Recently in politics/culture Category

Here is a pertinent paragraph from the Wikipedia entry for "Millennial Generation."  This observation/assertion is that the Millennial's generational thinking and attitude and ascetics that run quite counter to the whole counterculture and anti-establishment nature of the Baby Boomers. 

For the Church, this means that those who are still convinced that to save the Church is to get rid of everything that was (standard theology, doctrine, traditional architecture or music or language or liturgies and on and on) are now acting not for the future welfare of the Church, but for the perpetuation of their generational ideology.  My experience with younger people suggests that even things like "inclusive language" is passe - particularly among the women.   When we think about how to form or re-form the emphases or methodologies of the Church for future generations, we must do our best to truly understand emerging generations.  If not, we will once again "miss the boat."  We've missed the boat so often... 

Here is the paragraph:

In some ways, the Millennials have become seen as the ultimate rejection of the counterculture that began in the 1960s and persisted in the subsequent decades through the 1990s.^[62][63] This is further documented in Strauss & Howe's book titled Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, which describes the Millennial generation as "civic minded," rejecting the attitudes of the Baby Boomers and Generation X.^[64] Kurt Andersen, the prize-winning contributor to Vanity Fair writes in his book Reset: How This Crisis Can Restore Our Values and Renew America that many among the Millennial Generation view the 2008 election of Barack Obama as uniquely theirs and describes this generational consensus building as being more healthy and useful than the counterculture protests of the late 1960s and early 1970s, going as far to say that if Millennials can "keep their sense of entitlement in check, they might just turn out to be the next Greatest Generation."^[65] However, due to the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, at least one journalist has expressed fears of permanently losing a substantial amount of Generation Y's earning potential.^[66]

"We shouldn't reconstruct the Christian faith into an advancement of the American way of life, which I feel is the great sin of the American church today." -Gordon Fee (Professor Emeritus, Regent College, Vancouver) [source]

I remember listening to Gordon Fee during a Chi Alpha Fellowship retreat years ago when I was working in campus ministry.  Frankly, I don't remember anything he said, but we all liked his book.

This quote is very timely.  I concur with Fee concerning the idea that the American church of both the religious right and the religious left has allowed itself (themselves) to be co-opted by American socio-political systems and agendas. This has produced an institutional church that to the general public, particularly among younger generations, looks more like the crass American political system rather than the "love your neighbor as yourself" ideal of Christianity - at least as Jesus summed up in his two great commandments.  This has also produced a deficient Christian experience in this country among too many adherents.

We cease to be the imago Dei (the image of God) within our surrounding society when we allow ourselves to be so diminished and corrupted.  We experience a deficient form of the life in Christ when we do so.  The question may well be:

When are we, individually and in the aggregate, going to reclaim the relational experience promised by the texts of the Christian faith so that we are re-formed in humility into to the imago Dei in order to be a compelling witness of an alternative for the people we encounter everyday?

Here is an interesting article from the New York Times.  Entitled, Digital Devices Deprive Brain of Needed Downtime, the article describes findings concerning the affect of digital technology and its constant use on the brain, particularly on the brain's ability to actually learn, to form permanent memories, to synthesis what has been inputted previously, and to be creative.  Devises like the Blackberry, iPhone, iPad - the entire digitial cornucopia - are used to fill up even small amounts of downtime. Our purpensity to not simple be is a real hindrance to our own well being, it seems.  We are coming to the point where we allow no downtime, no time to "clear our heads," and we are robbing ourselves of simple rest. Perhaps we are even hindering our own ability to effectively learn. 

What does this do to feelings of tranquility, our ability to not be bored, or our ability to actually engage with people in ways that are deeper than relational "sound-bites"?

"Almost certainly, downtime lets the brain go over experiences it's had, solidify them and turn them into permanent long-term memories," said Loren Frank, assistant professor in the department of physiology at the university, where he specializes in learning and memory. He said he believed that when the brain was constantly stimulated, "you prevent this learning process."

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

At the University of Michigan, a study found that people learned significantly better after a walk in nature than after a walk in a dense urban environment, suggesting that processing a barrage of information leaves people fatigued.

I've often thought that a growing and now significant hindrance to our faith and relationship not only with God but with one another revolves around our inability to be still, quiet, alone with our own thoughts, and simply be with someone without the need to be entertained or occupied. 

A strategic triumph of the Enemy of our Faith is to so distract us that we no longer give time to sit quietly with God, to study the contemplate the Word of God, or meditate on what it all means for life and love.  We cannot know God without being still, but if we are so conditioned and culturally malformed to avoid those times of stillness and quiet, we will never know the depth of relationship that is possible with God.  We will not know the depth of relationship that is possible with one another, but rather we allow ourselves to be conditioned for the superficial and the temporary.

