First of all, "Seriously, a forty five year old trauma killed my tooth? Is there not like a statute of limitation on trauma induced tooth death?"
- Secondly, "Root canal, isn't that one of the images comedians use in their stand up acts to indicate the worst thing? It seems like root canal is synymous with pain.
- Thirdly, how much is this going to cost me? (answer, a whole lot)
- Lastly, pondering my weekly schedule, I just wondered about when I could find time to do all this.
Life is a series of losses and gains. We change jobs and we move. Or we keep our jobs and stay put but other people go. New people show up and some become friends. Friends leave and become memories. All the events have impact on us. Sometimes it takes a very long time for the consequences to be manifest. A blow to the mouth half a century ago will impact my time, my wallet and it will probably not be totally pain free. It makes me realize how significant small things can be. Fortunately, I have the money to pay for it and when it is done my mouth will have teeth in it. Still, it is amazing to think the connections in our lives. It makes me want to avoid inflicting any trauma on others. I also wonder about emotional traumas from my youth. Are they manifesting themselves now, too? In light of that, I need to be real careful about how I treat people!
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
how much is too much?
The 'Big News' in baseball today is Albert Pujols and his salary demands. It is reported that he wants $300 million for ten years. He is hands down the best hitter in baseball and probably the best player. He is also 31 and is in the decline phase of his career. There was lots of discussion on tv and on the radio as experts discussed the merits of his demands. Probably, the vast majority of Americans would say, "Baeball players make too much money!"
But baseball players are not the only ones raking in cash. Movie stars can get $20 million for one picture. There are lots of people "making too much money" in the entertainment industry. But are they making too much?
One part of the issue is systemic. There are over 300 million people in America and entertainers connect with such huge numbers that by virtue of economies of scale the dollar amounts are just crazy. If ten percent of Americans care about a team, that is 30 million people. If they each spend $100 a year on that team that is $3 billion dollars. When you start chopping up $3 billion into parts, those parts can be awfully large!
There are less than a thousand people (from the whole world) playing in the Major Leagues. What they make is crazy compared to you and me, but we don't fill stadiums with 30,000 people nor do we have tv contracts.
If I made 10 cents for every one who read this blog I could buy myself lunch at MacDonald's on most days. But let's say that I suddenly became world famous and ten thousand people from around the world read the blog. Ten thousand dimes would be $1000. That would be plenty to live on per day! People might think 10 cents is fair pay, but when it is ten thousand time ten cents then it seems outrageous. And if the daily connections were one hundred thousand per day (such a small number out of the billions of people in the world) suddenly it is crazy money.
Most of us look at the multi-millionaires and grouse about how much they make. Many of us fantasize that "if I made a million a year I would use it to help some needy charities." but what if a third world person looked at your life style today? Would they think you are living in extreme luxury? My guess is, by most standards of the world, I live an opulent life. So the question is, can I stop being mad about what someone else is getting and be thankful for what I have? Can I begin today to be generous with what I have to make an impact on the needs of others.
I wish that I could get half of Pujol's salary. I am sure I would use much of it to benefit others. But there is little chance I will see a fraction of that. There is little chance you will either. And it doesn't matter. Maybe that money would make us less the person we are today. Maybe it would not make us better. In the end, we are responsible for what we do have. And economies of scale will always mean that in a global economy some people are going to be able to get crazy rich. But the Lord Jesus indicates that entry into the Kingdom of God is more difficult for the rich. It helps to reflect on that as well.
But baseball players are not the only ones raking in cash. Movie stars can get $20 million for one picture. There are lots of people "making too much money" in the entertainment industry. But are they making too much?
One part of the issue is systemic. There are over 300 million people in America and entertainers connect with such huge numbers that by virtue of economies of scale the dollar amounts are just crazy. If ten percent of Americans care about a team, that is 30 million people. If they each spend $100 a year on that team that is $3 billion dollars. When you start chopping up $3 billion into parts, those parts can be awfully large!
There are less than a thousand people (from the whole world) playing in the Major Leagues. What they make is crazy compared to you and me, but we don't fill stadiums with 30,000 people nor do we have tv contracts.
