Yes, it is true, this is what many a New Yorker says. I have to admit, I say these too many of these very things and too often! This is one of the best "Sh*t [people] Say" videos!
Recently in personal Category
Sometimes, I wish I was a liturgist, then I would be competent in liturgy. I wish was a theologian, then I could deal with theological issues more correctly. Sometimes, I wish I was Church historian, then I could expertly deal with issues past and present. I wish I was a biblical scholar, then I might feel like I actually have something to say. I'm none of these things. My interest - where young people, faith formation, and technology collide. That's where I want to be, but it means I will be none of the above.
Here is a stunning video of migration - a group of Starlings. As the videographer wrote, "A chance encounter and shared moment with one of natures greatest and most fleeting phenomena. "
Murmuration from Sophie Windsor Clive on Vimeo.
Last day of 2011. I always have a bit of anxious anticipation thinking about what the new year will bring. I've learned that when I'm open to whatever may come, I am generally amazed at what the past year brought forth - positive and negative. This past year has been no different!
Happy New Year, everyone!
Happy New Year, everyone!
Henry Kissinger speaking with Chairman Mao.
"It did so by sidestepping the rhetoric of two decades & staying focused on the fundamental strategic objective of a geopolitical dialogue leading to a recasting of the Cold War international order." (On China, Kissinger; p. 234).
Is such a reordering possible in our two-decades old U.S. Culture War that has perverted our governmental processes and the Christian Faith in the U.S.?
What should we sidestep? How do we do it? What remains of the enduring "strategic objective" of the Church - for those who claim Christ who desire to find a way beyond the hubris, the anger, the bitterness, the spitefulness, the willful ignorance, the vengeful attitudes and actions that subsume so much of what is the Body of Christ, today?
It seems, and I experience, that within the Christian Faith, which is by nature relational (contra to the religion that developed around it), the more questions that are answered or settled the more we realize what we don't know and what is yet to be understood and discovered! It is invigorating and confounding at the same time. It is infinite.
This, I think, is a similarity to the exercise of science. Together, these both are the seeking of truth and knowledge, even though on different plains of experience, explanation, and understanding.
This, I think, is a similarity to the exercise of science. Together, these both are the seeking of truth and knowledge, even though on different plains of experience, explanation, and understanding.
This song is beautiful and marvelously tells the story so many of us have experienced and too often hidden in our hears. The announcer does a wonderful job introducing Adele. The song, she, certainly does bring up memories and heartaches. This is a true performer and artist - she is able to bring the lyrics to life.
From the Episcopal News Service, November 28, 2011, reported the conclusion of the disciplinary charges made against the Rt. Rev. Mark Lawrence:
I am thankful for this. After working 20 years in higher education, I can say that I've found (pseudo) liberals (in name only) to be particularly exclusive and spiteful despite their demand for the right of radical "inclusion." Whether I agree with this bishop is not the point - the point is that if we truly, honestly want a Church in the Anglican tradition of allowance of different perspectives, then he and his diocese have the absolute prerogative to be included. Whether I am personally gleeful, hurt, thankful, angry, or whatever emotion I might have related to their perspective is irrelevant. We are not a fundamentalist Church, whether the fundamentalists are liberal or conservative.
"The Episcopal Church's Disciplinary Board for Bishops Nov. 28 said it cannot certify that Diocese of South Carolina Bishop Mark Lawrence has abandoned the communion of the church.
"'Based on the information before it, the board was unable to make the conclusions essential to a certification that Bishop Lawrence had abandoned the communion of the church,' the Rt. Rev. Dorsey F. Henderson Jr., board president, said in a statement e-mailed to Lawrence and reporters."
Link to the article details...
I am thankful for this. After working 20 years in higher education, I can say that I've found (pseudo) liberals (in name only) to be particularly exclusive and spiteful despite their demand for the right of radical "inclusion." Whether I agree with this bishop is not the point - the point is that if we truly, honestly want a Church in the Anglican tradition of allowance of different perspectives, then he and his diocese have the absolute prerogative to be included. Whether I am personally gleeful, hurt, thankful, angry, or whatever emotion I might have related to their perspective is irrelevant. We are not a fundamentalist Church, whether the fundamentalists are liberal or conservative.
Judging a book by its cover... What is real and what is not? This is a commercial, but "Zombie Boy" or "Rico the Zombie" or Rick Genest is absolutely real.
I find something very compelling about this guy.
I find something very compelling about this guy.
There is something about this song! Truly, "we will never be the same!" One encounter... one taste... nothing is ever the same again.
I'm sure plenty of people have already heard of and either like to dislike (or perhaps are ambivalent toward) James Vincent McMorrow, but I just discovered him and think he is just great. Take a listen to this song - along with the video.
I contend that a primary reason for the withering of the Church within the public mind is resultant of the Church - liberal and conservative - capitulating to the zeitgeist. When we simply mirror the prevailing culture or system whether political, economic, philosophical, whatever, we lose our significance, our voice, our purpose, our justifiable reason to be noticed.
I've been a Mac aficionado since the early days. I used an Apple II
when I was in college. Then, my roommate Nick, who in 1984 worked for an educational entity that enabled him to buy the very first Macintosh at educational pricing, brought one home. We were all amazed. The product lived up to the commercial hype.
Harkening back a little further, to, say, the 1960's and the computer of the visionary film "2001."
I was in charge of technology support for Undergraduate Studies at Kent State at the change into a new millennium. I was the Y2K guy. And, well yes, I do like my Macintosh best.
Steve Jobs, who was not perfect by any means, not a prophet and all that, was a visionary. He was capable to understanding what was needed and how to do it. I do think he will be remembered as one of the greats! Rest in peace, Steve Jobs.
Harkening back a little further, to, say, the 1960's and the computer of the visionary film "2001."
I was in charge of technology support for Undergraduate Studies at Kent State at the change into a new millennium. I was the Y2K guy. And, well yes, I do like my Macintosh best.
Steve Jobs, who was not perfect by any means, not a prophet and all that, was a visionary. He was capable to understanding what was needed and how to do it. I do think he will be remembered as one of the greats! Rest in peace, Steve Jobs.
There hasn't been much blogging on my part over the last couple of years. Frankly, most of my posting has been on Facebook or Twitter. The inevitable progress of technology and the new-new-new thing. What's next? No idea. Yet, I control this space all the way down to the cgi and I'm not being exploited by the data gathering crowd. I like Facebook and all the positive stuff it provides, but I'm not naive.
If, in fact, I use this space as I say I do in the "Notice," well, I haven't been. To keep the stuff I like and want to come back to here, I'm less beholden to anyone else. So, perhaps a flurry of activity for a while.
On the other hand, I'm also considering that there might be a better venue for this kind of thing. Tumblr, perhaps, but all the stuff is saved on their servers and I'm at their disposal. Besides, with ten years of stuff, I don't want to just jump ship. I can't import all past stuff into Tumblr, else I just might.
If, in fact, I use this space as I say I do in the "Notice," well, I haven't been. To keep the stuff I like and want to come back to here, I'm less beholden to anyone else. So, perhaps a flurry of activity for a while.
On the other hand, I'm also considering that there might be a better venue for this kind of thing. Tumblr, perhaps, but all the stuff is saved on their servers and I'm at their disposal. Besides, with ten years of stuff, I don't want to just jump ship. I can't import all past stuff into Tumblr, else I just might.
Image via Wikipedia
"If you try to assert wisdom before people have themselves walked it, be prepared for much resistance, denial, push-back, and verbal debate."
- Richard Rohr, (Falling Upward; via MINemergent)
This is very true. There is also the reality that people who speak truth in these days, whose "yes" is yes and whose "no" is no, who and actually deal with the issues that become big, white elephants in the room, well these people are going to be resisted, are going to be accused, and are going to be opposed. (The vested interests of the status-quo will not recuse themselves easily, even as their failure is imminent.)
This is too bad, because when we speak truthfully, with consistency, and actually deal squarely with the real problems we face, then real, positive, and workable change for the better can occur. This is, of course, called integrity.
When we live within integrity, we then earn a hearing and garner respect from those who want nothing to do with the institutions to which we (I) belong - namely, the Church.
Image by Getty Images via @daylife
I wonder why the United States could not have or develop a replacement launch system to take the Shuttles place. Now, we are at the mercy of the Russians to get any of our people into space. Perhaps this is just a lull, but the decimation of the space industry that is resulting is not good for the future of our space program.
I also understand that the monies allocated to NASA could be better spent creating new systems for deep space exploration - by be in a glorified bus business. I understand that. Yet, at this point in time I don't believe that our situation is a result of a well planned out program. I simply fear that with all of other national problems, the U.S. space exploration program may well be hampered, permanently.