We in the Church will need to be intentional and determined to give ourselves to periods of downtime, quiet, and stillness.  We, as followers of the Christ, will need to be examples to a world that will grow weary of this form of life.  When people begin looking for an alternative, will they see examples of a way of life that doesn't shun technology but also is able to singularly focus for a lengthy period of time on the person sitting across from us, a life that is content and at peace without distraction?  What will be the witness of the Church?  Will people see the imago of God and an image of life that is substantially different and compelling for a good alternative, or will be look just like everyone else? 

This will be a coming mission of the Church - to reintroduce to the human experience, in the U.S. at least, examples of real, tactile relationships, a peace that comes from within and not determined by outside circumstances or influences, creativity, and a whole list of other things.  This is a common proclivity to the human experience from time beginning - we do harm to ourselves.

A lot has been written and the comments continue concerning the overturning of California's ballot initiative, Proposition 8, overturning the legislature's establishing equality in marriage for same-sex couples.  A couple points I would like to make concerning what I've read and the opinions that are being expressed:

1. The U.S. is NOT a Direct Democracy.  We are a Republic!  "The people" do not have the final say except through their elected officials within our system of checks and balances.  The courts mitigate the "tyranny of the majority" that can result when the majority seeks to deny equal consideration, access, and protection under the law to whole groups of people.  The legislatures mitigate an equal tendency among the courts to engage in the "tyranny of the minority."

2.  I am astounded that the Religious Right, anti-gay forces use the "will of the people" as their primary argument when fighting against state sanctioned same-sex marriage.  How short-sighted can they be?  They will not uphold this position and the right of the "will of the people" to rule when they are disadvantaged.  We will not find them accepting the "will of the people" if a state referendum passes that demands all crosses be removed from public view. They show themselves to be political hypocrites in taking on this tactic.

What are they going to do when the "will of the people" shifts in favor of same-sex marriage?  It is shifting! It is reckless for any group to base the success of and justification for their social or political agendas on the "will of the people."  "The people" are fickle!

3. The courts are not siding with the anti-gay marraige forces.  The courts are reflecting the changing attitudes of the American public regarding homosexuality and same-sex marriage - like they did during the Civil Rights era.  So, the Religious Right has to turn people, the voters, against their enemy the courts in order to maintain their victories.  This is so terribly short-sighted.  When the winds of public opinion change to reflect a strong bias and prejudice against Christians, which will happen, the courts will be the only recourse we have.  If the public believes the courts cannot be trusted (which is different than the belief that the judges are corrupt), the Republic as we know it is done for.

4. The anti-same-sex marriage folks are just mean spirited, because their political and social agenda drives them and not the love of Christ, which they claim.  Here is an example from the American Family Association responce to Judge Walker's decision to overturn Proposition 8:

The American Family Association (AFA) has called for Judge Walker's impeachment. Under the Constitution, judges may be impeached if they violate a standard of "good Behaviour." According to the AFA, Walker violated this standard in two ways...

Second, the AFA said, "Judge Walker is an open homosexual, and should have recused himself from this case due to his obvious conflict of interest." AFA's Bryan Fischer further said, "[Walker] is Exhibit A as to why homosexuals should be disqualified from public office ... A man who ignores time-honored standards of sexual behavior simply cannot be trusted with the power of public office." [emphasis mine]  (Source)

So, homosexuals should not be allowed to hold public offices?  What if homosexuals are elected to public office by the "will of the people"?

  

Here is the quote:

"I think there is something much bigger going on than finding a niche market and asking how should we position this product of the gospel so that those people will appreciate it, and will like it, and will accept it. We're really asking a deeper question about who we are in a changing cultural environment when it comes to the way think, the values we hold, the tools that we use, and the aesthetics that are meaningful to us." -Doug Pragitt (describing the concepts behind his new book, "Church in the Inventive Age")   Pagitt is the pastor of Salomon's Porch Church.

This is the melee in which I desire to be and where the Imago Dei Society has a real place within the greater arena of Anglicanism. Well, actually, this whole way of considering and thinking has had a place within Anglicanism, but to understand how we continue to do this thing called Anglicanism (this Christianity) in emerging cultures and with emerging generations are the questions we need to continually ask!

