De-friended on Facebook

I was voted off the island today.

I know that not all Christians behave in the way I saw earlier. I know many Christians who defy the stereotypical behavior I am about to present. However, as I stated in a previous post, they do not own the name. I know that in writing this, I am just fueling the stereotype.

But this just has all the makings of a good blog post. :)

Still, I will change the name even though there is no one innocent.

Curtis wrote a Christmas poem this morning and posted it on Facebook. Envision all of the forwarded emails you have gotten from ultra-right friends and relatives (or maybe that you have sent) and you can get a sense of the tone. In it he referenced a smiling president and congressman happy about all of the abortions that would be soon made available.

Below the poem a woman whom I did not know replied. She was actually very gracious and gently reminded him that things are not always so simple and she shared a personal experience. I always appreciate when a contrary opinion is stated politely.

Curtis wrote back (this I can quote because I get follow-ups in my email):
_____

"I don't debate God-
'God overthrows the thrones of those who are disobedient to His law.
My political views are those of the Our Father'. -- St. Avitus of Vienna"
_____

I believe this kind of reply to not only be weak, but rather blasphemous. After internally debating whether to say anything, I decided to remind Curtis that there are many people who hold various differing opinions they believe to be God's. I stated that he had every right to hold and defend his political views; but that I did not believe it is right to use God as a trump card or a lever to end the discussion.

I do not know if the lady was de-friended, but I was immediately ousted. A short time later, I received the following in my Facebook email box:
_____

"Andrew,
please don't tell me not to post political or religious views on my site. You accepted my request for friendship- but, I have now retracted that request.
Your posts have been quite controversial over the past several weeks and I have left it as freedom of speech. Keep voting for these liberals and that will be taken away too.
God Bless you and your family-"
_____

Apparently, I have not only been defriended, but blocked too since I can't reply to his email.

Now, of course, I never said anything close to telling him he can't post political or religious views. This is a good example of the digital/analog thinking comparison I had made in an earlier post.

I could dissect all of the ironic elements in his email, but I will leave that to you, dear reader.

How Would Others Refer to You?

There is debate amongst some in Christian circles about the term "Christian". Some have quit using it, and instead take on various euphemisms such as Christ Follower, Follower of the Way, etc. Others most often go by their particular sect - Lutheran, Mormon, Catholic, Pentecostal, etc.... Others stick with Christian because they either agree with all the baggage that now comes with the name, or they are determined to reclaim it from the more fundamental faction of the religion that now seems to typify the word.

I find myself rather ambivalent about it. I discover I am rather more interested with what word comes to mind when people get to know me. It seems rather pompous if I give myself the name Christian, but everyone else is thinking asshole.

Still, I see myself more and more on the outer edge of Christian circles ... and am finding myself happy there. The things that impassion the majority of Christians are no longer even a blip on my radar. For example:

• I do not believe God has any more investment in America than anywhere else. It is pure ego and insecurity that drives us into all of this "God is on our side" language.

• There is no "War on Christmas".

• I believe abortion is the murder of innocent life, but our attempts to legislate it away is closing the door when the horse has already left the barn. It is easy to shout against abortion, it is a sacrifice to work for the changes that need to come about to make a real difference.

• Christians are no different than anyone else.... really..... at all.

• I do not believe that any soul will spend an eternity in a place called Hell. Nope, not one.

• I believe prayer in public schools is motivated by a desire for power, not piety.

• I do not believe it is a threat to my children, nor to my marriage, if homosexuals marry.

• I believe the world would be a better place if the head of every ministry quit, then went and got a job at their local hospital.

• I do not believe in any kind of "rapture". I believe God wants us to redeem this world.

• I believe God is as close as out next breath, but that most Christian rhetoric shields Him from view.

• I believe Christianity competes with other religions, and that is a mistake.

• I believe most Christian parents lead their children to make spiritual decisions that they are not yet equipped to make.

• I believe organizations like Focus on the Family do more harm than good.

• I believe most churches indoctrinate their congregations and are houses of theological inbreeding. Inbreeding is bad in genetics and worse in theology.

• I believe Christians spend a lot of time working on "belief" rules (inerrancy of scripture, hell, trinity, salvation, etc..) so they can divide people into in/out and thereby give themselves a higher position.

• I believe Christianity has completely jettisoned the command to "love your enemy" and in doing so we have lost the heart of the gospel.

• I believe God stands with the poor. Christianity honors the poor while inside church doors, but mocks them in political discussions.

