So, it seems the Bush administration, at least some within the administration, are willing to admit that things are not going as planned in Iraq. Perhaps, there may be even a re-evaluation of whether our policy and strategy have been correct. Staying the course when it seems the situation is continually deteriorating is not prudent or wise.
People have been saying for years now that our strategy towards Iraq is untenable and unwinable. The voices of those who called upon the administration to step “outside the box” of “old-war” mentality of conflict between states were ignored or ridiculed. This war is being fought under an old and inappropriate model, in my uninformed opinion. In my mind, we are like the English in their attempt to defeat the revolutionaries during our war of independence. They just didn’t get the fact that their way of fighting just didn’t work any longer, and they lost. Some people in this administration just don’t seem to get the fact that the way of war has now changed.
If we end up pulling out of Iraq before we reach our stated goals or if the conflict ends in a way that suggests our weakness and the American people’s unwillingness to complete what we began, legitimately or illegitimately, the impression is that we are unreliable, unstable in our commitments, and are willing to let huge numbers of people die in our wayward attempts to impose our will on the world. Okay, but what do we do now?
The American people will fight to the end and sacrifice whatever needs to be sacrificed if we believe that the conflict is for a greater good. The World Wars are good examples. We entered them reluctantly and overcome our isolationist tendencies. Vietnam and now this war in Iraq were entered into not for some greater good that will benefit not just us but the world. No, we entered into these wars upon a faulty foundation, and with a faulty and perhaps illegitimate intent, and we are witnessing the results.
Will we learn? Will there be leaders willing to move towards a solution that recognizes the complexities of the new world dynamic? I hope so. Perhaps the more important question is whether the American people will be wise enough to recognize a good leader from a poor one. Will we allow ourselves to be manipulated, again? Will we recognize wisdom? Will we realize the folly of empire? Will we recognize that there really is a solution, but it will mean that we change our way of thinking and our way of relating to much of the world? I hope so. This isn’t about liberal vs. conservative. Those paradigms mean little in this day in day, frankly. It will take someone, all of us, to look beyond these ways of dicing up the world and one another.

I am encouraged and frustrated and disappointed and perplexed by what I see happening within the growing and emerging expression of the Christian faith in the U.S., particularly within the Emergent Church conversation and beyond and the lost opportunities by The Episcopal Church – the Anglican expression in the U.S.
The post-American-Evangelical and post-Liberal-Mainline experience is beyond the politicized Religious-Right, beyond Borg, Spong, and liberation-theology, beyond the “Seeker-Church” movement, beyond the Baby-Boomer necessity to cast down all that came before them, beyond the 1960’s generational demand of feminism, political-correctness, queerism, identity-politics, yadda, yadda, yadda. It is more than simply reaction to the generation before them. It is a restoration. Thank God, thank God, thank God Almighty!
Finally, the newer generational distinctives are coming back around to re-discovering the baby that was thrown out with the proverbial bathwater.
Yet, why are we who have had these things of liturgy, beauty in worship, sacramental theology, monasticism, the Daily Offices of the fixed-hour prayer missing it? So much energy of this new expression of the Faith takes up the task of re-inventing what has been (is?) the best of us – why must we re-invent the wheel to make the journey?
Why? Because we have forgotten our heritage! Why? Because too many of us have lost the relational aspect of God and the transformational aim of the Gospel! Why? Because we have been deluded by the psychotheraputic cult of self-esteem! There are so many other reasons.
We have in many places repudiated our ancient and marvelous traditions. I am so encouraged that younger people are re-discovering all of this, but the very Church that has exhibited and lived into all this stuff is in the process of repudiating it all in the name of innovation and God only knows why else. Is innovation or change wrong? Absolutely not, but if it is done to force an agenda upon people and the Church, then it is wrong, particularly if the change being perpetuated is not that which speaks to the needs of the future of the Church! Oh, and the prophetic work of the Holy Spirit is not those actions or intentions coming forth from us that conveniently support our agendas.
My rant is over. I hope to be more coherent and complete in the future.