I came across one of the ministries that has as its purpose (or its obsession) the condemning of the "Emergent" side of the Church as being heretical. I don't know whether it is simply their inability to understand enculturation and that we are all raised within a cultural system that forms us in the ways we collectively think, the way we understand the world around us and our place it in, what we consider to be aesthetically pleasing or appropriate, and even what we consider to be moral and ethical.  I don't know whether they are simply ignorant of disciplines like anthropology, sociology, etc., or what is really going on within them.  The Gospel of Jesus Christ and the divine Logos do not change, but we certainly do, our cultures certainly do, and what we consider to be self-evident truth certainly does.  So, groups like this, I suppose, either honestly not to understand, are being willfully ignorant (and as a former teacher, this is an astounding tragedy), or are intransigent in their beliefs - fundamentalists, in other words. 

What is this particular ministry, you might ask?  Apprising Ministries.  I don't know anything about this, really, and perhaps much of what they do is really good, but with regard to Emergent stuff, they have a thorn in their craw!  So, make up your own mind. 

Thomas Chatterton Williams in his book, Losing My Cool: How a Father's Love and 15,00 Books Beat Hip-Hop Culture, wrote: "Nietzsche believed the greatest deeds are thoughts. 'The world revolves around the inventors of new values,' he wrote.  For more than thirty years the black world has revolved around the inventors of hip-hop values, and this has been a decisive step backward." (p. 218)

In his book, Williams describes his experiences growing up with increasing allegiance to those inventors and the hip-hop culture, until discovering a much broader world when he went off to college - and more importantly due to his father's constant influence and love.  Certainly, not all of hip-hop is negative, but much of it is.  For many, many black people, according to their own testimony, the more gangsta forms have had a devastating effect on black culture and those forms are the "new values" taken up decisively by a generation.

Williams goes on to write that his generation, in order to pay the debt they owe their ancestors for all they suffered through in order to make possible in his generation a black President, who is a counter example as a "nuanced thinker" of hip-hop culture, his generation must take up the challenge to do things differently and make things right for the sake of the new generations coming.

I see in Williams' description of his experience and the "new values" of the hip-hop phenomina a similiar experience of another generation and another racial group - the overwhelmingly white Baby Boomer generation.  The "1960's" generation proclaimed a new morality with a whole set of "new values."  In their belief that their generation's purpose was to usher in a Brave New World, the age of Aquarius, they have been relentless in overturning anything they perceive as getting in their way.   As Nietzsche said, the world has revolved around this new morality and their new values.

Like hip-hop, not all that this generation has done is wrong or bad.  Many aspects of white, 1950's culture needed to be upended - racism, the "Stepford Wives" expectation of women are examples.  The proverbial baby was thrown out with the bathwater, however, because of an unnuanced rejection of all that came before them.  We are beginning to reap the whirlwind. 

One predominate characteristic of this generation is their rejection of the notion that their ancestors, or even their parents' generation, have anything worthwhile to say to them or to teach them, and as a result their generation is known as the first one to cast off history and lessons from the past as informants of how things should be. This may be a bit of overstatement, but not by much.  What is even more sad is that the generation in the aggregate does not acknowledge or perhaps even realize the tremendous sacrifice and denial of self past generations have endured for their generation's existence.

I am hopeful when I read the demographic trends of younger generations.  They will have their own problems, of course, but there seems to be a reclaiming of history and past experience as informants for figuring out how to live life.  As Williams claims it is up to his generation to overturn the very negative influences of hip-hop on African-American culture, so is it up to his generation, including all races, to overturn the negative aspects of the Baby Boomer zeitgeist for all Americans.

I know I shouldn't get into this, even before I start.  I have decidedly not been visiting all the Anglican/Episcopalian blogs very often, because, basically, they were truly causing me a lot of angst and distracting me from other important ministry stuff.  I have two brain cells, and when one and half of them is dealing with how this person doesn't like what that bishop said or whatever that other Primate declared, well, that only leaves 1/2 a brain cell to deal with the rest of my life - just too much to do.  In the end, all this stuff in the Church will come to nothing more than distraction within our culture and defamation of the cause of Christ.

Yet, when I hear this new line of reasoning and affront coming out of the leadership of this Church - whether lay or clergy - I just can't help myself.  When I hear people attempt to use a line of argument around the Episcopal Church's sense of "colonial victimhood" when the Church of England's & the Anglican Communion's Archbishop of Canterbury makes decisions that spank or put into "time-out" this Church for its self-centered actions, well, that is just beyond the pale.  It really is.  When I hear the leaders of the provinces in Africa making the "colonial victimhood" accusation against the "Western" provinces, I can understand their justifications for such accusation (even while I think they use that accusation for convenience and to attempt to justify their own actions of rebellion within the Communion).  (Before God, we will all give an account for what we do and say according to the attitudes of our hearts, and if any of us do things and then justify those doings with fine sounding arguments that are not the attitudinal reality within our heart - lying, in other words - then we will give an account to our final Judge and jury.)