If I made 10 cents for every one who read this blog I could buy myself lunch at MacDonald's on most days. But let's say that I suddenly became world famous and ten thousand people from around the world read the blog. Ten thousand dimes would be $1000. That would be plenty to live on per day! People might think 10 cents is fair pay, but when it is ten thousand time ten cents then it seems outrageous. And if the daily connections were one hundred thousand per day (such a small number out of the billions of people in the world) suddenly it is crazy money.
Most of us look at the multi-millionaires and grouse about how much they make. Many of us fantasize that "if I made a million a year I would use it to help some needy charities." but what if a third world person looked at your life style today? Would they think you are living in extreme luxury? My guess is, by most standards of the world, I live an opulent life. So the question is, can I stop being mad about what someone else is getting and be thankful for what I have? Can I begin today to be generous with what I have to make an impact on the needs of others.
I wish that I could get half of Pujol's salary. I am sure I would use much of it to benefit others. But there is little chance I will see a fraction of that. There is little chance you will either. And it doesn't matter. Maybe that money would make us less the person we are today. Maybe it would not make us better. In the end, we are responsible for what we do have. And economies of scale will always mean that in a global economy some people are going to be able to get crazy rich. But the Lord Jesus indicates that entry into the Kingdom of God is more difficult for the rich. It helps to reflect on that as well.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Me to Us
The idea of needing other people is easy for me to grasp. As a father, I am keenly aware of how much I give to my children. I give them a name. I chose their native language. I raised them in a particular church. I have been decisive in thousands of experiences: I chose their home, their school, their vacations, what they eat and drink, etc. I have limited some choices and expanded others.
Obviously, I was not alone. Mother probably was more decisive. It is also true that my kids made any number of decisions. They were not shaped and formed like clay. They make all sorts of choices, too.
Choices impact others. We are part of numerous systems. We ar one of the moving parts which have effects on other. Even when we withdraw we impact the group. Sometimes the team plays better without us, but there are other times when the team suffers our departure. If the team is playing with too few players it usually finds itself in trouble. There needs to be a reasonable ratio of workers to the job at hand.
What scares me about today is the focus on "Me" has resulted in the illness and death of so many institutions. I am a blood donor. Most blood donors are old. My motivation to give no doubt has elements of self involved, but in the end I do it because it is the right thing to do and people need my blood. People whom I do not know and whom I will never know have used more than ten gallons of my blood. Many have been babies. Is it worth the inconvenience of an hour of time and a needle in my arm. Yes. I hate needles and I am way busy, but yes, saving lives is worth it. It also helps me connect to the wider community. What happens as the number of donors shrinks?
Yesterday at prayer group Jean shared about an Egyptian woman she saw on tv. The woman was cleaning the square after the demonstrations. She said that woman said that Egypt belonged to the people and that the people had to clean it up. Most of us treat the "public square" as someone else's problem. We are not invested in cleaning up common ground. walking through a garbage strewn park in Chicago, following a weekend of ballgames and family picnics, I saw the fruit of that attitude. Civilization is perilous. It can all disappear in a blink. "We" can decide to maintain it. Unfortunately, the growing number of disconnected "Me's" is a deadly threat to all of us.
Obviously, I was not alone. Mother probably was more decisive. It is also true that my kids made any number of decisions. They were not shaped and formed like clay. They make all sorts of choices, too.
Choices impact others. We are part of numerous systems. We ar one of the moving parts which have effects on other. Even when we withdraw we impact the group. Sometimes the team plays better without us, but there are other times when the team suffers our departure. If the team is playing with too few players it usually finds itself in trouble. There needs to be a reasonable ratio of workers to the job at hand.
What scares me about today is the focus on "Me" has resulted in the illness and death of so many institutions. I am a blood donor. Most blood donors are old. My motivation to give no doubt has elements of self involved, but in the end I do it because it is the right thing to do and people need my blood. People whom I do not know and whom I will never know have used more than ten gallons of my blood. Many have been babies. Is it worth the inconvenience of an hour of time and a needle in my arm. Yes. I hate needles and I am way busy, but yes, saving lives is worth it. It also helps me connect to the wider community. What happens as the number of donors shrinks?