The organist and choirmaster of St. Paul’s commented the other day about how so few churches these days give consideration to the aesthetic – beauty and solemnity in the worship service, the mass. The comment and conversation prior to the comment dealt with the rumor that the next U.S. Book of Common Prayer might leave out all Rite I liturgies, gone would be their theological significance and particularly the older and more Elizabethan-style language.
This, frankly, would be a tragic mistake sense younger generations, generally, are attracted to and prefer the older, Elizabethan-style language (thee’s and thou’s, etc). I’ve experience this dynamic over and over again. To them, this is the language of the Church – that which is tried and true, ancient, not swayed by whim and trend. In like manner, so many young people are attracted to traditional Church architecture rather than the striped-down “seeker church” model. The tragedy would be that those in control would push through their agenda of change despite what demographic information is telling us about those who are making up the future of the Church.
It is about the esthetic present in worship. It is about creating a place and a space in time where the beautiful is presented and experienced. It is one of the primary emphases of The Oxford Movement. The beautiful can be experienced in high or low ritual, and both can be a distraction.
God is worthy of our best efforts. All that we do we shall do as if unto the Lord. The worship of God should be an experience of the beautiful in music, in vestments, in architecture, in language, in art, in manual acts, in our attention and devotion. When during the Eucharist all time is merged into one – the Church Victorious, the Church Militant, the Church Eminent – we are caught up into the experience of Heaven and present with the Great Cloud of Witness. We are in the presence of God Almighty.
How else can we respond? What else is there to do but to give up to God our best?

From an article on Christianity Today’s website covering the recent survey of evangelical ministries about what is in store for the future of Christianity. I presume in the U.S.
Here is a quote:

Mark Dever, pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., believes a pluralistic culture will turn increasingly intolerant of Christian faith.

I would counter that the pluralistic culture, in general, has become intolerant of intolerant Christians! While some people are intolerant of religion all together, they make up a very small percentage of the population.

I was reading a review of Andrew Sullivan’s new book, The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It, How to Get It Back by Mark Gauvreau Judge of Christianity Today.
He doesn’t think much of the book, primarily it seems because Sullivan writes that we are bound by our culture, time, and place and because of this and other reasons we cannot know for sure. Sullivan separates “conservatism” from “fundamentalism.” Fundamentalists, it seems, say that “we know!” From the review, it seems Sullivan claims that true conservatives are willing to say “we are not sure” or “we do not know.” I haven’t read the book, so I am relying on Judge’s review of the book.
Here’s the thing: there are large swaths of the Church that feel that they must say “we know!” They do not separate empirically confirmed knowledge from belief or faith. Our Christian life is based on what? Fact or Faith? It is based on faith because it is not empirically provable. It is metaphysics, not physics. Scripture says in I Corinthians 13:12

“Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”

There are those who convince themselves that what they believe is absolute and without question – making what is held by faith into something of fact. They must deny the truth in order to believe the Truth. I can say with all expectation that I am saved through Jesus Christ, but what proves it? Nothing empirically – it is only by faith that it is realized within me. Ephesians 2:8-9 says:

”For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.”

Well then, of course, anyone who does not agree with the “facts” is apostate and cannot know God. Yet, Scripture tells us that we will not fully (exactly) know what is the Truth of God until we see Him face-to-face.
This isn’t relativism as it has been known. It is humility. It is humility in the sense that we do not think that in this time and in this place and in this culture that we have all knowledge, all that is necessary to know, or that we are now for the first time capable to knowing all things. It simply is not the case, and to claim otherwise is contrary to reason, tradition, and Scripture. Paul wrote, “I know that I know that I know….” We can claim the same and it is true to us, but the assertion is based on faith.
So, if Sullivan will not confirm to this swath of the Church that there are certain things we must know absolutely and without question and can know as “fact,” then he is (we are) what?, a relativist, an agnostic, a person believing contrary to the Truth of God. If Judge is accurate concerning what Sullivan honestly believes, and if Judge demands that Sullivan is in grave error if he says, “I’m not sure,” then perhaps Judge is a fundamentalist after all, and not a true conservative.
It is hard to truly move within an intrinsic sense of humility – I do not know everything and I could be wrong. It is God-given as we yield ourselves to formation in God’s ways. Oh, that we are able to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with our God.