This Church in the U.S. has absolutely no right to claim colonial victimhood!  

We as a Church act in the world with respect to the wider Anglican Communion just like the Bush administration acted politically and militarily in the world.  We expect that we have the right to do whatever we want unilaterally because we are so developed and so enlightened and so absolutely correct and our "prophetic" doings are so righteous. We can do anything just so it is justified in our own minds no matter what hardship it may cause for anyone else. In our hubris and the resulting blindness, we actually believe that it is "good for them." 

Then, when we get pushback, or spanked for our childishness (which ++Rowan is doing, now) by those foreigners, then we start to act with petulance.  It is laughable that we attempt to rebuke the English Church because we were once a colony of England - nearly 300 years ago!   We, at this point in our ecclesiastical decline as a Church, can no longer really act this way, but we still do so because this generation of leadership doesn't know how to act in any other way. We are blind to our own "colonizing" attitudes and "imperialistic" actions with respect to the rest of the Communion, and particularly those "poor, backward" Anglicans in most of Africa (except Southern Africa, because they agree with us). 

The time is coming sooner than later when the rest of the world will stand up to the United States politically, economically, and militarily and say, "No more!"  Just wait until that happens and see the epileptic fits this country will go into.  We will become truly dangerous during the transition from world dominance to a far lesser status.  We will assert our dominance, in the mean time, by brute force if need be because we have lost our moral authority as a great nation and beacon of freedom.  This is what is happening to the Episcopal Church, our Church, within the Communion and with many of our former ecumenical partners.  We may not lob physical bombs (or money, in our case); we will simply not listen to anyone else, hands over our ears. We will simply not face up to reality and our place in the world Communion.   Oh, we want diversity and multiculturalism all right, just so long as they believe just like we do or pretend to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

We have to come up with fine arguments or attacks against those English colonizers in order to attempt to save face, but we continue to act in ways that do nothing much more that prove that we are not trustworthy and unwilling to listen to the plight of those less fortunate than our own American selves.

It isn't that I disagree with women being clergy or LBGT people being members, priests, or bishops of our Anglican Churches. It isn't that I don't think we can or should be advocates of such things around the Communion or the greater Church. What I absolutely disagree with is the way this generation of leadership in our Church has been conducting itself with respect to institutional change and the "controversial" issues.  We treat those issues as civil rights causes and make decisions in like manner.  This is not the way the Church should handle things. 

Now, because our leadership makes decisions in such a political or social manner (they know no other way), we are losing the knowledge of how to made decisions as a the Body of Christ, internationally.  And herein lies the problem of trust and "faith and order" as the other provinces attempt to order their lives when they cannot ignore what the Americans' are doing without much regard for their plight.

Just some interesting articles and other stuff.

Here is an article on "sin" in "Dallas News."  The reporter has various local religious leaders write a brief blurb on their denomination's or religion's sins.

http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/05/texas-faith-what-is-the-sin-wi.html


Here is a link to the "Q Gatherings," sponsored by Gabe Lyons, on of the authors of "unChristian," a book that challenges our commonly held notions of the perception of Christianity and the institutional Church by the majority of the emerging generations.

http://qideas.org/event/concept.aspx

I really do miss riding the subway, daily.  I even kind of miss the crowdedness of the trains during rush hour - all of them.  To ride the train is to experience all kinds of cultural and social forms - great rudeness and even more kindness... frustration and wonder... selfishness and compassion... the very young and the very old - it is all here.  Perhaps I'm waxing nostalgic, since I rarely ride the subway these days, but on Monday night as I was traveling to and from seeing Willie's musical (Willie Martinez is a parishioner and Jazz leader - he is the drummer for the band), "This Side of Paradise" about Zelda and F. Scott Fitzgerald, it felt good sitting on the subway and watching the people and their interactions, seeing the "up and coming" cultural changes, the vast array of cultures and dress and languages and attitudes, and knowing that this is New York City, the center of the known world.