Yesterday at prayer group Jean shared about an Egyptian woman she saw on tv. The woman was cleaning the square after the demonstrations. She said that woman said that Egypt belonged to the people and that the people had to clean it up. Most of us treat the "public square" as someone else's problem. We are not invested in cleaning up common ground. walking through a garbage strewn park in Chicago, following a weekend of ballgames and family picnics, I saw the fruit of that attitude. Civilization is perilous. It can all disappear in a blink. "We" can decide to maintain it. Unfortunately, the growing number of disconnected "Me's" is a deadly threat to all of us.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
What about ME?
We live in tension. On the one hand, our culture celebrates individualism. To be 'different' and 'unique' is a preoccupation of so many. (Of course, we all know that non-conformists frequently end up looking like other non-conformists!)
I recall the radical punk movement we saw in Europe in the 1980's. Often times dozens of these young people with bizarre hair styles, dark makeup, odd clothing and assorted piercings would be seen flocking together. (All looking uniquely the same as each other) One day a young woman, in all her punk strangeness, was sitting alone with us in a train compartment. She seemed uncomfortable and we wondered, "Are there ever times that she wishes she looked normal so she could just blend in? Did she ever say, I wish I wasn't a punk today." Isolated and alone she appeared uneasy.
That is the proverbial 'on the other hand' of the story. We seek to be unique but we also hunger to be included. We seek out others like us. Even misery loves company! We want to belong. Yet, we fear rejection. So we preemptively reject others, or we act in a way that invites rejection. We boast that we do not care what others say, even as we listen for their every word. In pathological instances, the fear of rejection can make being accepted painful. I have worked with enough disturbed young people to see that at work. It is one of life's tragedies. We make choices which are self destructive and push away those who we need the most.
In theory, faith communities are intended to bridge the gap between 'me' and 'them' by creating a 'we.' 'We' is personal. It includes 'me' without devolving into a disconnected individualism. 'We' is personal, so it does not negate the reality of 'me.' The problem is, both impersonal communalism and the selfish individualism are pulling at us. Hence, we live in tension: do I give up myself and melt into the group or do I assert myself and stand alone? Taken to an extreme either is unhealthy, hurtful and sinful. But balancing the two is like walking on ice. The slightest misstep and we are suddenlyflailing about at the brink of a fall.
So what about "me"? Do I matter? Am I all that matters? Why is it so hard?
I recall the radical punk movement we saw in Europe in the 1980's. Often times dozens of these young people with bizarre hair styles, dark makeup, odd clothing and assorted piercings would be seen flocking together. (All looking uniquely the same as each other) One day a young woman, in all her punk strangeness, was sitting alone with us in a train compartment. She seemed uncomfortable and we wondered, "Are there ever times that she wishes she looked normal so she could just blend in? Did she ever say, I wish I wasn't a punk today." Isolated and alone she appeared uneasy.
That is the proverbial 'on the other hand' of the story. We seek to be unique but we also hunger to be included. We seek out others like us. Even misery loves company! We want to belong. Yet, we fear rejection. So we preemptively reject others, or we act in a way that invites rejection. We boast that we do not care what others say, even as we listen for their every word. In pathological instances, the fear of rejection can make being accepted painful. I have worked with enough disturbed young people to see that at work. It is one of life's tragedies. We make choices which are self destructive and push away those who we need the most.
In theory, faith communities are intended to bridge the gap between 'me' and 'them' by creating a 'we.' 'We' is personal. It includes 'me' without devolving into a disconnected individualism. 'We' is personal, so it does not negate the reality of 'me.' The problem is, both impersonal communalism and the selfish individualism are pulling at us. Hence, we live in tension: do I give up myself and melt into the group or do I assert myself and stand alone? Taken to an extreme either is unhealthy, hurtful and sinful. But balancing the two is like walking on ice. The slightest misstep and we are suddenlyflailing about at the brink of a fall.
So what about "me"? Do I matter? Am I all that matters? Why is it so hard?