We shall see, but for now there is no longer a means to get our guys into space.
I've been told from time-to-time, again just yesterday, that talking with me is like playing leapfrog - meaning that I tend to jump from one thing to the thing, from topic to topic. I've been told I should be on Ritalin because I can't seem to focus for long on one thing. I've always said - as a justification? - that I've developed a keen ability to free-associate, or something like that. I also say that I am constantly trying to find and figure out the connections between seemingly unrelated things. I do believe that I am a generalist and finding linkages and connections is frankly very important to me. It drives me nuts, as well as my closer friends because I tend to process out loud.
??Truth be told, I do need to figure out a way to stay on topic a little better than I now do. So, I'm going to try - in a rambling, generalist kind of way. One of the ways I'm going to try is by writing some short pieces about experiences in my life that add up to who I am now. An experience I had a couple days ago with a couple clergy over the development of a new ministry that would require me to give up a lot and put myself into a situation that is more akin to living as an early 20's college student rather than a professional person nearing 50. A newly minted priest-to-be, now deacon, in our threesome made a couple comments that I could have misinterpreted (I tend to think not, however, even in my own assumption), that I found personally annoying. To me, they sounded condescending and presumptuous. He did not know me at all, yet... Likewise, and this is where I near hypocrisy, my own presumption could be getting in my way of seeing things clearly.??
Anyway, I thought it might be good for me to detail an overview of some of my early experiences - if just for my own sense of personal history. This is overview #1 - The Introduction. I have no idea where to begin. Perhaps all this will be under an umbrella of "challenge." I sense that as a society we are no longer particularly keen on be personally challenged. Challenge is difficult, particularly when the zeitgeist demands that we have to feel good about ourselves, always. Being challenged is often very uncomfortable and in the short run not particularly "feel-good" inducing. In addition, too often being challenging is considered by the guardians of multiculturalism and identity-based Realpolitik to be an affront to diversity. If we challenge such things as attitudes, behaviors, morals, spiritualities, religious beliefs, political ideologies of people belong to certain groups (of any kind in the favor with the guardians), then we are attacking the very person-hood or self-identity of the individual or the legitimacy of the group. I find this absurd, but that's why I don't fit in particularly well. After spending twenty years in higher education and six years as a clergyman in the Episcopal Church, the driving force to capitulate to the "parity line" is profoundly strong.
??The challenges of life change. Right now - being forced to look for another ministry position in an institution that is very challenging. Right now - the way I'm feeling (feelings being quite fickle), the future looks like the diminishment of my life rather than a good, forward momentum. Right now, a real heartfelt loneliness (I've great friends, but they just aren't the same of the one with whom I share life and love).
??
If one would consider the "normal" life of an average late-forties American male, as difficult as that prospect is in such a profoundly varied culture and diverse population, I don't fit it politically, socially, or politically. Materially, while I don't have nearly as much "stuff" as an average American male in his late 40's, I do have more than an average 20-something. This affects (or is it effects?) what I can and cannot reasonably do without having to divest myself of nearly all that I posses. At this point in my life and considering the amount of money I will conceivably make in the near future, I cannot afford to do that with an expectation that I will have to repurchase such items in the future. I'm considering a new ministry position, and it seems I may have to do such a thing - thus the feeling of "diminishment."
??Some may accuse me of snobbery of elitism when I say I don't want to live in that kind of situation or setting or in that run down apartment. Well, too bad. That "too bad" attitude comes from what I have willingly sacrificed over my life, and particularly in my early adult life after college that continues to impact my life even now. Someone who doesn't know me of my life may easily assume such attitudes. I particularly get annoyed when someone makes that kind of assumption about me and knows nothing of my life.
?
?Challenge back then:
??
When I finished college, I remained in Bowling Green because at the time I wanted to continue working in campus ministry. Campus ministry had a tremendous impact on my life. My senior year, I and a couple other students began a new campus ministry-like group on the campus of Bowling Green State University out of an Assembly of God church that was not even two years old. In that short time, the church had grown to around two hundred regular attendees. We realized that the growth of the various campus ministry groups on campus was not a result of non-Christians or lapsed Christians coming into the groups, but just a shuffling around of those who were already fairly committed Christians. We also noticed that the various groups on campus, and there were around 20 (if I remember correctly), rarely had anything to do with each other. If anything, there was an antagonism between many of the groups due to theological and even political differences in understanding and action. We wanted to form a group that helped bring together Christians from all of the different groups. ?
?
In the end, we didn't want to just start another campus ministry like all the others, but something different, something unique, something that didn't exist to perpetuate a specific theological vain of thought or understanding, but a ministry that was creative enough and open enough to figure out ways to help bring unity and understanding among Christians that still allowed for the great diversity of opinion and practice among the various groups. Frankly, we believed that the differences were good and helpful because they enable us wrestle with issues of faith and life that was not possible if we only stayed among our own. ?
?
We decided on the name, Dunamis Outreach, because we liked the implications of Acts 1:8, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." The challenge of creating something new, hopefully honestly new, was daunting to us as 21 year old with little real experience of life. Yet, we didn't know any better; we didn't know that is "couldn't be done;" we didn't know that other people had lost vision and their ability to dream what could be - and be willing to go after the vision and the dream; we didn't know that we really needed to think about our retirement portfolio and to live on virtually nothing was a prudent way to live. We just did it, whatever it took to do it, and had fun all along the way.?
?
Enough for now. I could save this as a "draft," but when I do that I never come back to the draft. So, just publish and since I'm really doing this for me, banish the concern about what others think.
??Truth be told, I do need to figure out a way to stay on topic a little better than I now do. So, I'm going to try - in a rambling, generalist kind of way. One of the ways I'm going to try is by writing some short pieces about experiences in my life that add up to who I am now. An experience I had a couple days ago with a couple clergy over the development of a new ministry that would require me to give up a lot and put myself into a situation that is more akin to living as an early 20's college student rather than a professional person nearing 50. A newly minted priest-to-be, now deacon, in our threesome made a couple comments that I could have misinterpreted (I tend to think not, however, even in my own assumption), that I found personally annoying. To me, they sounded condescending and presumptuous. He did not know me at all, yet... Likewise, and this is where I near hypocrisy, my own presumption could be getting in my way of seeing things clearly.??
Anyway, I thought it might be good for me to detail an overview of some of my early experiences - if just for my own sense of personal history. This is overview #1 - The Introduction. I have no idea where to begin. Perhaps all this will be under an umbrella of "challenge." I sense that as a society we are no longer particularly keen on be personally challenged. Challenge is difficult, particularly when the zeitgeist demands that we have to feel good about ourselves, always. Being challenged is often very uncomfortable and in the short run not particularly "feel-good" inducing. In addition, too often being challenging is considered by the guardians of multiculturalism and identity-based Realpolitik to be an affront to diversity. If we challenge such things as attitudes, behaviors, morals, spiritualities, religious beliefs, political ideologies of people belong to certain groups (of any kind in the favor with the guardians), then we are attacking the very person-hood or self-identity of the individual or the legitimacy of the group. I find this absurd, but that's why I don't fit in particularly well. After spending twenty years in higher education and six years as a clergyman in the Episcopal Church, the driving force to capitulate to the "parity line" is profoundly strong.
??The challenges of life change. Right now - being forced to look for another ministry position in an institution that is very challenging. Right now - the way I'm feeling (feelings being quite fickle), the future looks like the diminishment of my life rather than a good, forward momentum. Right now, a real heartfelt loneliness (I've great friends, but they just aren't the same of the one with whom I share life and love).
??
If one would consider the "normal" life of an average late-forties American male, as difficult as that prospect is in such a profoundly varied culture and diverse population, I don't fit it politically, socially, or politically. Materially, while I don't have nearly as much "stuff" as an average American male in his late 40's, I do have more than an average 20-something. This affects (or is it effects?) what I can and cannot reasonably do without having to divest myself of nearly all that I posses. At this point in my life and considering the amount of money I will conceivably make in the near future, I cannot afford to do that with an expectation that I will have to repurchase such items in the future. I'm considering a new ministry position, and it seems I may have to do such a thing - thus the feeling of "diminishment."
??Some may accuse me of snobbery of elitism when I say I don't want to live in that kind of situation or setting or in that run down apartment. Well, too bad. That "too bad" attitude comes from what I have willingly sacrificed over my life, and particularly in my early adult life after college that continues to impact my life even now. Someone who doesn't know me of my life may easily assume such attitudes. I particularly get annoyed when someone makes that kind of assumption about me and knows nothing of my life.
?
?Challenge back then:
??