I've been thinking over and through aspects of "contemporary" Evangelical worship practices.  This past Sunday, I was home in Ohio for Mother's Day (I surprised my Mom - and she was!) and attended the church my sister and her family attend.  It is a growing Church of God (Anderson, IN) with a new building and all the "spiritually correct" stuff that is supposed to draw large crowds.  It was a fine enough service.  The band was very good.  The worship leader was a young guy and I could tell that he really enjoyed what he was doing - his personality was infectious.  As I watched the crowd, they were actually singing.  In many of these kinds of worship services, I've noticed that a large majority of the people simply stand and watch the band rather than interring into the worship experience, so I was glad to see that there was more going on than just a "spiritual concert."  The preacher gave a good sermon.  Babies were dedicated - it was Mother's Day after all.

North Point Ministries is a very large mega-church.  They've done a parody video of themselves, as I understand it, and it captures the new wave of doing church that is supposed to be the "relevant" and "contemporary" thing to do. This too, shall pass.  Not that there is anything wrong with it if it is done well and within context, but if, as is happening, everyone jumps on yet another bandwagon that is supposed to save the church in America, then it once again becomes inauthentic and just another passing fad, a puff of wind.

Here is the video parody:

"Sunday's Coming" Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.

By the way, my sisters church service was a whole lot like this - including the cool video with relevant questions.  I don't get the impression that the pastor thinks he has all the answers, however. 

Part of me really liked it - it was fun being back in that environment, even without the all encompassing Charismatic-Evangelical aspects that are not part of the Church of God, Anderson theological belief concerning the Gifts of the Holy Spirit.  Yet, I'm not there any longer.  To me, it smacks of religio-entertainment.  People come to God through it, people grow in their relationship with God and one another in the midst of it (if the pastor preachers well, that is), but I would rather be involved in a "full-bodied" experience that I've come to know in Catholic worship in its Anglo-Catholic form.  We all participate and we all do the work of worship and liturgy together. 

Article on Millennials: Independence Day Comes Late for Millennials

The state of the country and Christianity in the U.S. To where is all this leading?

From OneNewsNow.org Daily News Briefing:

Ministry says some members have quit praying for Obama

COTTSDALE, AZ - A national ministry that organizes prayer for the president says it's hearing from members who have quit praying for President Barack Obama...

His letter says the ministry has been "hit hard because some of our members are deeply distraught with our country's leaders." Otto writes that members "tell us that they are discouraged, disappointed, and some have admitted they have stopped praying for the president and our nation."

Otto says prayer is needed more than ever with issues like the healthcare vote dividing Americans, and with the nation's leaders casting aside what he calls "biblical principles."

I've said before that so much of the anger we are seeing coming out of the Town Hall meetings held by Democrats around the country however many months ago, the Tea Party protests, and the healthcare coverage controversies stem from the politicized Religious Right losing this last national election. Then, of course, the Republican operatives (really the Neo-Con's) exploit all of this for their advantage. Winning power is the only thing that matters, regardless of what it does to the country or society overall and regardless of whether it leads us to such division that the common good is no longer possible.

The rank-and-file Religious Right voters (Values Voters, American-Evangelicals of the neo-conservative kind, etc.) have been told over and over again that God is on their side and that there is no way that God would let His country (the divinely established U.S.A.) fall into the hands of "anti-Christians." Just pray really hard, protest, write letters, give lots of money "to our organization" (Focus on the Family, American Family Association, Institute for Religion & Democracy, etc.), and "we can keep the godless, liberal, secular humanists from destroying our country!" "God is on our side, and we will win because He deems it so." These kinds of statements come out of the various organizations all the time.

So, after the near hysterical rhetoric used by these groups in their attempt at fear-mongering in order to motivate their people to vote during the 2008 election, they lost! For so many of the Christians, suddenly the promises from their leaders that God would not let them down if they just did these things where no more. "How could this happen - isn't God all powerful?" "Didn't we pray, like we were supposed to?" "How could God let Satan win?" There developed a crisis of faith, a terrible feeling of being let down, a utter feeling of being marginalized, of being lied to, of no longer feeling empowered and special because God is on their side, etc.

The politicized Religious Right and their promises made to the Fundamentalist/American-Evangelical world didn't live up to expectations, and now the rank-and-file are disillusioned and angry. And, of course, in the disappointment and anger the manipulative forces seeking power will try to exploit all this for their own advantage - they are charlatans. Again, the feelings or beliefs that "God is on our side" and "we know we love God so much and are so devout" leads them to an inability to consider that they just might have been wrong. They could be compelled to even more extreme reactions and actions.