[Update: I have to say that after re-reading this post I am quite embarrassed by all the grammatical mistakes and misspellings. I know that I state clearly that I will not be all that concerned about good grammar and spelling, since this is really just a place for me to dump my thoughts, but there are times when my lack of diligence is just plain embarrassing. I am a terrible proof reader! This is why I will never be a writer or why my opinions won’t carry much weight. Oh well…]
I’m not really sure how to deal with this question, assertion, or quandary about the ‘ignorance’ of so many Americans. The American Heritage Dictionary defines ‘ignorance’ as: The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. ‘Ignorance’ in-and-of-itself is not the real issue, because most people in the world do not want to be and if given the chance would not be lacking in knowledge. This is something of a different sort – a willful not-knowing.
Perhaps ‘ignorance’ isn’t the right word. Perhaps a better word is ‘sciolism’ (n : pretentious superficiality of knowledge). We Americans, in general, suffer from willful ‘sciolism.’
I say ‘Americans’ specifically because this type of ignorance/sciolism – almost willful and applied – seems to be a characteristic of Americans, particularly. I have had the privilege of knowing and working with people from many different cultures and countries because of my work in campus ministry, higher education, and because of my time working in Europe. This is touchy, I know, because the people I’ve encountered from other cultures and countries do not represent every compatriot of theirs. It is touchy, too, because I’ve witnessed these same kinds of attitudes among people in other countries. Yet, I have not found this same general attitude of non-engagement with or unwillingness to consider different ideas among other nationalities that seems to be so prominent among Americans – or at least with large portions of American society. I’ve had to defend Americans (embarrassingly so) and stressed the need to truly understand the vastness of this country between two oceans with a generally uniform culture, history, and language.
This matters to me because I love what my country ideally stands for, despite the current distortions. In addition, because I am a Christian my way of thinking must pull me outside this particular American cultural context in which I was raised/formed and now live.
Maybe we could throw in a little ‘philistinism’ in the mix: (n : a desire for wealth and material possessions with little interest in ethical or spiritual matters [syn: materialism]). For 95% of Americans to say, “I believe in God,” is a very different kind of thing than 95% of the people doing anything about their belief or knowing what-in-the-world they even mean by it – regardless of whether they go to church or not.
Far too many of us whether we are conservative or liberal only want to gather around ourselves teachers who will scratch our itching ears. Too many of us who proclaim to be ‘Christian’ do not read or consider the arguments of those with whom we disagree, and when confronted with evidence that challenges our current beliefs we simply reject that evidence out-of-hand. 2 Timothy 4:3 – “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.”
I find it interesting that this is a favorite accusation among ‘conservative Christians’ against ‘liberal Christians.’ Yet, my experience has shown me that ‘conservative Christians’ are less likely to be engaged with those with whom they disagree than are more progressive Christians, often because they fear that if they read or consider ideas contrary to their perspective that Satan will deceive them and they will lose their standing with God and fellow believers. Generally, there is not a seeking of Truth, but a seeking of that which confirms what they already believe – or, frankly, what they want to believe regardless of the veracity of their position. Whether a correct or incorrect perception, this has been my experience of American Christianity – conservative and liberal. Anyway…
Most of those I know who profess to be practicing Jews or Muslims know a whole lot more about their faith, its history, and their scriptures than a many Christians I have encountered, including me.
There are Americans who are ignorant of many things for a variety of reasons, and this does not have to be pejorative. If given the opportunity, they would rectify their lack of understanding or knowledge. What I am talking about is something of a different sort that seems to have infected American culture. It is an anti-intellectualism that has contaminated students, for example, who believe it simply isn’t cool to want to learn or know much of anything. What I see in many Americans today (!) is a willful non-interest in anything other than themselves and what they want to believe to be true.
This has dire affects on our foreign policy, on our safety and standing in the world, on our ability to realize, admit, and rectify our mistakes and wrong doings, on our ability to compete in a changing world, on the demand that our politicians and leaders lead wisely, and whether we as a culture and a people will continue to prosper. We cannot have a democracy without an informed and educated citizenry. We cannot exercise positive leadership in the world if the positions we take and our actions in the end cause more harm and hardship than good. There is a disconnect between what we want to believe of ourselves and our actions and the reality of it all. In the competition of ideas and world-views, if ours lead to nothing more than the imposition of position rather than the encouragement of that which betters those with whom we are engaged, then we will lose – as we should.