When I finished college, I remained in Bowling Green because at the time I wanted to continue working in campus ministry. Campus ministry had a tremendous impact on my life. My senior year, I and a couple other students began a new campus ministry-like group on the campus of Bowling Green State University out of an Assembly of God church that was not even two years old. In that short time, the church had grown to around two hundred regular attendees. We realized that the growth of the various campus ministry groups on campus was not a result of non-Christians or lapsed Christians coming into the groups, but just a shuffling around of those who were already fairly committed Christians. We also noticed that the various groups on campus, and there were around 20 (if I remember correctly), rarely had anything to do with each other. If anything, there was an antagonism between many of the groups due to theological and even political differences in understanding and action. We wanted to form a group that helped bring together Christians from all of the different groups. ?
?
In the end, we didn't want to just start another campus ministry like all the others, but something different, something unique, something that didn't exist to perpetuate a specific theological vain of thought or understanding, but a ministry that was creative enough and open enough to figure out ways to help bring unity and understanding among Christians that still allowed for the great diversity of opinion and practice among the various groups. Frankly, we believed that the differences were good and helpful because they enable us wrestle with issues of faith and life that was not possible if we only stayed among our own. ?
?
We decided on the name, Dunamis Outreach, because we liked the implications of Acts 1:8, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." The challenge of creating something new, hopefully honestly new, was daunting to us as 21 year old with little real experience of life. Yet, we didn't know any better; we didn't know that is "couldn't be done;" we didn't know that other people had lost vision and their ability to dream what could be - and be willing to go after the vision and the dream; we didn't know that we really needed to think about our retirement portfolio and to live on virtually nothing was a prudent way to live. We just did it, whatever it took to do it, and had fun all along the way.?
?
Enough for now. I could save this as a "draft," but when I do that I never come back to the draft. So, just publish and since I'm really doing this for me, banish the concern about what others think.
Nice little video, along with great lyrics and music, from M. Ward.
There is nothing new under the sun - we all share, to one degree or another, the desire to know - why! A broken heart, a long night, and how do we stay in the light? Good questions all - questions the beg for an interior life that is so hard to find in our day. Quit, stillness, calm - the attitudes for and the results of being present with God.
There is nothing new under the sun - we all share, to one degree or another, the desire to know - why! A broken heart, a long night, and how do we stay in the light? Good questions all - questions the beg for an interior life that is so hard to find in our day. Quit, stillness, calm - the attitudes for and the results of being present with God.
Here is another one! I am just amazed at what some people have to endure, and yet come to such places. Then there are others, who seem to suffer little, yet come to nothing. What enables some to do such as this young guy and others to come to nothing or realize not a hint of their potential?
The late Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star general and the 34th president of the United States, was once asked who he believed to be the greatest man he'd ever met. He replied in a snap: "It wasn't a man. It was a woman - my mother. She had little schooling, but her educated mind, her wisdom, came from a lifelong study of the Bible. One night we were playing a card game, mother, my brothers and I. It was Flinch. Hands were dealt and I drew a bad one. I began to complain."
He continued: " 'Put your cards down, boys,' Mother said. 'Dwight, this is just a friendly game in your home where you are loved. But out in the world where there isn't so much love, you will be dealt many a bad hand. So you've got to learn to take the hands life deals you without complaining. Just play them out.' "
via: Finding Home
From this morning's Emergent Village post:
This is a good word for me, today.
Lingering resentment
Forgiving behavior is dealing with situations as they arise in an assertive manner and then letting go of any lingering resentment. As the leader, if you are not able to let go of the resentment, it will consume you and render you ineffective.
James C. Hunter
The Servant
This is a good word for me, today.
I'm starting to make a distinction between the "Christian Faith" and the "Christian Religion."
The "Religion" deals more with cultic practices and asking what I must know about stuff. The "Faith" deals with being - who must I be & how must I be with God, with one another, and with myself.
Perhaps, too, this deals with a too intense focus on "revelation" in our understanding of God's dealing with humanity (or even if there is anything to such statements). Too much of a focus on revelation can too easily lead us to simply asking the question of what we must know in order to be right with God, rather than how we must be or what we must do to be right with God. I think the focus on being is much more in line with the great commands of Jesus - and even the Law.
"I am a practitioner of the Christian Faith," which in my mind places the emphasis on being and relationship. I don't think it is the same as saying, "I am a practitioner of the Christian Religion," with all is rituals, dogmas, etc. (Believe me, this is not an attempt to downplay the importance of such things as ritual or doctrine, etc., in human life or in the practice of the Faith.)
This may touch on the divide between being "spiritual" vs. being "religious."
The "Religion" deals more with cultic practices and asking what I must know about stuff. The "Faith" deals with being - who must I be & how must I be with God, with one another, and with myself.
Perhaps, too, this deals with a too intense focus on "revelation" in our understanding of God's dealing with humanity (or even if there is anything to such statements). Too much of a focus on revelation can too easily lead us to simply asking the question of what we must know in order to be right with God, rather than how we must be or what we must do to be right with God. I think the focus on being is much more in line with the great commands of Jesus - and even the Law.
"I am a practitioner of the Christian Faith," which in my mind places the emphasis on being and relationship. I don't think it is the same as saying, "I am a practitioner of the Christian Religion," with all is rituals, dogmas, etc. (Believe me, this is not an attempt to downplay the importance of such things as ritual or doctrine, etc., in human life or in the practice of the Faith.)
This may touch on the divide between being "spiritual" vs. being "religious."
So, I installed a new commenting system, today. Hopefully this will work far better than the old HaloScan, JS-Kit/Echo (at least on my blog).
With the crash of the hosting companies servers a while ago, my lack of posting, and the problems with comments all added up to less hits and all that. Now, getting tons of hits isn't my goal - as I say in the Notice at the top of my sidebar - but I know at least a few people do read this from time-to-time and in the past have made comments. So, the old comments are gone.
With the crash of the hosting companies servers a while ago, my lack of posting, and the problems with comments all added up to less hits and all that. Now, getting tons of hits isn't my goal - as I say in the Notice at the top of my sidebar - but I know at least a few people do read this from time-to-time and in the past have made comments. So, the old comments are gone.
These past couple of months have been a bit traumatic. Thankfully, no one has died or been harmed in any way. I was called upon in November of 2009 to lead an effort to study, understand, and establish new ministries that are present with emerging generations and within emerging culture. The initial focus of the effort was the neighborhoods of Red Hook and Carroll Gardens in Brooklyn (the 11231 zip-code). I began the world on January 8, 2010. The sponsorship of the Red Hook Project and Imago Dei was to be for three years, after which we would be on our own.
I've spend the last year doing the hard work necessary to get this sort of thing going - an entrepreneur, a project manager, a researcher, a community organizer, etc. I've meet and talked with numerous community and religious leaders. I've conducted focus groups of current residence of the neighborhoods, particularly in Red Hook, of artists, of young people of various ages. I've interviewed students, and the list goes on.
I studied, read, and researched adolescent development, traits of the emerging generations, and the particulars of emerging culture. My goal/intent has always been to understand the contexts in which we live not just right now, but to also understand as best we can were things will be in the 2020's. I'm doing the work for the Church to be able to meet the culture and young people head on - to be present with them where they are - rather than trying to play catch up and doing a terrible job at it.
The Church has a terrible time being "on-time." We tend to always be 15-20 years behind the curve, yet we think these "new" things we are suddenly enamored with are cutting-edge, when they simply aren't. The positive side of the slow crawl of the Church is that it should be able to ride through in a good way the crass trendiness that simply overtakes everything for the moment and then is nothing, again. The is a difference in trying to be trendy in order to attract people and understanding where people are in their understanding of themselves, their world, and their place in the world and trying to be present with them in the mix. When the Church decides to ride the trend waves, all is lost. We stop being authentic to who we are and what we are.
The Church is always "other," with respect to the prevailing culture. Why are we afraid of that, unless we have lost confidence that we have anything worthwhile to say or contribute... let alone the whole stuff about the Cure of Souls and salvific relationships with God.
Anyway, starting in January 2011, this past January, we began in earnest the doing of ministry. Because the genesis of the Red Hook Project came out of St. Paul's Church in Carroll Gardens, and because of the formation I received within this parish, and since St. Paul's has carried on ministry in Red Hook for over the last 18+ years since the diocese closed the parish in Red Hook (foolishly), the beginning efforts for new ministry starting out of St. Paul's. In addition, since we are unable to afford a space in Red Hook (the foolish part mentioned above - selling property in New York City), St. Paul's provides the space we need to begin ministry and to experiment with what has been learned over the past year.