In many ways, this mirrors the "conservative," or perhaps "fundamentalist" would be a better word, world of Islam (and even Judaism). The Islamist terrorists are reacting out of desperation because all that they have been taught about what should happen concerning the devout followers of Islam is not the reality in the world. Allah is all great and Allah's followers are the ones who should always win, have power, have wealth, etc., and not the infidels, particularly in the grossly immoral West. Yet, the Muslim countries, particularly Arab & Persian countries, are not at all "winning." The bitterness, the jealousy, the anger, the disgust, the feelings of impotency, the poverty, the corruption, all of it that people are feeling lead them to extreme actions. So, they feel that they have to take matters into their own hands and do for Allah what Allah doesn't seem to be doing for them, which often comes down to providing for their prosperity and authority and power in the world - the utter defeat of the infidels and the ascendancy of Islam in all parts of the life around the world. The disillusionment is terrible.

I think that for a significant group of Christianists in this country, they are headed down a similar trajectory that extremist Islamists have traveled. The exploitative forces may well come to believe that they can will win if chaos reigns, that instability is to their advantage, and that they will be able to attain power or money by exploiting the hell out of people's sense of disillusionment. I think it would not take much of a push for a more radical faction to rise up among the neo-conservative, politicized Religious Right, in the name of defending a Godly America, to become violent.

I came across this quote attributed to Rowan Williams, ABC, and wanted to use it for the Imago Dei and Red Hook efforts.

I googled the quote to try to find the original source for a citation. It seems from an address given by The Rt. Revd. Dr. Steven J.L. Croft, Bishop of Sheffield, that Williams was not the originator of the quote. So, in the larger context of the address, Croft was speaking of missionary theologians who spent most all of their ministries in mission contexts and who later reflected on their experiences and wrote down those reflections. Croft mentions a few that to him have had a great impact on Anglican mission ideas. It seems the quote came from , The Rev. John Taylor. Here is the quote in its small context:

John Taylor was a CMS missionary to Africa and former head of the Church Missionary Society. His books, particularly the Go Between God are a clear articulation of a theology for mission which have influenced a generation of theologicans, bishops and practitioners in the United Kingdom. It is John Taylor who first articulated the wonderful phrase which is now widely quoted in Anglican documents on mission:

“Mission is about finding out what God is doing and joining in”.

One of the key elements in the cluster of ideas around missio Dei is that the Trinity is already at work in the world outside the church. God continues to reach out, to call, to love those he has created. We therefore go, as the Apostles went to Philippi so long ago, confident that we will find those who are seeking.

I hope I have said enough in this section to convince you that the movement to develop fresh expressions of church by the Church of England has deep roots both in the recovery of a sense of the missio Dei in world theology; in biblical studies and in our recent practice and exploration. It is the logical and practical outworking of shifts in our theological perspective which go back now a generation. It is not the mindless pursuit of the trendy or of consumer Christianity.

The entire address of Bishop Croft can be found in his address to the General Synod of the Church in Norway; 18th November, 2009; entitled:

The Mission of the Triune God Shaping Congregations Today Working towards a Mission-shaped Church
The Rt. Revd. Dr. Steven J.L. Croft, Bishop of Sheffield

Here is the HTML version (don't know if it will work in all browsers):
http://tinyurl.com/yktjurd

The PDF for download came be found here: http://www.kirken.no/?event=downloadFile&FamID=102589

Why we seem to never get anything done at work... and then have to do it all at home.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, gave the Presidential address to the Church of England's General Synod, yesterday.

Of particular interest, aside from his more balanced thinking on the whole LGBT issue and of the troubles within the Anglican Communion, of particular interest to me was his explanation of the distinctiveness of the Christian understanding and definition of freedom and liberty. (this starts around the 17:51 minute mark)

I also find very interesting his presentation of the concept of "three-dimensional thinking." In many ways, he is presenting something that should be natural for Anglicans - really it is a re-presenting of the Via Media extended beyond the original middle way between Roman Catholicism and the Continental Reformation.

"Seeing something in three dimensions is seeing that I can't see everything at once: what's in front of me is not just the surface I see in this particular moment... So seeing in three dimensions requires us to take time with what we see. It may help us look more critically at solutions that seek to do too much all at once; and perhaps to search for structures that will keep open the ability to learn from each other." (Source)

This is something I want to thank more about.

Fr. Mike Kinman, on Facebook, wrote the following. We are all using copious amounts of Purell these days. I'm sure GoJo (based in my old town of Akron, OH) is pleased, even if, as Mike mentions in the blessing, we are initiating some sort of super-virus.

