The Crabbe and Goyle of Christianity

A lot of hoo-ha has been stirring over in the anti-emergent corner of the blogosphere. It concerns some posters a couple of folks made which poke fun at the views of some postmodern Christians.

As I looked at the blogs of the gentlemen who put together these posters, at first I was a little irritated, but then I was embarrassed. They reminded me of my own theological past. They took me back to a time when I used to beat up people with theology and scripture. I was a pretty good Bully for Christ.

The best measure I could use to describe myself at that time is Crabbe and Goyle. In the Harry Potter series, they are the two thugs who hang out with Malfoy and use their relationship with him to intimidate and harass people. Their relationship to Malfoy is sycophantic. I think many aspects of my relationship with Christ could have been fairly described in similar fashion.

Lewis says that evil cannot succeed in being evil the way good can being good. Evil is not original, it can only exist as a corruption of good. Evil needs good, but good does not need evil. Harry could go on fine in life without Crabbe and Goyle, but they could not go on without Harry (or someone like him). Their nature requires an enemy, someone to be against, or better yet - someone to beat down. Without someone to shove below them, Crabbe and Goyle would not know what to do with themselves.

I am not even sure how to talk about this type of Christian without getting into mudslinging. When I read the blogs of some of these anti-emergent folks, I just see a lot of anger and frustration wrapped in christianeez rhetoric. I also know that if someone had pointed out this behavior in my past, I would only have shouted louder and more obnoxiously.

I have been a Christian for 25 years. Only in the past few do I feel like I have started to be a follower of Christ. I grew up hearing that our faith was different because we had a "relationship" with God. I believed all those years I had a relationship with him and, I suppose, on some level I did. However, I feel like it is only now that I am beginning to discover what relationship means.

Speaking of posters, I thought these responses from Emerging Grace were wonderful.

Thank You JK Rowling!

Thank you dear lady for the gift you gave us. Thank you for such a wonderful closing. Your choice of ending with so many stories of redemption give a little hope in these troubled times. May God Bless You.....

and goodbye Harry... we will miss you!

Going to the Manti Pageant?

I have Mormon Coffee on my Google Reader list. I am not a fan of their approach, but I do find some of the posts interesting and pertinent to life here in Utah.

They recently did a post on their trip to the Manti pageant this year. The pageant is an outdoor theatrical re-enactment of parts of the book of Mormon and the life of Joseph Smith.

When Mormons gather in large groups, organizations like Mormon Coffee take the opportunity to evangelize. Contrary to typical evangelism, these street preachers carry signs designed to provoke and belittle Mormons, while yelling similar slogans.

On their blog, Mormon Coffee was inviting Christians to come down next year and join them in sign carrying and yelling (Click here to see the post). In the comments section I tried to post my experience at the pageant. Since it is a moderated blog, it has to be cleared. My comment was not posted, so I am going to try to recall it as best I can here.

I had the opportunity to attend the Manti pageant last year with some neighbors who had invited my family. We were sitting outside the fenced area since we had some dogs with us. A street preacher was making his way down our row. He was yelling out to the small crowd behind the fence about deception, Mormons going to Hell, etc. When he got to our area, he singled me out declaring that I was blind and needed to be open to the truth. I couldn't get a word in to tell the guy I wasn't Mormon. My neighbors snickered at the irony of his choosing the one non-Mormon in the group to yell at. This reaction made him angrier. He shouted at us a little louder, then stomped off.

It is said on the Mormon Coffee blog that if one person comes to Christ, all of this (yelling and sign carrying) is worth it. Therefore, it is considered that the methodology works. I think there is a difference between something working, and something being efficient and effective. My neighbors saw the shouting as confirmation that their beliefs are correct (after all, why all the persecution if Mormons aren't right?). From that view, I don't think you have forward momentum if you take one step forward followed by four steps back.

I am sure there were some good hearted and sincere street preachers out there. For the most part however, I observed only frustration and anger. When the totals are tallied, I think the street preachers do more harm than good.

I am disappointed that my original post was deleted. I know it was better than the above (I was in the groove that night).

Seeing the street preachers out there makes me realize how careful I have to be when I open scripture. They are a living testament that you can get scripture to justify almost anything. If they truly feel that Mormons need converting, I think they can engage in a way that does not destroy community.

A wise woman once told me, "Don't pull weeds unless you are willing to stay and tend the garden". These street preachers come in... do enormous damage with their verbal violence... and then leave the scene in a wake of destruction - that those of us who live here have to clean up.

Theology's Top Model!

Since I have my summer off (don't hate me cause I'm beautiful) I decided I could now go to an early morning bible study that my job usually precludes me from attending.

In one of the first emails from the group they used a word I didn't know (not a good sign) - dispensationalism. Actually, I had a general idea what it meant, but since isms of any sort make me squeemish, I figured I better raise my hand and ask the teacher to use it in a sentence.

One of the guys in the group emailed back a well detailed explanation of dispensationalism and its history in the church. I won't repeat it here but, in short, it is an explanation of how God has dealt with man throughout history. The writer also presented some of the alternatives to this idea.