A little different vision:
Living From a Different Vision
By: Mary Grey
Consider the many spiritualities that arose as a culture of protest against corruption and abuse of power. In fact, the monastic movements began as a retreat from city to desert, as a counter-cultural protest against the decadence of city life. A spirituality of resistance and struggle refuses to let injustice have the last word. Let us be clear: this is not an opting out from society, a retreat to an inner world where Christians settle down cozily with their own ideals, and give up on social critique. Far from it: prophetic critique today will work as far as possible with whatever forces or energies of society are leading in the right direction. The point about a spirituality of resistance is that we already live from a different vision. And this is what is so energizing.
Source: The Outrageous Pursuit of Hope, Via Inward/Outward

The process of realizing the differences between what has been known as “Evangelicalism” in this country and what has developed into the Christian “Religious Right” is picking up. For twenty years now, this group that has developed into the politicized Religious Right has striven to make sure the American public believes that they are the true Evangelicals and that their brand of Christian faith-expression is the only true expression of the Christian faith. The Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Mainline Protestants, and any other form are all apostate and not truly Christian, although the Religious Right will align with them politically or socially when their goals are the same.
Here is an interview from the Star-Tribune concerning Randall Balmer’s new book, “Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America: An Evangelical’s Lament“ :
Interview: Christian right has hijacked his faith, evangelical says
What is becoming more apparent is that the Religious Right is not the same as traditional American-Evangelicalism. In the same way, I think that we are realizing that politically the Neo-Conservatives in charge of this administration and who have taken control of much of the Republican Party are not truly conservative in the traditional understanding of American-conservatism and not in line with the traditions of the Grand Ol’ Party of Lincoln.
Thank God! The distortions of the Christian faith and of American-Conservatism are becoming clear, and the Religious Right and the Neo-Conservatives will be brought to task. I just don’t know how long the deception will last or how deep will be the damage.
Via: Father Jake Stops the World