Currently, we have the "Imago Dei Sunday Evening Service" that is currently meeting at St. Paul's (which at times has a larger attendance than some of the established parishes in the area). We have the "2nd Saturdays for Good Works" that began last August (our first ministry effort). There is the monthly Imago Dei "Red Hook Gathering" at a local Red Hook eatery and pub (Rocky Sullivan's) where we have a bit of food, a little drink, and talk about life, faith, and how it all fits together. We have a "Home Group" meeting in Carroll Gardens with nine members. By February, we had a very good start resulting from all the work beforehand that set the foundation upon which the new efforts rest. In addition, last month we started the "Faith meets Art meets Space" project for artists (another target group for the Red Hook Space) to intentionally investigate how their faith influences their art with the rich space of St. Paul's nave as their backdrop. We intend on having the exhibition and performances the first of June.
Then, in February, I was told it was all ending. Ending because of money issues, ending because of opposition to the effort others in the diocese, ending because the will to do something new outside the convention boxes was not there.
This is a very big blow. There have been mixed signals since February about what exactly will be stopped and what might go forward. I've continued working as if the project would continue beyond the June 1st cut off date, hoping that they would find the money and have the will to continue. It hasn't happened. I was told that as of June 1st, it all ends.
What in the world do I do, now? I am fighting a real melancholy - a mix of disappointment, anxiousness about attempting to find a new place of ministry, real concern about the people who have a stake in this effort and now will be left high and dry, a profound sadness about suddenly leaving the people of St. Paul's and the lone priest for a growing congregation in a lurch (I've been ministering in this parish for 7 years). In a month and a half, I'm gone.
Ideally, I would love to continue working at St. Paul's to continuing implementing all that I've learned this past year, all the ideas and plans that have been developed and are ready for implementation, to continue ministry development in Red Hook, etc. But, the parish doesn't have the money for a second priest and the diocese will not "pay me to be at St. Paul's."
There are several of priests I am in conversation with who know that pouring new wine into old wine skins just doesn't work. I had great hope that this project might be an exception, but it is not. The Imago Dei Initiative and the Red Hook Project are new wine efforts, and the wine skins of the present institution will not make space for them at this time. What then do we do? Do I try to find a secular job to support myself and continue doing the work, anyway? I did that sort of thing for four years, and it is very unhealthy, but that may be the sacrifice. These priests (and lay people, too) know that we are going to have to do something on our own. This is just the way the Church is and the lessons of history bear this out. What am I willing to do? Right now, I'm depressed and anxious. Do I just take anything that may come along, even if I sense that it wouldn't be right?
Another consideration is that I've made a life here in NYC. It has only been the last several months that I've felt that I have friends with whom I have enough history and comfortableness to not feel terribly lonely. It has taken me six years to get to this point. The prospects of moving to another city, another place where I will have to start all over again at this point in my life just is not something I want to do.
Yet, there may be a very good and real opportunity to put into place what I have been dreaming of and planning for over the last couple of years in another diocese, city, and state. Is this of God? Is this the next step? Do I simply forget about the relationship issue and go? I don't know. Right now, I'm not emotionally in a particularly good place to be making these kinds of decisions. I'm very thankful for the support of friends and family. We shall see what happens over the next month and a half.
I've spend the last year doing the hard work necessary to get this sort of thing going - an entrepreneur, a project manager, a researcher, a community organizer, etc. I've meet and talked with numerous community and religious leaders. I've conducted focus groups of current residence of the neighborhoods, particularly in Red Hook, of artists, of young people of various ages. I've interviewed students, and the list goes on.
I studied, read, and researched adolescent development, traits of the emerging generations, and the particulars of emerging culture. My goal/intent has always been to understand the contexts in which we live not just right now, but to also understand as best we can were things will be in the 2020's. I'm doing the work for the Church to be able to meet the culture and young people head on - to be present with them where they are - rather than trying to play catch up and doing a terrible job at it.
The Church has a terrible time being "on-time." We tend to always be 15-20 years behind the curve, yet we think these "new" things we are suddenly enamored with are cutting-edge, when they simply aren't. The positive side of the slow crawl of the Church is that it should be able to ride through in a good way the crass trendiness that simply overtakes everything for the moment and then is nothing, again. The is a difference in trying to be trendy in order to attract people and understanding where people are in their understanding of themselves, their world, and their place in the world and trying to be present with them in the mix. When the Church decides to ride the trend waves, all is lost. We stop being authentic to who we are and what we are.
The Church is always "other," with respect to the prevailing culture. Why are we afraid of that, unless we have lost confidence that we have anything worthwhile to say or contribute... let alone the whole stuff about the Cure of Souls and salvific relationships with God.
Anyway, starting in January 2011, this past January, we began in earnest the doing of ministry. Because the genesis of the Red Hook Project came out of St. Paul's Church in Carroll Gardens, and because of the formation I received within this parish, and since St. Paul's has carried on ministry in Red Hook for over the last 18+ years since the diocese closed the parish in Red Hook (foolishly), the beginning efforts for new ministry starting out of St. Paul's. In addition, since we are unable to afford a space in Red Hook (the foolish part mentioned above - selling property in New York City), St. Paul's provides the space we need to begin ministry and to experiment with what has been learned over the past year.
Currently, we have the "Imago Dei Sunday Evening Service" that is currently meeting at St. Paul's (which at times has a larger attendance than some of the established parishes in the area). We have the "2nd Saturdays for Good Works" that began last August (our first ministry effort). There is the monthly Imago Dei "Red Hook Gathering" at a local Red Hook eatery and pub (Rocky Sullivan's) where we have a bit of food, a little drink, and talk about life, faith, and how it all fits together. We have a "Home Group" meeting in Carroll Gardens with nine members. By February, we had a very good start resulting from all the work beforehand that set the foundation upon which the new efforts rest. In addition, last month we started the "Faith meets Art meets Space" project for artists (another target group for the Red Hook Space) to intentionally investigate how their faith influences their art with the rich space of St. Paul's nave as their backdrop. We intend on having the exhibition and performances the first of June.
Then, in February, I was told it was all ending. Ending because of money issues, ending because of opposition to the effort others in the diocese, ending because the will to do something new outside the convention boxes was not there.
This is a very big blow. There have been mixed signals since February about what exactly will be stopped and what might go forward. I've continued working as if the project would continue beyond the June 1st cut off date, hoping that they would find the money and have the will to continue. It hasn't happened. I was told that as of June 1st, it all ends.
What in the world do I do, now? I am fighting a real melancholy - a mix of disappointment, anxiousness about attempting to find a new place of ministry, real concern about the people who have a stake in this effort and now will be left high and dry, a profound sadness about suddenly leaving the people of St. Paul's and the lone priest for a growing congregation in a lurch (I've been ministering in this parish for 7 years). In a month and a half, I'm gone.
Ideally, I would love to continue working at St. Paul's to continuing implementing all that I've learned this past year, all the ideas and plans that have been developed and are ready for implementation, to continue ministry development in Red Hook, etc. But, the parish doesn't have the money for a second priest and the diocese will not "pay me to be at St. Paul's."
There are several of priests I am in conversation with who know that pouring new wine into old wine skins just doesn't work. I had great hope that this project might be an exception, but it is not. The Imago Dei Initiative and the Red Hook Project are new wine efforts, and the wine skins of the present institution will not make space for them at this time. What then do we do? Do I try to find a secular job to support myself and continue doing the work, anyway? I did that sort of thing for four years, and it is very unhealthy, but that may be the sacrifice. These priests (and lay people, too) know that we are going to have to do something on our own. This is just the way the Church is and the lessons of history bear this out. What am I willing to do? Right now, I'm depressed and anxious. Do I just take anything that may come along, even if I sense that it wouldn't be right?
Another consideration is that I've made a life here in NYC. It has only been the last several months that I've felt that I have friends with whom I have enough history and comfortableness to not feel terribly lonely. It has taken me six years to get to this point. The prospects of moving to another city, another place where I will have to start all over again at this point in my life just is not something I want to do.
Yet, there may be a very good and real opportunity to put into place what I have been dreaming of and planning for over the last couple of years in another diocese, city, and state. Is this of God? Is this the next step? Do I simply forget about the relationship issue and go? I don't know. Right now, I'm not emotionally in a particularly good place to be making these kinds of decisions. I'm very thankful for the support of friends and family. We shall see what happens over the next month and a half.
