Friday, October 31, 2008
Apparently, I am in a cult...
Tweet
The Cult of Mac according to Skye Jethani - I think he's only half-kidding, but he certainly raises some good points about consumerism and Christianity. His final question is this:
[A]re we unknowingly contributing to the problem by encouraging Christians to construct and express their identities via Christ-branded merchandise rather than through characters transformed to reflect the values of Christ himself?
I would answer in the affirmative, and add that the problem runs even deeper, to the level of identity via church affiliation, similar to merchandise/brand affiliation. The first question amongst Christian acquaintances is, "What church do you go to?" This is how Christians define themselves - what church have you chosen to be your church? This mentality leads churches into the marketing mentality with phrases like, "A church for people who don't like church." Just like Mac is the "anti-PC," there are "cool" churches that are the "anti-churches."
Unfortunately, for those like Skye and others who see through such BS, we are stuck in a postmodern world of churches marketing to us while we look for a group of Christians that are willing to jettison the entire mentality. But all we are offered is another brochure that says, "Come to our church! We don't market like everyone else. We really love Jesus."
[A]re we unknowingly contributing to the problem by encouraging Christians to construct and express their identities via Christ-branded merchandise rather than through characters transformed to reflect the values of Christ himself?
I would answer in the affirmative, and add that the problem runs even deeper, to the level of identity via church affiliation, similar to merchandise/brand affiliation. The first question amongst Christian acquaintances is, "What church do you go to?" This is how Christians define themselves - what church have you chosen to be your church? This mentality leads churches into the marketing mentality with phrases like, "A church for people who don't like church." Just like Mac is the "anti-PC," there are "cool" churches that are the "anti-churches."
Unfortunately, for those like Skye and others who see through such BS, we are stuck in a postmodern world of churches marketing to us while we look for a group of Christians that are willing to jettison the entire mentality. But all we are offered is another brochure that says, "Come to our church! We don't market like everyone else. We really love Jesus."
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Barack Obama on the Daily Show
Tweet
I've been keeping up w/ Jon Stewart's show by watching online - Obama was on last night. For the most part, pretty boring in comparison to the Daily Show's other segments, but a few good jabs at the whole socialism accusation.
Voting Pro-Life...Voting Democrat
Tweet
Read (or listen) this NPR article about the Catholic vote and abortion.
Obviously abortion is at the top of the list of important issues for evangelical voters as well, but like some of the Catholics mentioned in this article, my opinion (and vote) in the matter has swayed in the last few months. I would agree with Douglas Kmiec, who was quoted as saying:
Obviously abortion is at the top of the list of important issues for evangelical voters as well, but like some of the Catholics mentioned in this article, my opinion (and vote) in the matter has swayed in the last few months. I would agree with Douglas Kmiec, who was quoted as saying:
"We are not baby killers," Kmiec said. "We are simply finding analternative way to build up life, to honor the truth of the humanperson, to promote human good."
He also told the students thatObama's policies would reduce the number of abortions more thanMcCain's would. Kmiec says the position goes beyond abortion — itincludes health care, living wages, caring for the poor.
The article also presents information regarding the implications of a possible overturn of Roe v. Wade, stating that abortion would still be allowed in 30 states.
I first began to reconsider my position when I heard of the 95/10 initiative which is a comprehensive plan put forth by the Democratic party, aiming to reduce the number of abortions by 95% in the next 10 years. The plan covers such issues as promoting abstinence and contraceptives, support for mothers facing unplanned pregnancies, and child health care. As I read about this plan, I realized that even though I voted Republican in the first two presidential elections that I could ('00, '04) in large part because G.W. Bush spoke so strongly against abortion, very little has been done by the Republican party (even with a majority in Congress) to decrease the number of abortions in the United States. My hope is that this plan will be adopted and implemented, and more work will be done at a federal, state and local level to go beyond the pro-life rhetoric and actually do something to decrease the number of abortions and increase the quality of life for those dealing with the challenges of unexpected/unwanted pregnancies - and the young lives that courageously brought into this world.
See also Pro Life Pro Obama
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
A line of thinking I don't understand...