Holy God, creator of all things in heaven and on earth, we give you thanks for the gift of this Purell, for ethyl alcohol, it’s active ingredient and for Isopropyl Myristate, Tocopheryl Acetate, Aminoethl Proponal and other inactive ingredients whose purpose is known only to you and in files that cannot be released by the Food and Drug Administration until 2079. We humbly ask that your love and care for all creation not extend to the microbes we hope to eradicate through our sometimes fanatical and paranoid cleansing and that you guard and protect us from all superviruses we might be unleashing on the world through the same. We also beg your protection and indemnification for ourselves, Johnson and Johnson, Gojo industries and all other subsidiaries from liability and physical or spiritual damage from the use of this sanitizer. Finally, may the chemical cleansing of our hands be a an outward and visible sign of the cleansing of our hearts, and may the pungent and alcohol-laden scent waft heavenward as incense in your presence. In the name of your son, Jesus Christ, who, like Purell, comes as fire and burns away all that is not worthy of surviving in your presence.

Let the church say … AMEN.

Someone pointed out to me that she was offended by a comment I had written a while back. It came from something I wrote that dealt with the rise of promiscuity and how she interpreted my comments - that I asserted that the fault lay at the feet of women.

I want to make a clarification in case others may have interpreted what I wrote in the same way. I don't know whether I simply wrote that piece badly or whether she misinterpreted what I wrote, either way I need to clarify.

First of all, just to be clear, I in no way believe that women are separately at fault for the rise of promiscuity! Promiscuity and infidelity have been the domain of men for as long as men have been around, to our shame. As Christians, neither are esteemed as positive or appropriate behaviors or attributes.

Women had a part to play with the rise of promiscuity and infidelity, of course - it takes two to tango, after all. What I think I tried to assert before was that the female contribution to the rise came out of what I consider to be a mistaken assumption or tactic of the woman's liberation movement of the 1960's and 1970's - that for women to have equality with men, they had to take upon themselves male attributes rather than demanding that men acknowledge, respect, value, and esteem unique attributes that women can bring to the table. For women to be equal, it seemed, they had to become like men. So, as the thinking might go, since women thought that to be equal they had to become like men, they too often took upon themselves the worst of male attributes.

Or, something like that.

In an article from Christianity Today, December 2009, entitled, "A More Social Gospel: Campus ministries swap pizza for compassion."

... Advocates believe such efforts reclaim the church's true calling.

"The social message and the traditional evangelism approach go hand in hand, " said Bob Marks, recruitment specialist for Chi Alpha, an Assemblies of God ministry active on more than 200 campuses worldwide. One example: The University of California, Irvine chapter focused on human trafficking last year.

Josh Spavin, an intern with the University of Central Florida's Campus Crusade for Christ chapter, said traditional evangelism still works, but times have changed with this generation.

"Students tend to not just take it unless they experience it or see it in someone else's life," Spavin said...

Spavin said he hopes his chapter will launch an HIV/AIDS outreach with a campus gay and lesbian group...

I've been saying as I've talked about the Red Hook Project and the ImagoDei Society that our culture is moving into a pre-Constantinian environment where society and the prevailing culture are no longer "Christian" - we are Post-Christian - and that if we hope to have an impact on people or society, then they have to see something compelling and different in the lives of those of us who claim Christ. They have to witness something different about us and that we certainly are not just a mirror image of the worst of the prevailing culture.

This quote from Spavin simply is another example of this trend or idea.

I also find it very interesting that a Campus Crusade for Christ chapter would be willing to do anything with a campus gay group. Of course, if they have an underhanded goal that this will be a vehicle for them to get these homosexuals to repent and give up the "lifestyle," without a willingness to even suspect that their presumptions could be wrong, then their efforts will most certainly fall flat. If they revert to such tactics, then they will simple go backwards into a way of being that at least with these later unchurched generations does nothing but reinforce the negative image of Christians in general.

As many may know, there is a proposed bill making its way through the Ugandan parliament that is incredibly draconian, yet consistent with those Fundamentalists (Christian, Jewish, or Muslim) that believe God demands the death of homosexuals (as described in the Levitical Law Code for Jews and Christians - Leviticus 20:13). Of course, even Fundamentalist Christians do not abide by even the demands of the Moral Law spelled out in Leviticus (despite the assertion that the Moral Law is still in force for Christians), yet they are all too quick to demand obedience to the Moral Law when they think the issue of homosexuality is concerned.

An article from the Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, concerning the proposed Ugandan law and the British Commonwealth entitled, "Uganda's anti-gay bill causes Commonwealth uproar."

The issue concerning the proposed Ugandan law comes off the heals of reports of the politicized Religious Right and Neo-Con's exportation of the Culture Wars to other parts of the world. Read about the report from Political Research Associates entitled, "Globalizing the Culture Wars: U.S. Conservatives, African Churches, and Homophobia."