• I believe there are Christians who live contrary to what I have said, but they do not own the term "Christian" here in America.

I was motivated to write this after reading a quote this morning by Dorthy Soelle on Catholicanarchy. Her definition of Christianity would probably not be favorably received in many church circles.

“In a theological perspective it is evident that the content of this fascist religion [right wing Christianity] contradicts the message of the Jewish-Christian tradition. The God of the prophets did not preach the nation-state, but community between strangers and natives. The apostle Paul did not base the justification of sinners on the Protestant work ethic, but on grace, which appears for young and old, for diligent and for lazy people! And Jesus did not make the family the central value of human life, but the solidarity of those deprived of their rights. The most important norms of the Moral Majority are not contained in Christian faith, as we can see from the many critical remarks against the family that appear in the gospels. It is characteristic of Christofascism that it cuts off all the roots that Christianity has in the Old Testament, in the Jewish Bible. No word about justice, no mention of the poor, whom God comes to aid, very little about guilt and suffering. No hope for the messianic reign. Hope is completely individualized and reduced to personal success. Jesus, cut loose from the Old Testament, becomes a sentimental figure. The empty repetition of his name works like a drug: it changes nothing and nobody. Therefore, since not everybody can be successful, beautiful, male, and rich, there have to be hate objects who can take the disappointment on themselves. Jesus, who suffered hunger and poverty, who practiced solidarity with the oppressed, has nothing to do with this religion.

“At a mass meeting a thousand voices shouted: ‘I love Jesus’ and ‘I love America’—it was impossible to distinguish the two. This kind of religion knows the cross only as a magical symbol of what he has done for us, not as the sign of the poor man who was tortured to death as a political criminal, like thousands today who stand up for his truth in El Salvador. This is a God without justice, a Jesus without a cross, an Easter without a cross—what remains is a metaphysical Easter Bunny in front of the beautiful blue light of the television screen, a betrayal of the disappointed, a miracle weapon in service of the mighty.”

The Darwin Fishy

Back in 1976, I remember sitting at a Christian music festival listening to Keith Green banging away on the piano. Between songs, Keith bluntly ripped on the merchandisers who were selling "Jesus Junk" at the back of the festival grounds. It seemed good to me though. I had my Christian comics, Christian t-shirt, and Christian frisbee.

Thirty-three years later, I practically have an alergic reaction to "Jesus Junk". The merchandisers of the seventies were amatuers compared to what is available today. One item I always thought was beyond absurd are the Testamints (little candies with a cross on it). So I was a little suprised when my daughter had a knock-off tin of mints called "Fish Mints". (Their website claims to "Be Reaching the World one piece at a time.")

"Sweetheart, where did you get these?" I inquired, turning the small tin in my hand. The lid said these were sugar-free and promised a bible verse inside.

"At the Hobby Lobby," she shrugged.

"Let me rephrase... Why did you get these?"

"I don't like Altoids, and these were cute," she replied.

"Cute?"

"Yeah," she answered, taking back the tin. "They have these cute little fish named Darwin."

I choked on my drink and spluttered, "Darwin??"

"Mm-Hmm," she smiled. "These little fishy are called Darwin Fish."

I have obviously been neglectful in my duties to raise my children in the Christian subculture. :)

Ebenezer Scrooge Could Write a Best Seller in America

Scrooge may be one of literature's unsung heroes. He is the victim of having been created at the wrong place and in the wrong era. His value system was scorned and treated with derision. How would he be judged today?

Today, there are scores of Americans loudly trumpeting and rallying for his values. He is not a miser, but a hero! In the past, he was the archetype of a failed human being; today he would be doing book signings and preaching his message on the AM radio dial.

Consider some of his quotes which used to earn him the reputation of a miser and wicked man...

"I wish to be left alone, sir! That is what I wish! I don't make myself merry at Christmas and I cannot afford to make idle people merry. I have been forced to support the establishments I have mentioned through taxation and God knows they cost more than they're worth. Those who are badly off must go there."

Here he articulates a belief that anyone receiving assistance is "idle".

"Another word from you, Cratchit, and you will celebrate Christmas by losing your position."

Scrooge uses his financial advantage to further line his pockets while paying as little as he can. The abuse of workers does not bother him because if they do not like it, they may go elsewhere. In his mind, he has committed no foul. This is a completely justifiable position to many Americans.