Tweet
The recent political buzzword is socialism *gasp* - I can't figure out the line of reasoning (or lack thereof) that I've heard thrown around lately:
Barack Obama plans to tax higher income citizens more than lower income - we've all heard it: Everyone making less than $250,000 would get a tax break, and businesses and individuals above that line would make up the difference, thereby "spreading the wealth." McCain is using this language as an attack against Obama - and I'm not really sure I get exactly why "spreading the wealth" is a bad thing.
As an American, I've paid taxes since I started working as a teen. I get a lot of them back because I make so little, but I understand that I pay a lot of money into a big pool, and other people decide how to best use that money for the good of all Americans. We have to have taxes, and we have to rely upon a redistribution of tax money. The issue (as I understand it) is where the bulk of the tax burden falls - upon the lower, middle, or upper class. The tax laws are written and re-written to favor some over others with the supposed purpose of benefiting as many Americans as possible.
What I hear people saying is that they are upset that more of their money will be taken away to pay for the needs of people who pay less. The reason (I think) is that it is assumed that people who make more money have worked harder and longer to make a lot of money, and deserve to keep it. While those who are making less money either haven't put in their time yet and will eventually get to the top, or that they are simply lazy and are "mooching" off of the system.
Again, as an American, this really bothers me, for several reasons - but I'll only offer one for now. In general, our country enjoys greater wealth and success than any other country in history. And yet the sentiment I hear expressed is that we want more, and we are worried that excessive luxuries we have and we think we deserve will be taken away. The result is an ever more apparent equity gap. Brian McLaren briefly describes this exponential increase of the equity gap in his book "Everything Must Change" - "If you take the top 20% of [U.S.] wage-earners and compare them to the bottom 20%, the ratio jumped from 18:1 in 1990 to 24:1 in 2000." (pg. 234) The statistics are even more sickening when considered on a global scale.
The more I consider the statements and policies of John McCain and others in his party, the more I am convinced that they are selfish, greed-driven, big-dollar-CEO-style politics that will only continue to make the rich insanely more rich, and hinder more people who are in genuine need from being able to receive assistance. In my opinion, this is fundamentally un-American.
Although this post is already (really) long, I have to address the same issue from a Christian standpoint. The mindset (again, as I understand it) that says, "I deserve to keep my riches and I am not interested in helping those below me who are in need," is clearly unbiblical. From the Hebrew laws of the Jubilee years (Lev. 25) to the first Christian communities sharing "everything in common...giving to anyone as he had need," the indisputably clear Christian attitude is showing mercy to the poor and in need by helping in real, practical ways. The minor prophets (often forgotten in modern Evangelicalism) repeatedly show God's heart for the poor and judgement against the unmerciful rich. For example, read Amos 5:11-24, "You trample on the poor and force him to give you grain. Therefore, though you have built stone mansions, you will not live in them...For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins..." (v. 11-12).
As I read and reflect on these verses, I am personally humbled and embarressed, and I am in awe of modern American Christianity. How have we forgotten God's heart for the poor, the needy, the sick, the stranger? (see Matt. 25) As Christians we should always be challenging our government to do more for the poor in our country, to close the equity gap, to bring greater prosperity to all people, even if that might mean a greater financial burden for those of us who can afford it.
There is clearly so much more that could be said about this - so what do you think? And by the way, if you made it to the end of this post, you will be glad to know that the above picture was taken today at the church just down the street from our house in Grove City. If you know me at all, you know how I love church signs!!!
The recent political buzzword is socialism *gasp* - I can't figure out the line of reasoning (or lack thereof) that I've heard thrown around lately:Barack Obama plans to tax higher income citizens more than lower income - we've all heard it: Everyone making less than $250,000 would get a tax break, and businesses and individuals above that line would make up the difference, thereby "spreading the wealth." McCain is using this language as an attack against Obama - and I'm not really sure I get exactly why "spreading the wealth" is a bad thing.
As an American, I've paid taxes since I started working as a teen. I get a lot of them back because I make so little, but I understand that I pay a lot of money into a big pool, and other people decide how to best use that money for the good of all Americans. We have to have taxes, and we have to rely upon a redistribution of tax money. The issue (as I understand it) is where the bulk of the tax burden falls - upon the lower, middle, or upper class. The tax laws are written and re-written to favor some over others with the supposed purpose of benefiting as many Americans as possible.