I recently read an essay by Elizabeth Drescher on the "rd Magazine" website entitled "Turn Off, Slow Down, Drop In: The Digital Generation Reinvents the Sabbath"
I love this paragraph:
The Episcopal Church is in crisis because we are a dying institution (has little to do with the gay-issue or the conservatives leaving the Church - although it has a whole lot to do with it... irony). So many people are rushing to do triage and to save this venerable national treasure, but the ways and means they are trying to save it are little more than the same old things that have been going on for the last 40 years that have gotten us into the mess to begin with. They dress up these tired old ways and means in hipster clothing or Emergent garb thinking that things like PowerPoint presentations, bad rock-ish music, hip-cool candles and flashy lights, casting off vestments, or better yet taking out pews, sidelining the Prayer Book, explaining away Scripture, or outlawing Rite I language will magically make the Church all rad (yes, I know) so that streams of young people will suddenly fill the empty spaces. What they end up doing is just another form of blab-casting.
What we so often forget is that Jesus is the one that builds the Church, and if we so manage affairs of the Church according to trendy culture dictates that Jesus is nicely tucked away out of site, well, we have already failed.
There are streams of young people filling churches. Just not our churches. Around where I live (Brooklyn, NY), within an 1/2-hour walk I can take you to at least 5 churches that are in the hundreds of members each and are made up almost exclusively with those under, say, 32 years of age. They beg for people over 40 to come to their churches. St. Paul's, where I serve, has a very close relationship with a few of these churches. You know what they are doing in their services? Old Hymns song out of hymnals. Traditional liturgies (they are rediscovering the significance of liturgy). We use Rite I at St. Paul's for our principle liturgy (Rite II other times - we aren't protesting anything), but when we talk about changing to Rite II, it is the 20-somethings who have been coming in greater numbers over the last 5 years who protest the loudest.
This is why my work in the Imago Dei Society/Initiative isn't focused on being trendy, but on understanding emerging generations and emerging culture to find out not how to become like them, but to discover how to translate the Faith to them in ways they can understand, form them into consequential Christians, and learn how to receive, living into and pass on the enduring Tradition in its Anglican form. This doesn't play too well when those attempting triage are bent on re-hashing the latest hip-cool thing the culture throws at us (even when all the evidence shows that what younger people are looking for is something substantially different from all that hype and manipulation).
I love this paragraph:
At the other end of the spectrum, fantasies that the application of new technologies to traditional practices will, in themselves, enrich life in general and spirituality in particular are no less misguided. Take a recent blog post on the U.S. Congregational Life Survey, which shared with italicized surprise the utterly unremarkable finding that "use of visual projection equipment in worship is not related to church growth." No kidding? Survey says: a dull video or lame music is just dull as a preacher blah-blah-blah-ing on in person with no relational interest in or connection to the people to whom they are blab-casting. So, too, an engaging, interactive minister who genuinely connects to people and encourages their connection to one another is going to be compelling face-to-face and in technologically-enabled engagements (see, for example, @texasbishop, @MeredithGould, @jaweedkaleem). [emphasis mine]For some reason, and this gets to some of the other stuff in the article and in the life of the Church in general (particularly the Mainline denominations and more particularly the Episcopal Church, of which I am a priest), we think we must manage God. After all, if we don't manage God everything will just fall apart and we will devolve into nothingness. (Yeah, and how is that going for us?)
The Episcopal Church is in crisis because we are a dying institution (has little to do with the gay-issue or the conservatives leaving the Church - although it has a whole lot to do with it... irony). So many people are rushing to do triage and to save this venerable national treasure, but the ways and means they are trying to save it are little more than the same old things that have been going on for the last 40 years that have gotten us into the mess to begin with. They dress up these tired old ways and means in hipster clothing or Emergent garb thinking that things like PowerPoint presentations, bad rock-ish music, hip-cool candles and flashy lights, casting off vestments, or better yet taking out pews, sidelining the Prayer Book, explaining away Scripture, or outlawing Rite I language will magically make the Church all rad (yes, I know) so that streams of young people will suddenly fill the empty spaces. What they end up doing is just another form of blab-casting.
What we so often forget is that Jesus is the one that builds the Church, and if we so manage affairs of the Church according to trendy culture dictates that Jesus is nicely tucked away out of site, well, we have already failed.
There are streams of young people filling churches. Just not our churches. Around where I live (Brooklyn, NY), within an 1/2-hour walk I can take you to at least 5 churches that are in the hundreds of members each and are made up almost exclusively with those under, say, 32 years of age. They beg for people over 40 to come to their churches. St. Paul's, where I serve, has a very close relationship with a few of these churches. You know what they are doing in their services? Old Hymns song out of hymnals. Traditional liturgies (they are rediscovering the significance of liturgy). We use Rite I at St. Paul's for our principle liturgy (Rite II other times - we aren't protesting anything), but when we talk about changing to Rite II, it is the 20-somethings who have been coming in greater numbers over the last 5 years who protest the loudest.
This is why my work in the Imago Dei Society/Initiative isn't focused on being trendy, but on understanding emerging generations and emerging culture to find out not how to become like them, but to discover how to translate the Faith to them in ways they can understand, form them into consequential Christians, and learn how to receive, living into and pass on the enduring Tradition in its Anglican form. This doesn't play too well when those attempting triage are bent on re-hashing the latest hip-cool thing the culture throws at us (even when all the evidence shows that what younger people are looking for is something substantially different from all that hype and manipulation).
Lent officially began last week, but today, Monday, March 14th, I embark on a personal (I don't know what word to use) Lenten discipline to find out what it is like to be focused on an identity as a "sacramental priest." I've been talking to my spiritual director about what it means to be priest. When I finished seminary, I spent the next four years being a data analyst for a research project at the Church Pension Fund. It was a good job at a great place to work, but at the beginning of my priesthood my identity continued not as a sacramental presence within a community of people, but as a "company" man, a techno-geek, a secular person in the work-a-day world rather than the "God person" among people. My most productive time was spent playing with numbers in a cubical rather dealing with the cure and care of souls. Then, this past year I did work in ministry full-time, yet most of my time was taken up in the development of a new ministry - more organizational, more research oriented, and more financial than sacramental.
In addition, many of the models for "priest" lifted up in the Church have developed over the years to be more like a therapist-priest, or social-worker-priest, or political- or social-activist-priest, or corporate-manager-priest, but not a priest that is devoted to sacramental ministry - the Cure of Souls. What does it mean to be a priest that is more sacramental and focused on "God-work" than a corporate executive, a social activist, a therapist, or a social worker? I know that a priest in full-time ministry wears many hats, and I like that. Yet, too often it seems that the sacramental presence is overwhelmed.
My spiritual director talks about the priest as the "God-person" in a community, a neighborhood, within a society. People need to know that there is someone present who is connected with God and is dedicated to be a helpful presence, an encouragement, an identifiable representative of God available to people, so my spiritual director says. This really cuts at my Type-A, achievement compulsion. I don't know if I know how to be this kind of person. I realize that my identity as a priest is not "what I do" or "how much I do" or "how well I do," even though those things are important considerations, but to be the God-person being about what God-people do - pray, worship, study Scripture, dispense the sacraments, and be about the Christian formation of God's people.
To that end, beginning today I am dedicating myself to a process that will lead to a deeper understanding of what it means to be the God-person, a sacramental priest, within a parish community and in my neighborhood community. At St. Paul's Church (199 Carroll St., Brooklyn, NY) in the Red Hook and Carroll Gardens neighborhoods of Brooklyn, I will be a sacramental priest in the Anglo-Catholic tradition by engaging in:
+ Morning Prayer at 7:30 AM - Monday through Thursday (this is already an Office done at St. Paul's)
+ Evening Prayer at 6:00 PM - Monday through Thursday
+ Low Mass - 6:30 PM - Monday through Thursday
+ Meeting with one person each day
+ Guiding/coaching the people involved in Imago Dei Initiative's "Faith meets Art meets Space" project for artists
On Fridays, it is the custom at St. Paul's to have morning Mass at 9:00 AM and during Lent Sheila Reed conducts Stations of the Cross at 6:00 PM. So, Fridays are already taken care of (this is also my weekly day off). Saturdays will be "management" stuff and for the doing of Good Works. Sundays, High Solemn Mass at 11:00 AM and the Imago Dei Evening Service at 5:00 PM.
I'm striving to live more fully into the Imago Dei Society's Rule-of-Life: http://imagodeiinitiative.org/life/rule-of-life/
This is my Lenten Discipline. I'm not sure what will come of it, but I'm sure I will be changed. God always works in ways I just don't understand and can rarely anticipate. I plan to blog the experience. We shall see, by the mercy of our Lord.
I returned home from the Israel/Jordan trip to discover that my Website/blog host had a catastrophic crash of the server from which my blog and website is delivered. I've been without e-mail, web-service, and this blog for six days - a very long time.