Scrooge believes virtue comes from making money and being shrewd in business. The following statement by Jacob Marley runs in complete opposition to his worldview:

"Business?! Mankind was my business! The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

Yes, Scrooge may have been a failure in the mind and era of Dickens; but in many town halls across today's America ....

He would be the featured speaker.

The Manhattan Declaration - Who Cares?

The latest get together by well-known Evangelicals has produced The Manhattan Declaration. It seems that every few years now, someone in this genre of Christianity writes up a new manifesto and sends it around for everyone to sign. So once again, we have another written proclamation stating that Christianity's primary concern is with abortion and making sure that gays stay in the closet.

One thing the writers and signers of this document all have in common is that they think everyone is out to get them and that they must protect themselves.

I disagree.

I don't think anyone cares.....

Dualistic Thinking Leads to Raising the Ante'

I have been devouring Richard Rohr's "Everything Belongs". It has been giving me new directions to try, since various aspects of my faith historically direct me to places I no longer find to be helpful.

One of the primary issues he deals with is how Western dualistic thinking has permeated most of the religious faiths we have grown up with. By dualistic, he means putting everything in an either/or context. We do not see things as they are... we see things as WE are. This leads to self deception. I touched on this thought in a previous post on digital thinking. Since an item needs to be pushed in to one of two camps (either/or), this prevents us from seeing it with its true gradients.

I saw this played out in real life this weekend. The University of Utah and BYU have a football rivalry. In most cases, it is all in good fun. I have two neighbors who are absolutely entertaining in the shenanigans they will pull on each other. However, after BYU won yesterday's game, the quarterback of BYU had some sharp words for his opponents:

"I don't like Utah. In fact, I hate them. I hate everything about them. I hate their program, I hate their fans, I hate everything. .... I think the whole university, their fans, and their organization is classless. They threw beer on my family and stuff last year, and they did a whole bunch of nasty things, and I don't respect them, and they deserve to lose."

Now, I know nothing about either of these teams, and even less about football. However, one does not need to be into sports to recognize us/them, either/or, dualistic thinking. Perhaps he has legitimate gripes with individuals who are U of U fans... but the WHOLE university?

Here he presents the Achilles Heel of dualism. Blame and anger are shotgunned across the board. People whom he does not know and has never met become the targets of his insults. Dualistic thinking often gets presented by its defenders as being logical and rational. I would submit that its real appeal is that it requires less effort and plays completely to our egos.

This reminded me of a scene from MASH. After a long night of treating burn victims, the doctors and a visiting general go to the mess tent for coffee. Over the radio, a communist announcer accuses their MASH unit, and specifically Hawkeye, of war crimes. She accuses Hawkeye of conducting experiments on prisoners.

General: You know, that really roasts my butt! Why don't we put out some propaganda of our own?

BJ: Like what General?

General: Like those burn victims... why don't we say they were firebombed by the enemy because they cooperated with us?

Hawkeye: Why should we say that?

General: Because it is a very effective weapon Pierce. Every time they put out something, we should put out something worse!

Hawkeye: So they lie and then we lie... where does it end?

General: Hmmm... maybe you're right, but it still steams me.

Hawkeye: Steams me too, but it's gotta stop somewhere.

(MASH Season 5 Episode 15 - 38 Across)

Anger, spite, violence, gossip, envy, greed, insults, lies.... we all get hit with these at one time or another. How do we respond?

Let it stop with us.

I Say NO to More School! - Teacher Perspective

Last month, I wrote a commentary about President Obama's thoughts that we, as a nation, should consider lengthening our school day and year. I spoke from a parent's perspective, since I have two elementary age children.

Now I want to look at it from a teacher's point of view. I have been teaching elementary school for 18 years and have taught to the very wealthy and the very poor. I am against adding time to our day and year. I truly feel there would be nothing to be gained by increasing our children's time in school. TIME is not really our issue. Most time in school is not being used efficiently; so to add more inefficiently used time will not provide any real growth.

In order for a student to progress at a good pace, I believe they need three things:

1. A teacher who is competent in the subject matter
2. Pre-requisite skills for the learning that is taking place
3. A commitment by the student and/or parent(s) to learn the material

Most school reform movements will address my first item, but you will NEVER hear anything about the other two. Worse yet, most school reform believes that changing the structure of the day, or the curriculum, or how we house children, or how we assess or deliver instruction will be the key. I have watched for 19 years as legislators, districts, and school boards have tweaked these items... it never delivers.