People often cling doggedly to one of the many sides of this issue, but as I read I noticed I could see them as nothing more than possible- and incomplete- models.

It reminded me of Galileo. He got into a lot of trouble for proposing a model of the universe that contradicted the church of Rome. He felt that the existing model (Earth centered) did not explain the skies or make predictions as well as his model (Sun centered). In the end, though Galileo's model was an improvement, it was still incomplete. I wonder if he would have been slow to surrender his model if he had lived to see it being supplanted.

It seems to me that all of our denominations, tenants, religions, and beliefs are nothing more than our attempts to develop a model to explain what we see when we look at God. Perhaps they are also our attempt to make Him predictable.

Sometimes models seem to contradict each other. If you have ever caught Brian Greene on PBS, you may have heard him explain the apparent contradictions of String Theory and Relativity. String Theory seems to work great at the quantum level but doesn't help at the cosmic level. Relativity works to explain the cosmos, but breaks down as we head toward the quantum level. Men like Stephen Hawking would like to find a single, unified theory to explain everything.

Science is good at holding two apparently contradictory theories. Men of Science know that there is more to know.

Theologians (and religious folks in general) tend to find it very difficult to hold two theories of God that seem to be in opposition. The tendency is to champion one model while belittling proponents of the other.

If we have yet to find a unified model for physics, why would we think we could develop a unified model for God?

For myself, I tend to hold my models of God very loosely. I suspect that God was referring to our models when he told us not to "make any graven image". I don't know that he was as concerned with little clay images to sit on our shelves, but rather our tendency to want lock God down, to quantify Him, to point and say, "This is who He is!"

The Spirit blows wherever it pleases... He will not be contained.

In the end, I think our models tell us a lot more about ourselves than they do about God.

Who is responsible?

I know there is a thin line between stating reality and making excuses, but there is a line. I don't want to dismiss problems as being unsolvable, but I think there is room for calling things as they are and not sitting in an endless cloud of idealism where no true changes are made.

I have sat through countless seminars and meetings in my 15 years as a teacher where the presenter insists that we can have across the board success with students. If curriculum is done right, if the instruction is delivered properly, if the environment is correct, etc... then EVERY child will succeed.

Do you notice anything missing in the equation?

The child's responsibility.

However, if you say that, you will be accused of making excuses. After all, if the child is unmotivated, then it is the teacher's job to motivate the student. As far as these theorists are concerned, the child plays no role in his or her outcome.

From personal experience, I reject this premise. I was the classic trouble maker as a boy. I never got anything above a C prior to 10th grade. School was at the bottom of a short list of meaningless priorities. Looking back, I recognize that many of my teachers did all that they could. They employed the right strategies, they cared, they intervened... yada, yada, yada. I simply didn't want to do it. Period. End of story.

They were powerless.

In the summer prior to my 10th grade year, that all changed. Perhaps someday on this blog I will write out my testimony. Suffice to say, I saw de' light.

I came back the first quarter of my 10th grade year and nailed 4 A's and two B's. My teachers and principal were shocked, but they had nothing to do with my turnaround. I pulled those grades because I wanted to. Period. End of story.

I believe I must do ALL that I can to help my students, but they must put forth effort. Their will affects their destiny. Like the ghosts and the Bright Ones in Lewis's The Great Divorce, the student can put nearly all of their weight on me but they must still walk.

If we take all responsibility in the equation away from the students, should we then be surprised if they approach life irresponsibly?

An Interview with Tony Campolo

This is a great interview with Tony Campolo. He really outlines where Christianity should be going and what it should look like. I don't think that the majority of Christianity at the moment reflects his views, but I hope a generation from now they are commonplace.

What is your theological worldview?

This is an interesting quiz I found on another blog. I am sure it is in no way scientific, but I would say that it pegged me pretty well. I would probably be labeled a postmodern/emergent. Definitely putting Charismatic at the bottom of my list was spot on. I am surprised even 11 % of my theology could go there (must be the subliminal influence of growing up in charismatic circles).

The strong holiness end comes from growing up on Keith Green music. :)

I have no idea what Neo Orthodox even means.

The more I learn about reformed theology, the more it gives me the willies. They are brothers in Christ, but too depressing.

I disagree with the author's definition of postmodern. I in no way feel alienated from older forms of church, nor would most post moderns (I think). I find the reverence and touch of mysticism refreshing.

Anyway, give it a whirl and post your outcome in the comments section.

You scored as Emergent/Postmodern. You are Emergent/Postmodern in your theology. You feel alienated from older forms of church, you don't think they connect to modern culture very well. No one knows the whole truth about God, and we have much to learn from each other, and so learning takes place in dialogue. Evangelism should take place in relationships rather than through crusades and altar-calls. People are interested in spirituality and want to ask questions, so the church should help them to do this. Emergent/Postmodern 71% Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 68% Neo orthodox 54% Modern Liberal 50% Classical Liberal 36% Reformed Evangelical 36% Fundamentalist 29% Roman Catholic 21% Charismatic/Pentecostal 11% What's your theological worldview? created with QuizFarm.com

The best blog on Jerry Falwell

I had a lot of thoughts on Jerry Falwell's passing. Though I had many, many disagreements with him and I felt he hindered more often than he helped; I still wished he and his family peace and I pray that a merciful Father embraces him now.