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The Law of Unintended Consequences
I am off on Mondays. Yesteday was also a "Snow Holiday" in the Memphis TN area as we got blanketed with about 4 inches of the fluffy white magic. As we knew the night before that there was no school, we were spared the daily ritual of (repeated) wake-up calls and lunch making and other preparations of a normal day. My wife and I were lounging around when the phone rang. It was a friend of ours who is also an occassional church attender. His job takes him out of town regularly. In fact, he was calling us from the airport in Nashville.
We talked about several things including this blog. He told me that he was planning to come to church on Sunday. As he was looking at the church website (standrewscollierville.org) for the times of the eucharist he stumbled across the blog. It turns out that he got side tracked reading the blog, lost track of time and missed church. "So," I said to him, "I made you miss church because of the blog?" We both laughed about the paradox of that. So much for my plan!
Plans. All of us have made plans. All of us do things with some sort of intended outcome. I write this blog for "wonderers and wanderers." My target audience is believers who are sometimes buffeted with doubts. I want to reach out to the people who have questions. In addition, I write for open minded agnostics and atheists. I want to engage people who do not believe, yet have the courage to 'doubt their doubts.' My hope is some day someone will show up at our door and say, "I read your blog and I want to go to church here." It hasn't happened yet. However, my friend did miss church because of the blog! (ha!)
One of the things about life is every choice we make (and the many choices we do not make) all create reality. A person is driving his car and decides to change his radio station. He reaches for the radio and inadvertantly changes lanes and causes a wreck. People die. People are injured. Lives are changed. The consequences of the act of changing a radio station reverberate through history. A hundred years from now it could be a link in the chain which produces a cure for cancer or a nuclear holocaust.
We cannot control all the outcomes. We cannot foresee them. Obviously, there are expected outcomes for our actions. We can sort of think through some of those. But we cannot be totally certain exactly what all the outcomes will be. That is why HOPE is so important. It is why prayer is so important. In the end, what we do may not achieve our intended ends. But when we give it to God we have reason to think that He will use it and make a good of it in the end. My friend who read the blog, well, he missed church but we did have a great conversation about it. He is going to help me to help some needy people. He also talked with me about a friend of his who is an atheist. He and I made a connection for the first time in months, a connection which brought joy to me. Last but not least, he gave me a blog idea! So you never know how things will work out!
We talked about several things including this blog. He told me that he was planning to come to church on Sunday. As he was looking at the church website (standrewscollierville.org) for the times of the eucharist he stumbled across the blog. It turns out that he got side tracked reading the blog, lost track of time and missed church. "So," I said to him, "I made you miss church because of the blog?" We both laughed about the paradox of that. So much for my plan!
Plans. All of us have made plans. All of us do things with some sort of intended outcome. I write this blog for "wonderers and wanderers." My target audience is believers who are sometimes buffeted with doubts. I want to reach out to the people who have questions. In addition, I write for open minded agnostics and atheists. I want to engage people who do not believe, yet have the courage to 'doubt their doubts.' My hope is some day someone will show up at our door and say, "I read your blog and I want to go to church here." It hasn't happened yet. However, my friend did miss church because of the blog! (ha!)
One of the things about life is every choice we make (and the many choices we do not make) all create reality. A person is driving his car and decides to change his radio station. He reaches for the radio and inadvertantly changes lanes and causes a wreck. People die. People are injured. Lives are changed. The consequences of the act of changing a radio station reverberate through history. A hundred years from now it could be a link in the chain which produces a cure for cancer or a nuclear holocaust.
We cannot control all the outcomes. We cannot foresee them. Obviously, there are expected outcomes for our actions. We can sort of think through some of those. But we cannot be totally certain exactly what all the outcomes will be. That is why HOPE is so important. It is why prayer is so important. In the end, what we do may not achieve our intended ends. But when we give it to God we have reason to think that He will use it and make a good of it in the end. My friend who read the blog, well, he missed church but we did have a great conversation about it. He is going to help me to help some needy people. He also talked with me about a friend of his who is an atheist. He and I made a connection for the first time in months, a connection which brought joy to me. Last but not least, he gave me a blog idea! So you never know how things will work out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)