The reality is, most teachers are competent to teach their class. As much as the anti-unionists would have us believe there are scores of clock-punching lazy teachers being protected by unions, it simply isn't the case... and teachers are certainly not what is driving the condition of our schools.

I believe our largest failing pertains to pre-requisite skills. The truth is that up to two-thirds of the students in a given classroom do not belong there. The subject matter is simply too advanced or too easy for the student.

In an inner-city environment, such as I teach in now, the subject matter is too advanced. But in American schools we have a "ready-or-not, here-you-go" view of class advancement. Whether or not a student has the skills in place to move on... we move them on. Students are placed by age, rather than what skill they are ready to acquire. I have used this example before, but it would be like if I wanted to switch careers and decided to go to medical school. The registrar at the University looks at me and says, "Well, normally we would put you on a pre-med schedule to get in your sciences.... but if we did that, you would be in class with a bunch of twenty year-olds. You look like you are about 40, so why don't we put you in 2nd year medical school ... that way you would be in with classmates closer to your own age." To be on a class track that I am completely unprepared for could not be more demoralizing.

Consider also what it would be like for the professor, trying to teach surgical skills to folks who failed Biology 101 or couldn't stand the sight of blood... along with students who were ready to move on to their next year of medical school. Does that sound chaotic and wrong? In my class I have an even spread of Harry Potter readers, down to See Spot Run. My students are expected to be taught, and later tested on, the division/conversion/and reduction of mixed numbers - yet many struggle to add 13 and 7 in their head.

Anti public education folks will often point to studies that show that our students do worse the longer they are in the system. I believe this is because of our determination to advance kids by their age rather than their readiness.

I believe this also has a negative effect on my third category - student commitment. The longer a student, who is not ready, gets pushed to higher and higher levels... the more their commitment wanes. This of course brings out the misbehavior that is more and more prevalent in our classrooms. How frustrating it is to be pushed on to the next level, when you felt completely helpless in the previous one.

There needs to be a fundamental shift in the way we approach education in our schools. Simply lengthening the time in a bad system will only increase everyone's level of frustration.

Quotes From Articles I Have Read Recently #8

I have this gadget on the side of my blog that lists blog articles that I have shared within my Google Reader. However, it is things like Google Reader that keep people from actually going to blogs anymore. A lot of folks are probably like me and only go to the actual blog if they are going to comment. So I have a feeling that my list of articles I have read recently doesn't get seen much. So I am going to try to be more diligent in creating lists like this, with quotes, so I can add some traffic to these articles I enjoyed.

And yet, when I joined the blogging world I discovered there were a lot of people out there like me, trying to find a spiritual worldview that makes sense to them. It is in that spirit that I have tried to help articulate Christian Universalism, as expressed by the CUA, as a comprehensive spiritual paradigm that goes beyond-far beyond-simply rejecting belief in Hell. I see Christian Universalism as a new alternative to both traditional, conservative, orthodox religion and the many forms of liberal religions that surround us today. Those of us disillusioned with traditional religion often find that our alternatives aren’t particularly appealing: “Rational” religions that have been stripped of any real spirituality; liberal political activism that invokes religion when convenient; and the New Age movement, which offers plenty of spirituality but has forgotten that real spirituality is not indulging ourselves. For those of us who feel spiritually homeless, with no labels to describe our beliefs, no one we can relate to, and nowhere to go, I am happy to announce that it need not be this way. This is where Christian Universalism enters the picture. The Christian Universalist

I don’t know what I believe. That’s kind of a relief, actually, as it’s taken me about seven years to say. Since my fundamentalist upbringing never left a lot of room for doubt, I spent a lot of time bottling up the truth, which was that I no longer knew what capital-T Truth was. Admitting this to myself was difficult enough, but I also found myself faced with a somehow more daunting dilemma: how do I continue to function honestly in the Christian community without people I love rejecting me or—worse—worrying about me? Each time I would come close to exposing the true nature of my (un)belief, I could think only of a time when I had been kept up at night in anguish over a lost soul. What did I do now that that lost soul was me? Emerging Toward Something Redeeming

Increasingly I see the church as an organization for the spiritually immature. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying this in an elitist way, thinking I am better than others. I am not. However, the traditional church seems to be like a body of children vying for the approval of a heavenly parent. Also, it is engaged in a medieval attempt at the manipulation of the divine, for their benefit. I see the church increasingly retreating into unreality. Reflections