The gentleman over at Subversive Christianity had one of the best commentaries on Falwell's passing. Normally, I would simply link to it, but the blog will be erased as of May 20th. So I am going to paste it here. If you read this prior to that date, I suggest you head over there for some of the best spiritual commentary around.

May Light Perpetual shine on him
Jerry Falwell's dead.
It's hard to believe, at least for people of my generation. I was born two years before Falwell founded Thomas Road Baptist Church, and the Moral Majority was a major player on the American scene from my mid-twenties to my mid-thirties. Falwell's been a national presence during my entire lifetime. His death is strange, like the sudden disappearance of a familiar landmark. As my wife exclaimed when I told her Falwell had died: "Dead!? Jerry Falwell?! Are you serious?!"
The reactions to Falwell's passing are, I suppose, predictable. He was hated and he was loved. Those who hated him are chortling with delight. Some of their responses are downright mean (Goldbricker and the comment thread on Atheist Revolution), others (No More Hornets) joyous but a bit more precise in their reasons for celebrating, and some (Salon and Feminary) measured and reflective. Those who loved him--for example, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, and folks at Liberty University--are erring in the opposite direction by offering encomiums of Falwell that whitewash the genuine harm to others--and, I fear, to God--that some of his actions and pronouncements inflicted. Both kinds of responses are understandable.
But both are also unsettling because in their rush to vilify or sanctify Falwell, they don't bother to try to see him as a human being. This failure or refusal only encourages an "us" versus "them" divide between Falwell groupies and Falwell loathers and, more importantly, between the worldviews they represent.
Falwell's understanding of what it means to be a Christian strikes me as so obviously broken, so obviously defensive and exclusionary and judgmental, that I can only conclude it was embraced by a man who was suffering from wounds that cut deeply into his soul. A man who could condemn and thunder jeremiads as well as Falwell could is either a total charlatan or someone who's in a state of chronic anxiety, fear, anger, self-doubt, and envy--a man who exudes ill-being rather than well-being. I don't think Falwell was a fake. He was a victim whose personal suffering drove him to embrace a spirituality and value system that victimized others. He was a guy whose own wounds drove him into the arms of a god who demanded that he wound others. When I think of him in these terms, I realize that Falwell deserves our compassion more than our hatred or reverence. Nor do I mean this in a holier-than-thou, patronizing way. Because my guess is that many of the demons that haunted Falwell haunt us as well. We may not have the clout that Falwell did, and so our destructiveness may be on a less public scale. But it's real nonetheless. Admitting this doesn't whitewash Falwell's life. But it does begin the process of bridging the "us" and "them" divide.
I so dislike what Falwell did to Christianity in the U.S. But I do so hope that his demons have been at last exorcised. And even though the words stick in my throat--a reflection of the thousands of demons that inhabit my own soul--I say (and pray that I might say it sincerely): May light perpetual shine on my brother, Jerry.

Hope and Obstacles by Brian Mclaren

I have listened to this talk by Brian Mclaren about 10 times in the past month or so. In it, he outlines some of the challenges that have faced the Church in the recent past, as well as the hope and path for the Church in the future. He addresses the relationship of the independent evangelical churches to the mainline churches. Through the strengthening of these ties, he speaks of hope for a post-christian world.

"The Protestant history has been the history of downward expansion... The interesting thing that tends to happen is that each level of the Church denies the legitimacy of the levels above it... or below it. But what I would like to suggest [is that] a Deep Ecclesiology is [an] acknowledging [of] the Church and honoring the Church in all of its forms. And instead of arguing about which narrow band is legitimate; just assume that God has lower standards than we do and is willing to bless people that we would never bless... if we were God." ~ Brian Mclaren

Click Here

Tale of the Body Thief

For me, reading Anne Rice's Vampire novels was always a spiritual experience. The way she would wrestle out questions about life, morals, and God through her characters left me in wonder.

I was particularly drawn to her story "The Tale of the Body Thief". In it the vampire Lestat, after hundreds of years of being a vampire, longs to experience human feelings again. He is gifted with the opportunity by a gentleman who can swap souls. He agrees to a 24 hour switch.

Within moments of the transformation, he regrets his decision. The pressure in his bowels revolts him. His bad breath makes him nauseous. He is overwhelmed by the limitations of his new body. The simplest tasks require so much effort. He desires nothing more than to reclaim his vampiric body with its' preternatural strength, senses, and eternal youth.

As I read it, I wondered if Jesus experienced anything like that; going from immortal to mortal, from timeless to present, limitless to limited. What was that like?

I read a poem on a blog recently that addressed this question. I think in general I am a little too boorish to appreciate poetry properly, but this one really spoke to me.
Click here.