But, it is all back and my nearly eleven years of blog posts made it through!
More later...
But, it is all back and my nearly eleven years of blog posts made it through!
More later...
This coming Monday, February 14, a bunch of folks from the Episcopal Diocese of Mississippi, a couple guys from New York City, and one nephew from Ohio will be heading to Israel and Jordan for a 10 day pilgrimage.
We are excited!
One aspect of this particular pilgrimage will be an experiment to use Journeys Unlimited's social media websites to chronicle the experiences of the members of the pilgrimage as real-time as possible. We will use Twitter, a Tumblr travel blog, YouTube, and Flickr to post impressions, experiences, videos, and photographs of the trip. Journeys Unlimited's Facebook page will be a central place where new posts and uploads will be announced.
If anyone wants to follow this pilgrimage group along the way, stay tuned.
Journey Unlimited's social media sites are as follows:
Flickr for photos
YouTube for videos
I came across this '90's song and video. I like it! It is one of those songs that gets into my mind - it has that hook effect. I love the voice of the black woman singing (don't know her name).
The old electronics - cutting edge back then - could fetch a bit of money these days for the nostalgia effect. Too bad their drinking in LA got a little over done and led to the smashing of that bitchin' Mac laptop (before the OS went all Unix) they were using to make their cool groves. The song is from "Bran Van 3000," a group out of Montreal (I think). By the way, they have a new album that came out in 2010.
Official website: http://bv3.ca/
The old electronics - cutting edge back then - could fetch a bit of money these days for the nostalgia effect. Too bad their drinking in LA got a little over done and led to the smashing of that bitchin' Mac laptop (before the OS went all Unix) they were using to make their cool groves. The song is from "Bran Van 3000," a group out of Montreal (I think). By the way, they have a new album that came out in 2010.
Official website: http://bv3.ca/
There is always an elephant in the room. Sometimes we are better at admitting it than not. Its seems only common sense that to solve a problem it is best to recognize the elephant and deal with it. Common sense. Common. Sense.
Sometimes I think I am too intent on identifying the problems that have caused and still cause so many of our problems, whether individual, within the Church common, or within our national psyche. Sometimes, I think that identifying those big old elephants even when others would rather focus on the positive stuff that skirts the invisible thing in the room just may not make me all that popular, but I just can't seem to let it go.
I don't know... I do think that if we want to solve our problems and resolve our issues we must have everything out in the open and public and recognized and admitted. If we don't, I just don't know how we will really solve anything. Reading through some of my previous posts - so negative as I attempt to discover and identify the elephants. Will this get me to where I want to go? Perhaps not, but I'm simply processing out loud. I suppose.
Sometimes I think I am too intent on identifying the problems that have caused and still cause so many of our problems, whether individual, within the Church common, or within our national psyche. Sometimes, I think that identifying those big old elephants even when others would rather focus on the positive stuff that skirts the invisible thing in the room just may not make me all that popular, but I just can't seem to let it go.
I don't know... I do think that if we want to solve our problems and resolve our issues we must have everything out in the open and public and recognized and admitted. If we don't, I just don't know how we will really solve anything. Reading through some of my previous posts - so negative as I attempt to discover and identify the elephants. Will this get me to where I want to go? Perhaps not, but I'm simply processing out loud. I suppose.
Image via Wikipedia
A quote from Henri Nouwen
"...Jesus to his Apostles the day before his death: 'No one can have greater love than to lay down his life for his friends.' (Jn 15:13)
"For me these words summarize the meaning of all Christian ministry. If teaching, preaching, individual pastoral care, organizing, and celebrating are acts of service that go beyond the level of professional expertise, it is precisely because in these acts ministers are asked to lay down their own lives for their friends. There are many people who, through long training, have reached a high level of competence in terms of understanding human behavior but few who are willing to lay down their own lives for others and make their weakness a source of creativity. For many individuals professional training means power. But ministers, who take off their clothes to wash the feet of their friends, are powerless, and their training and formation are meant to enable them to face their own weakness without fear and make it available to others. It is exactly this creative weakness that gives the ministry its momentum."
(Nouwen, Henri, Ministry and Spirituality; New York: The Continuum Publishing Co., 2000; p 93)
Well, this election cycle is now over, except for the changes that have to be realized in the next few months.
I voted. I did my civic duty, but this election cycle sucked. I found myself voting not so much for who I wanted, but voting against what I thought to be terrible prospects. This isn't a good rationale for voting!
Here is one of the problems in the American psyche that we have to face and deal with. Many of the founding ideals of the American Republic sat squarely on the notion that the common citizen is the best locus for control and for fulfilling the Declaration of Independence's call for the "pursuit of happiness." What we have done, which in some ways is the triumph of "liberal" dogma that the government best holds our individual futures and is the solution to our common problems, is to give over to the government the responsibilities to make us happy, not just guarantee a free and even playing field for each person to pursue happiness. We have given over to the government many of our rights, freedoms, and perogatives, so that government will play the role of Nannie to our collectively childish whims. We don't want the responsibility for our own happiness; we don't want the responsibility for our own jobs, we don't want to deal with the consequences of our own laziness or short-sightedness or irresponsibility concerning money, health, or the common good.
One of the triumphs of the "conservative" dogma is the hyper-individualism that has driven us so far away from notions of the common good that in our hyper-individualism we have fallen out of the practice of looking out of the good of one another. We forget what it means to be part of a community, so that when we face hard times we no longer have others to rely upon for help, support, and encouragement, which then simply drives us out of fear, necessity, or ignorance into the waiting arms of a governmental bureaucracy needing to justify itself and its growth. We look to government for social salvation because we no longer know how to rely on one another or that social salvation rests with each of us, together. Well, perhaps we don't really want to help our neighbors anyway, since in a selfish compulsion we try to accumulate things or money or a sense of personal security in an attempt to protect ourselves, as individuals, from the harshness of the real world.
(What also needs to be acknowledged is that the founders generally believed that the "citizenry" consisted of white, male, landowners. They were, after all, the ones who were allowed to vote. They were expected to be educated enough to know the issues and be less susceptible to manipulation or deception. They owned land so they had a true vested interest in the success of the whole enterprise, it was assumed. I wonder, sometimes and particularly after this election cycle, if perhaps there were elements of truth in their thinking, at least concerning education and vested interest - not concerning participation based on sex or race.)
By the way, we are not guarenteed "happiness," just the freedom to "pursue" happiness - this is a big difference. We've also gotten this mixed up. Now, we demand of the government in whatever form that it guarantee our happiness, our jobs, our success, our health! This is impossible and cannot be the responsibility of the government, at what ever level. Yet, because as a society we have for the most part abandoned individual responsibility for our own actions and prosperity, we now make these untenable demands of our government. When the government doesn't deliver, immediately, then we are convinced by certain groups that benefit from chaos, mistrust, and mismanagement that the government in power, or the party in power, is not listening, is not doing "for the people," is not fulfilling its responsibility to us. It was never the government's responsibility in the first place, and we are near idiots to try to place such expectations on the government. We will always be let down if we try, and we will then act irrationally as a citizenry and an electorate, as we are now doing.
It we expect the government to take care of everything so that we don't have to think, exert effort, or take responsibility for ourselves, then we will never find happiness and will probably have the freedom to pursue happiness withdrawn by a "Nannie" government that believes it is acting for our own good. Kind of like the computer AI in the remake movie, "I, Robot."
Government can and does do many good things. Yet, for the balances of power to work and for the form of government to work as was envisioned by the founders, we the people must be informed, motivated, active, concerned for the common good, and willing to see the best in even our opponents - in other words, compromise for the good of the whole. I fear that too many of us in the country are now unwilling to do this any longer. "I want mine, I want it now, and the government better give it to me!" is the attitude that comes across the strongest in many quarters. Some may be motivated, but not informed (and think that is just fine because they naively trust the good sounding people striving for power). Some may be motivated, even informed, but act from only their individual greed. It goes on and on.
I do fear for the democracy and the continued integrity of the Republic. Nothing guarantees the unending continuance of our form of government, the geo-political entity known as the United States of American, or the continued success of this grand experiment in "self-government." We will not fall from forces outside our borders, but we may well fall from within.
I voted. I did my civic duty, but this election cycle sucked. I found myself voting not so much for who I wanted, but voting against what I thought to be terrible prospects. This isn't a good rationale for voting!