I love how Whitman absorbs and identifies with all of humanity. Male and female, slave and free, saint and sinner, rich and poor. Whitman, to use his words, embraces multitudes. And I want to embrace multitudes. Whitman embodies what the theologian Miroslav Volf calls a "catholic personality," making space within the self to accommodate others. And I think that is often missing in religious people. We fail to make space in our hearts and minds for other people. Experimental Theology

The funny thing about religious dogmatism is the lack of unanimity among those dogmatists who proclaim the certainty of their own pet belief system. Dogmatism is good, we are told--but of course, my dogmatism is right and yours is wrong. How this serves as an argument for the absolute knowability of God is anyone's guess. Mystical Seeker

It's always struck me as rather odd that there is a field within Christianity called "apologetics." Perhaps the clearest definition of apologetics is, "The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines." I think of it more as trying to prop up the dubious.

After all, if something is true should that truth be not hard to see? Certainly there are some things where that is not the case. One that springs to mind is scientific truths. There is nothing about truths in physics that is at all self-evident to me. Shouldn't theology be different? Why do we need a whole "department" that spends all its time defending declared truth? May I suggest it's because such "truths" are really little more than WAGs (wild-assed guesses)?

If a truth is a truth it doesn't need anyone to defend it. Gravity is a truth. If you don't believe it, jump off a bridge and I promise you will be convinced. There are certain things in the spiritual arena that are relatively easy to verify and/or experience as well. The truth is that apologetics isn't concerned with truth at all, but rather with propping up arguments and theories. Why do these things need propping up? The need propping up because in what they declare they go too far. They go to far because those who propose them are essentially insecure. In the name of honesty, apologetics should be called "argumentation." A Real Bishop's Reality

Total Depravity is Depraved

One of the most self serving doctrines that man has ever created is "Total Depravity". It is the idea that man is born into a state in which he cannot do anything that is good. Goodness only comes when one has crossed over into Christianity. This doctrine was popularized by a 16th century preacher named John Calvin, and it is the cornerstone doctrine of many Christians today.

Last week, a local Pastor wrote an article for the Salt Lake Tribune extoling the virtues of Total Depravity. His motivation was an advertising campaign that was launched by Athiests in New York. Ads were placed in the subways that stated, "A million New Yorkers are good without God. Are you?"

As a Christian, I believe that the fascination most of my fellow believers have with Calvin's doctrine is driven by a desire to control. Total depravity gives the user a trump card (in their mind) whereby they can be better than everyone else around them... without, in fact, being better.

This is why many Christians react to campaigns like the Athiests in New York created. The ad spotlights goodness, rather than doctrine, and puts the Christian and the Athiest on an even playing field. The Christian does not like to lose their trump card, so they loudly insist that everyone play by their rules.

I can quote scripture with the best of them, and I know that many Christians reading this are pulling out their favorite scriptures to justify their pet postition. I already know them, so put away your Gideons. As with most "scriptural" positions, an easy scriptural rebuttal can be made.

Rather than scripture fencing, I would like to look at fruit (what actions result from positions) John Calvin is held in high esteem by many Christians. Yet he did not really do anything worth emulating. He created doctrines that gave Christians power over people... little else. Cities where Calvin's doctrines reigned were oppressive. Calvin had a man arrested for disagreeing with him. Convicted of heresy, Michael Severetus was burned at the stake. Calvin thought that was a bit extreme... he would have preferred a mere beheading.

Could any of us picture Ghandi calling for somone's death for holding a different position? Of course not! He was too GOOD a man for us to even imagine such a thing.

To me, that is where Total Depravity falls apart. It renders words like good, bad, right and wrong completely meaningless. Instead, it simply seeks to elevate a particular people group.

I do not believe the teachings of Jesus line up with a doctrine that causes us to render human goodness meaningless.

Annie Opens this Friday!

This Friday, the South Jordan Community Theater production of Annie will hit the stage. My daughter is the orphan Tessie, and I will be singing and dancing in the Hooverville scene (got Man 2 lines there also), various Warbucks mansion scenes, NYC, and playing the soundman in the radio scene.

It occured to me the other night while doing a sound check, as I was singing out a few lines from the stage, the strange twists and turns my life has taken these past few years. My politics & faith have taken a sharp Left turn, I am live in Utah after being a life long Michigander, and I have been in 3 musicals this past year (never did theater before) ... heck, I even sang a solo in one of them!

Curious to see what is going to happen next....