A groundbreaking investigation by Political Research Associates (PRA) discovered that sexual minorities in Africa have become collateral damage to our domestic conflicts and culture wars. U.S. conservative evangelicals and those opposing gay pastors and bishops within mainline Protestant denominations woo Africans in their American fight.

Much of these efforts come out of the groundwork over the past decade of the Institute of Religion and Democracy (IRD). Read the "Reforming America's Churches Project" (and here) of the IRD.

What this group does not recongnize or wants to admit is that in the same way they believe the mainline denominations have capitulated to the prevailing culture in order to be "relevant," so have they and the Evangelical/Fundamentalist denominations capitulated to the same culture, only on different issues. There is legitimacy in the recognition that when the Church - of the conservative or liberal bent - takes on as its primary focus social or political agendas, it gives up its mission and its power. The more fundamentalist left and right do the exact same thing to the detriment of the cause of Christ in the world, but form opposite ends of the socio-political spectrum.

Then there is "The Family." Listen to a report from NPR's Fresh Air with Terry Gross interviewing Jeff Scarlet, researcher of "The Family" and author of, "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power."

Read the Fresh Air transcript from the episode entitled, "The Secret Political Reach of 'The Family.'"

From the transcript, this brief portion:

GROSS: Let's talk about The Family's connection to Uganda, where there's a, really a draconian anti-gay bill that has been introduced into parliament. Uganda already punishes the practice of homosexuality with life in prison. What would the new legislation do?

Mr. SHARLET: Well, the new legislation adds to this something called aggravated homosexuality. And this can include, for instance, if a gay man has sex with another man who is disabled, that's aggravated homosexuality, and that man can be - I suppose both, actually, could be put to death for this. The use of any drugs or any intoxicants in seeking gay sex - in other words, you go to a bar and you buy a guy a drink, you're subject to the death penalty if you go home and sleep together after that. What it also does is it extends this outward, so that if you know a gay person and you don't report it, that could mean - you don't report your son or daughter, you can go to prison.

And it goes further, to say that any kind of promotion of these ideas of homosexuality, including by foreigners, can result in prison terms. Talking about same sex-marriage positively can lead you to imprisonment for life. And it's really kind of a perfect case study in the export of a lot of American, largely evangelical ideas about homosexuality exported to Uganda, which then takes them to their logical end.

GROSS: This legislation has just been proposed. It hasn't been signed into law. So it's not in effect yet and it might never be in effect. But it's on the table. It's before parliament. So is there a direct connection between The Family and this proposed anti-homosexual legislation in Uganda?

Mr. SHARLET: Well, the legislator that introduced the bill, a guy named David Bahati, is a member of The Family. He appears to be a core member of The Family. He works, he organizes their Ugandan National Prayer Breakfast and oversees a African sort of student leadership program designed to create future leaders for Africa, into which The Family has poured millions of dollars working through a very convoluted chain of linkages passing the money over to Uganda.

From the HarpersCollins website description of Scarlet's book:

They are the Family—fundamentalism's avant-garde, waging spiritual war in the halls of American power and around the globe. They consider themselves the new chosen—congressmen, generals, and foreign dictators who meet in confidential cells, to pray and plan for a "leadership led by God," to be won not by force but through "quiet diplomacy." Their base is a leafy estate overlooking the Potomac in Arlington, Virginia, and Jeff Sharlet is the only journalist to have reported from inside its walls.

This all reminds me too much of Christian Reconstructionism or Dominionism - read about both here and here. The interconnections between these people, groups, and efforts are not by accident. While the coordination behind many of these efforts are the work of what I think is a relatively small and radical group of people, the influence of their work both domestically and internationally cannot be denied.

Andrew Sullivan comments on all this on his blog, "Christianity vs Christianism, Love vs Power."

Some of Andrew Sullivan's comments on Glen Beck's (Fox News commentator) coming proposals to save American.

No wonder Palin feels a kindred spirit. The two of them represent the degenerate expression of cliches that used to be ideas (and ideas worth retaining and adjusting to new circumstances). But the vessel for rethinking will not come from proud ignoramuses and populist Elmer Gantrys. It will not come from reiterating propaganda but from confronting unpleasant facts about conservatism's recent catastrophic failures and mistakes.

They're not thinking; they're emoting.

They're not engaged in reforming conservatism; they're engaged in escapist denialism about real problems.

They are a sign of profound cultural sickness, not resurgent political and civic health.

Speaking as one who is more progressive-conservative/libertarian, I couldn't agree more with Sullivan's last sentence.