Here is one of the problems in the American psyche that we have to face and deal with. Many of the founding ideals of the American Republic sat squarely on the notion that the common citizen is the best locus for control and for fulfilling the Declaration of Independence's call for the "pursuit of happiness." What we have done, which in some ways is the triumph of "liberal" dogma that the government best holds our individual futures and is the solution to our common problems, is to give over to the government the responsibilities to make us happy, not just guarantee a free and even playing field for each person to pursue happiness. We have given over to the government many of our rights, freedoms, and perogatives, so that government will play the role of Nannie to our collectively childish whims. We don't want the responsibility for our own happiness; we don't want the responsibility for our own jobs, we don't want to deal with the consequences of our own laziness or short-sightedness or irresponsibility concerning money, health, or the common good.
One of the triumphs of the "conservative" dogma is the hyper-individualism that has driven us so far away from notions of the common good that in our hyper-individualism we have fallen out of the practice of looking out of the good of one another. We forget what it means to be part of a community, so that when we face hard times we no longer have others to rely upon for help, support, and encouragement, which then simply drives us out of fear, necessity, or ignorance into the waiting arms of a governmental bureaucracy needing to justify itself and its growth. We look to government for social salvation because we no longer know how to rely on one another or that social salvation rests with each of us, together. Well, perhaps we don't really want to help our neighbors anyway, since in a selfish compulsion we try to accumulate things or money or a sense of personal security in an attempt to protect ourselves, as individuals, from the harshness of the real world.
(What also needs to be acknowledged is that the founders generally believed that the "citizenry" consisted of white, male, landowners. They were, after all, the ones who were allowed to vote. They were expected to be educated enough to know the issues and be less susceptible to manipulation or deception. They owned land so they had a true vested interest in the success of the whole enterprise, it was assumed. I wonder, sometimes and particularly after this election cycle, if perhaps there were elements of truth in their thinking, at least concerning education and vested interest - not concerning participation based on sex or race.)
By the way, we are not guarenteed "happiness," just the freedom to "pursue" happiness - this is a big difference. We've also gotten this mixed up. Now, we demand of the government in whatever form that it guarantee our happiness, our jobs, our success, our health! This is impossible and cannot be the responsibility of the government, at what ever level. Yet, because as a society we have for the most part abandoned individual responsibility for our own actions and prosperity, we now make these untenable demands of our government. When the government doesn't deliver, immediately, then we are convinced by certain groups that benefit from chaos, mistrust, and mismanagement that the government in power, or the party in power, is not listening, is not doing "for the people," is not fulfilling its responsibility to us. It was never the government's responsibility in the first place, and we are near idiots to try to place such expectations on the government. We will always be let down if we try, and we will then act irrationally as a citizenry and an electorate, as we are now doing.
It we expect the government to take care of everything so that we don't have to think, exert effort, or take responsibility for ourselves, then we will never find happiness and will probably have the freedom to pursue happiness withdrawn by a "Nannie" government that believes it is acting for our own good. Kind of like the computer AI in the remake movie, "I, Robot."
Government can and does do many good things. Yet, for the balances of power to work and for the form of government to work as was envisioned by the founders, we the people must be informed, motivated, active, concerned for the common good, and willing to see the best in even our opponents - in other words, compromise for the good of the whole. I fear that too many of us in the country are now unwilling to do this any longer. "I want mine, I want it now, and the government better give it to me!" is the attitude that comes across the strongest in many quarters. Some may be motivated, but not informed (and think that is just fine because they naively trust the good sounding people striving for power). Some may be motivated, even informed, but act from only their individual greed. It goes on and on.
I do fear for the democracy and the continued integrity of the Republic. Nothing guarantees the unending continuance of our form of government, the geo-political entity known as the United States of American, or the continued success of this grand experiment in "self-government." We will not fall from forces outside our borders, but we may well fall from within.
Every now and then I catch up on what is going on with the controversies within the Anglican Communion among the bloggers who are most prolific. Mark Harris (Preludium), a priest in Delaware and member of the Episcopal Church (TEC) Executive Council and Kendall Harmon (Titusonenine), the Canon Theologian for the Diocese of South Carolina, are two of these. Over the past couple of years, and despite my respect for much of what he has written in the past, Harris has become more typically Baby Boomer-ish (those who believe they are given an unique charge to remake the world in their own image and bring in the age of Aquarius by the dismantling all that came before them) and particularly stereotypically American (those who expect their will to be done around the world simply because we are Americans, so smart, so progressive, and so right). After all, we just want what is best for the world and its people, and we know exactly how everyone needs to act and what they need to believe.
All these machinations we are hearing from the leadership of the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A. concerning steps being taken by the Archbishop of Canterbury (ABC) and the governing structures of the Anglican Communion because we snub our nose and refuse to abide by a couple requests made of us by those bodies, increasingly smacks of people who are used to getting their way, but no longer can.
Now, honestly, I have to admit that abiding by these two requests will impact my life, but only minimally. What I have to acknowledge is that I don't always get my way, I don't have a "right" to anything within the Church or the Body of Christ, and that I consider myself to be part of a Church that is Catholic - all of these things cause me to recognize, acknowledge, and abide by things I don't like, think is fair, or consider to be right. It isn't all about me or my group. By saying that, I do not even consider that I stop advocating for myself, my group, what I think to be God's will, what I believe to be right for the good order, safety, and benefit of all, and an advocate for those who are terribly abused by other Anglicans around the world and demand that they stop their abuse.
Soon, "imperialist" America will have to deal with the rest of the world standing up to us. How will we as a people and as a nation act when this really starts to happen in earnest? Will we join the rest of the world as equal partners or... will we continue to act like imperialists and attempt to force our will on the world or... will we retreat into isolationism?
The Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church are a foreshadowing of all this and how Americans will probably act.
So many of our reactions in TEC (at least among many of its leadership) smacks of an "imperialist" Episcopal Church that generally got its way within Anglicanism (because we were Americans and we had the money), but now has to deal with foreign people standing up to us and saying, "our views count and we aren't going to let you get away with this anymore."
Now, we may absolutely disagree with them and actually may be absolutely right - but we are still being stood up to. We don't like it, so we laughingly do things like accuse the ABC of acting like a colonial authority when he, completely within his right, "interferes" in TEC, which claims to be an Anglican province by definition in communion with him. We just can't stand being stood up to.
How are we going to act, now?
Are we going to join the rest of the Communion as equal partners and recognize that all (but a few) have requested that we don't do a couple things and that as equal partners sometimes we have to give a little (while still being ardent advocates of our position) or... are we going to attempt to force our will one very one else (something like Spong's attack on African bishops) or... will we simply retreat into isolationism and claim we don't need the rest of the Communion and gloriously declare that we are our own sect?
I keep hearing all the above from our leadership, except, really, that we see ourselves as equal members of the Communion and that sometimes we don't get our way. Send no more money to them... we can do just as well on our own and who needs them - these are the attitudes I hear and read the most.
All these machinations we are hearing from the leadership of the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A. concerning steps being taken by the Archbishop of Canterbury (ABC) and the governing structures of the Anglican Communion because we snub our nose and refuse to abide by a couple requests made of us by those bodies, increasingly smacks of people who are used to getting their way, but no longer can.
Now, honestly, I have to admit that abiding by these two requests will impact my life, but only minimally. What I have to acknowledge is that I don't always get my way, I don't have a "right" to anything within the Church or the Body of Christ, and that I consider myself to be part of a Church that is Catholic - all of these things cause me to recognize, acknowledge, and abide by things I don't like, think is fair, or consider to be right. It isn't all about me or my group. By saying that, I do not even consider that I stop advocating for myself, my group, what I think to be God's will, what I believe to be right for the good order, safety, and benefit of all, and an advocate for those who are terribly abused by other Anglicans around the world and demand that they stop their abuse.
Soon, "imperialist" America will have to deal with the rest of the world standing up to us. How will we as a people and as a nation act when this really starts to happen in earnest? Will we join the rest of the world as equal partners or... will we continue to act like imperialists and attempt to force our will on the world or... will we retreat into isolationism?
The Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church are a foreshadowing of all this and how Americans will probably act.
So many of our reactions in TEC (at least among many of its leadership) smacks of an "imperialist" Episcopal Church that generally got its way within Anglicanism (because we were Americans and we had the money), but now has to deal with foreign people standing up to us and saying, "our views count and we aren't going to let you get away with this anymore."
Now, we may absolutely disagree with them and actually may be absolutely right - but we are still being stood up to. We don't like it, so we laughingly do things like accuse the ABC of acting like a colonial authority when he, completely within his right, "interferes" in TEC, which claims to be an Anglican province by definition in communion with him. We just can't stand being stood up to.
How are we going to act, now?
Are we going to join the rest of the Communion as equal partners and recognize that all (but a few) have requested that we don't do a couple things and that as equal partners sometimes we have to give a little (while still being ardent advocates of our position) or... are we going to attempt to force our will one very one else (something like Spong's attack on African bishops) or... will we simply retreat into isolationism and claim we don't need the rest of the Communion and gloriously declare that we are our own sect?