THis is my second year in a row that I am not involved in an opening of school. For twenty years, I was a part of the beginning of a new academic year. I miss it!
Here is Beloit College’s Mindset list for the Class of 2010, born around 1988.
Beloit College’s Mindset List for the Class of 2010:
1. The Soviet Union has never existed and therefore is about as scary as the student union.
2. They have known only two presidents.
3. For most of their lives, major U.S. airlines have been bankrupt.
4. Manuel Noriega has always been in jail in the United States.
5. They have grown up getting lost in “big boxes.”
6. There has always been only one Germany.
7. They have never heard anyone actually “ring it up” on a cash register.
8. They are wireless, yet always connected.
9. A stained blue dress is as famous to their generation as a third-rate burglary was to their parents’.
10. Thanks to pervasive headphones in the back seat, parents have always been able to speak freely in the front.
11. A coffee has always taken longer to make than a milkshake.
12. Smoking has never been permitted on U.S. airlines.
13. Faux fur has always been a necessary element of style.
14. The Moral Majority has never needed an organization.
15. They have never had to distinguish between the St. Louis Cardinals baseball and football teams.
16. DNA fingerprinting has always been admissible evidence in court.
17. They grew up pushing their own miniature shopping carts in the supermarket.
18. They grew up with and have outgrown faxing as a means of communication.
19. “Google” has always been a verb.
20. Text messaging is their e-mail.
21. Milli Vanilli has never had anything to say.
22. Mr. Rogers, not Walter Cronkite, has always been the most trusted man in America.
23. Bar codes have always been on everything, from library cards and snail mail to retail items.
24. Madden has always been a game, not a Super Bowl-winning coach.
25. “Phantom of the Opera” has always been on Broadway.
26. Boogers candy has always been a favorite for grossing out parents.
27. There has never been a skyhook in the NBA.
28. Carbon copies are oddities found in their grandparents’ attics.
29. Computerized player pianos have always been tinkling in the lobby.
30. Nondenominational mega-churches have always been the fastest growing religious organizations in the United States.
31. They grew up in minivans.
32. Reality shows have always been on television.
33. They have no idea why we needed to ask “…can we all get along?”
34. They have always known that “In the criminal justice system the people have been represented by two separate yet equally important groups.”
35. Young women’s fashions have never been concerned with where the waist is.
36. They have rarely mailed anything using a stamp.
37. Brides have always worn white for a first, second or third wedding.
38. Being techno-savvy has always been inversely proportional to age.
39. “So” as in “Sooooo New York,” has always been a drawn-out adjective modifying a proper noun, which in turn modifies something else.
40. Affluent troubled teens in Southern California have always been the subjects of television series.
41. They have always been able to watch wars and revolutions live on television.
42. Ken Burns has always been producing very long documentaries on PBS.
43. They are not aware that “flock of seagulls hair” has nothing to do with birds flying into it.
44. Retin-A has always made America look less wrinkled.
45. Green tea has always been marketed for health purposes.
46. Public school officials have always had the right to censor school newspapers.
47. Small white holiday lights have always been in style.
48. Most of them never had the chance to eat bad airline food.
49. They have always been searching for “Waldo.”
50. The really rich have regularly expressed exuberance with outlandish birthday parties.
51. Michael Moore has always been showing up uninvited.
52. They never played the game of state license plates in the car.
53. They have always preferred going out in groups as opposed to dating.
54. There have always been live organ donors.
55. They have always had access to their own credit cards.
56. They have never put their money in a “Savings & Loan.”
57. Sara Lee has always made underwear.
58. Bad behavior has always been getting captured on amateur videos.
59. Disneyland has always been in Europe and Asia.
60. They never saw Bernard Shaw on CNN.
61. Beach volleyball has always been a recognized sport.
62. Acura, Lexus and Infiniti have always been luxury cars of choice.
63. Television stations have never concluded the broadcast day with the national anthem.
64. LoJack transmitters have always been finding lost cars.
65. Diane Sawyer has always been live in “Prime Time.”
66. Dolphin-free canned tuna has always been on sale.
67. Disposable contact lenses have always been available.
68. “Outing” has always been a threat.
69. “Oh, The Places You’ll Go” by Dr. Seuss has always been the perfect graduation gift.
70. They have always “dissed” what they don’t like.
71. The United States has always been studying global warming to confirm its existence.
72. Richard M. Daley has always been the mayor of Chicago.
73. They grew up with virtual pets to feed, water and play games with, lest they die.
74. Ringo Starr has always been clean and sober.
75. Professional athletes have always competed in the Olympics.

A friend of mine sent this joke to me the other day. It may be old, but it’s new to me and I couldn’t stop laughing.

Donald Rumsfeld is briefing George Bush in the Oval Office. “Oh, and finally, sir, three Brazilian soldiers were killed in Iraq today.”
Bush goes pale, his jaw hanging open in stunned disbelief. He buries his face in his hands, muttering “My God…My God.”
“Mr. President,” says Cheney, “we lose soldiers all the time, and it’s terrible. But I’ve never seen you so upset. What’s the matter?”
Bush looks up and says…”How many is a Brazilian?”