I keep hearing all the above from our leadership, except, really, that we see ourselves as equal members of the Communion and that sometimes we don't get our way. Send no more money to them... we can do just as well on our own and who needs them - these are the attitudes I hear and read the most.
I don't think enough can be said about routine - or enough good can be said of routine. This month and next will be anything but routine, and you know it makes the stress level run much higher. For me, a primary responsibility I have right now is to think and plan. For me to think along a creative track, I need to time to orient myself, clear my mind, sit and mull, dwell, and imagine, but when I'm rushing here or there or getting ready for a trip of one sort or another, there isn't much time for any of that.
Routine enables me to be more consistent and to know what to expect. It enables me to relax much more - less stress. Lack of routine does help in the self-motivation department, either. I find myself physically and mentally warn out and too susceptible to melancholy (which is were I am right now).
I leave in a few days for CREDO (a clergy development and care conference). Of course, this is one of my stressers because it comes at a very inopportune time. Ten days away does not help me move ahead. Yet, I know that this is probably the best time for me to get away and to examine myself. With regard to self-care, right now I'm not living a particularly balanced and healthy lifestyle. In the long run, reacquainting myself with balance and health will far out pace the hectic schedule and demands that are confronting me right now.
Maybe in December I can return to some kind of consistent and stabilizing routine. I hope so.
Routine enables me to be more consistent and to know what to expect. It enables me to relax much more - less stress. Lack of routine does help in the self-motivation department, either. I find myself physically and mentally warn out and too susceptible to melancholy (which is were I am right now).
I leave in a few days for CREDO (a clergy development and care conference). Of course, this is one of my stressers because it comes at a very inopportune time. Ten days away does not help me move ahead. Yet, I know that this is probably the best time for me to get away and to examine myself. With regard to self-care, right now I'm not living a particularly balanced and healthy lifestyle. In the long run, reacquainting myself with balance and health will far out pace the hectic schedule and demands that are confronting me right now.
Maybe in December I can return to some kind of consistent and stabilizing routine. I hope so.
There is a new Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life reports on new survey results, "U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey." It doesn't look very pretty, frankly.
How much do you know about religion? Click and take the 15-question survey. I got 14 out of 15, scoring quite high. I should have - there might be a little problem if I didn't!
How much do you know about religion? Click and take the 15-question survey. I got 14 out of 15, scoring quite high. I should have - there might be a little problem if I didn't!
So, I'm attending the Episcopal Village East (EVE) conference in Baltimore. I attended the TransFORM East Coast conference in May. I said to a few people as I left Brooklyn that I wanted to see how the two conferences compared with each other. Here is a first observation: People at TransFORM where tweeting and blogging all through the conference - and it was encouraged by the leadership - while at the first pre-conference session for EVE everyone was writing with pens and pencils on notebook paper.
The people at TransFORM, which describes itself as a "missional community formation network," seemed to be people of and ensconced in the communities they are trying to reach. The people at this EVE session seem to be those who are trying to learn about the same demographic group of people, but are not of them. Does that make sense?
It is terribly difficult and takes an immense amount of energy to try to understand the constitutional make-up of a different group of people.
The people at TransFORM, which describes itself as a "missional community formation network," seemed to be people of and ensconced in the communities they are trying to reach. The people at this EVE session seem to be those who are trying to learn about the same demographic group of people, but are not of them. Does that make sense?
It is terribly difficult and takes an immense amount of energy to try to understand the constitutional make-up of a different group of people.
Tired Pony - Members of Snow Patrol, R.E.M., and Bell and Sebastian. I really like this!
Tired Pony Website
iTunes Preview site
Tired Pony Website
iTunes Preview site
A co-worker of mine at CPG represents this guy. I've followed him for the last couple of years, and he is very good!
Isn't it true that Christians are supposed to seek truth? That means that seeking truth
must be independent of what makes us feel good, or makes us feel secure,
or superior, or valued, or respected, or accepted, or included, or
anything else, frankly. If we seek truth, truth must rule the day, else our lives are a lie.
I was thinking about a good friend from college who played an important part of my life during the latter part of those days. I haven't seen or heard from him for nearly 20 years. Why? A variety of reasons, I suspect, but that is a fact regardless of why. Time passes and the general, the mundane, and the profound aspects of life intrude.
I decided to google him this morning just to see if anything came up, and it did. I listened to a radio interview he did last year about his current career and creative activities. It was so funny hearing his voice, as if no time has passed. Yet, so much time and so many changes of life and attitude and perspective. What can be said? Nothing really - actually so much if given time.
Looking back over the years of friendships and relationships and acquaintances, of events and activities and and jobs and goals, I wonder from time-to-time what could have been if different decisions were made a strategic points in my life. My life could have gone in so many different directions, and I have done so many different things. There was no real plan. Opportunities presented themselves and at times I fell into them and other times I pursued them. I am a reluctant cleric. I've been a bus driver, a graphic designer, a desktop publisher, a network systems director, a data analyst, a teacher, a campus pastor, a missionary, a technology geek, a oil change technician, a college instructor, a student leadership development specialist, a student three times, and coming full-circle now a missioner.
Back in Bowling Green, after my bachelors degree, I took a year of graphic design and photography in a program similiar to the primary course of the old Bauhaus. I loved it and was quite surprised that I actually had talent. But, just one year and I moved on to Kent. What if I continued in design and photography, which is now my hobby. What if I allowed my creative side to develop rather than allow myself to be taken into fields where logic ruled? I don't know, but here I am after all that time and all those experiences.
With people, too, how might things have been different. What might have been if my friend and I kept in contact and maintained our friendship? I have little contact with people from my past, and that is primarily my fault. I am terrible at keeping up past relationships. It isn't that I forget about them, as is evident in my googling this past friend, but I just don't make the phone call, write the letter or e-mail because life intrudes and the immediate cries out and I heed the call.
Sometimes, I really do wish things would have been different. I'm in one of those times right now. Why? I don't know, but I am. It isn't that life is bad right now, because it certainly isn't. I have right now the opportunity to do what I've always wanted to do, but the problem is knowing exactly what I always wanted to do. At times I feel like I am the proto-example of the Gen X-Y kind of guy who is just all over the place with no clear direction or intent.
To be honest, I don't think I would change anything of the strange and winding paths my life has taken. I just wonder if I went back in time what might or could be different and whether I might be more settled. God only knows, truly.
I decided to google him this morning just to see if anything came up, and it did. I listened to a radio interview he did last year about his current career and creative activities. It was so funny hearing his voice, as if no time has passed. Yet, so much time and so many changes of life and attitude and perspective. What can be said? Nothing really - actually so much if given time.
Looking back over the years of friendships and relationships and acquaintances, of events and activities and and jobs and goals, I wonder from time-to-time what could have been if different decisions were made a strategic points in my life. My life could have gone in so many different directions, and I have done so many different things. There was no real plan. Opportunities presented themselves and at times I fell into them and other times I pursued them. I am a reluctant cleric. I've been a bus driver, a graphic designer, a desktop publisher, a network systems director, a data analyst, a teacher, a campus pastor, a missionary, a technology geek, a oil change technician, a college instructor, a student leadership development specialist, a student three times, and coming full-circle now a missioner.
Back in Bowling Green, after my bachelors degree, I took a year of graphic design and photography in a program similiar to the primary course of the old Bauhaus. I loved it and was quite surprised that I actually had talent. But, just one year and I moved on to Kent. What if I continued in design and photography, which is now my hobby. What if I allowed my creative side to develop rather than allow myself to be taken into fields where logic ruled? I don't know, but here I am after all that time and all those experiences.
With people, too, how might things have been different. What might have been if my friend and I kept in contact and maintained our friendship? I have little contact with people from my past, and that is primarily my fault. I am terrible at keeping up past relationships. It isn't that I forget about them, as is evident in my googling this past friend, but I just don't make the phone call, write the letter or e-mail because life intrudes and the immediate cries out and I heed the call.
Sometimes, I really do wish things would have been different. I'm in one of those times right now. Why? I don't know, but I am. It isn't that life is bad right now, because it certainly isn't. I have right now the opportunity to do what I've always wanted to do, but the problem is knowing exactly what I always wanted to do. At times I feel like I am the proto-example of the Gen X-Y kind of guy who is just all over the place with no clear direction or intent.
To be honest, I don't think I would change anything of the strange and winding paths my life has taken. I just wonder if I went back in time what might or could be different and whether I might be more settled. God only knows, truly.