What I hear people saying is that they are upset that more of their money will be taken away to pay for the needs of people who pay less. The reason (I think) is that it is assumed that people who make more money have worked harder and longer to make a lot of money, and deserve to keep it. While those who are making less money either haven't put in their time yet and will eventually get to the top, or that they are simply lazy and are "mooching" off of the system.
Again, as an American, this really bothers me, for several reasons - but I'll only offer one for now. In general, our country enjoys greater wealth and success than any other country in history. And yet the sentiment I hear expressed is that we want more, and we are worried that excessive luxuries we have and we think we deserve will be taken away. The result is an ever more apparent equity gap. Brian McLaren briefly describes this exponential increase of the equity gap in his book "Everything Must Change" - "If you take the top 20% of [U.S.] wage-earners and compare them to the bottom 20%, the ratio jumped from 18:1 in 1990 to 24:1 in 2000." (pg. 234) The statistics are even more sickening when considered on a global scale.
The more I consider the statements and policies of John McCain and others in his party, the more I am convinced that they are selfish, greed-driven, big-dollar-CEO-style politics that will only continue to make the rich insanely more rich, and hinder more people who are in genuine need from being able to receive assistance. In my opinion, this is fundamentally un-American.
Although this post is already (really) long, I have to address the same issue from a Christian standpoint. The mindset (again, as I understand it) that says, "I deserve to keep my riches and I am not interested in helping those below me who are in need," is clearly unbiblical. From the Hebrew laws of the Jubilee years (Lev. 25) to the first Christian communities sharing "everything in common...giving to anyone as he had need," the indisputably clear Christian attitude is showing mercy to the poor and in need by helping in real, practical ways. The minor prophets (often forgotten in modern Evangelicalism) repeatedly show God's heart for the poor and judgement against the unmerciful rich. For example, read Amos 5:11-24, "You trample on the poor and force him to give you grain. Therefore, though you have built stone mansions, you will not live in them...For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins..." (v. 11-12).
As I read and reflect on these verses, I am personally humbled and embarressed, and I am in awe of modern American Christianity. How have we forgotten God's heart for the poor, the needy, the sick, the stranger? (see Matt. 25) As Christians we should always be challenging our government to do more for the poor in our country, to close the equity gap, to bring greater prosperity to all people, even if that might mean a greater financial burden for those of us who can afford it.
There is clearly so much more that could be said about this - so what do you think? And by the way, if you made it to the end of this post, you will be glad to know that the above picture was taken today at the church just down the street from our house in Grove City. If you know me at all, you know how I love church signs!!!
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
New Emery!!
Tweet
"While Broken Hearts Prevail"
Oh, I love this band!! New EP - only a year since their last full release - if only I didn't just buy the new Copeland album.....we'll see how long I can resist this temptation -
"While Broken Hearts Prevail"Oh, I love this band!! New EP - only a year since their last full release - if only I didn't just buy the new Copeland album.....we'll see how long I can resist this temptation -
Call + Response
Tweet
I heard about this film through a few other blogs. It is about modern-day slavery of all kinds around the world. Looks really intense and powerful. After watching the trailer, I don't know if I really want to see the film, because I think it will be really disturbing on a deep level...I'm also also suspect of movies that have a lot of big name musicians and artists - I'm not sure why, but if it is "popular" or "hip" I wonder of it is for real.
But I do think it's important to support these types of independent, social justice cause, films. And I like and respect a lot of these artists, so we'll see.
Playing at the Lennox for a short period of time, starting Nov. 7th
I heard about this film through a few other blogs. It is about modern-day slavery of all kinds around the world. Looks really intense and powerful. After watching the trailer, I don't know if I really want to see the film, because I think it will be really disturbing on a deep level...I'm also also suspect of movies that have a lot of big name musicians and artists - I'm not sure why, but if it is "popular" or "hip" I wonder of it is for real.But I do think it's important to support these types of independent, social justice cause, films. And I like and respect a lot of these artists, so we'll see.
Playing at the Lennox for a short period of time, starting Nov. 7th
Monday, October 27, 2008
Everything Must Change "Hands" Video
Tweet
Back in May I went with some friends from the Emergent Cohort to the "Everything Must Change" tour in Goshen, Indiana. Brian McLaren was there, and I was really impressed with each of his presentations, his attitude, his demeanor, and the brief opportunities we had to have more intimate conversations.
Brian just posted the below video on his blog that includes pictures of the "hands" (see the theme with the book?) It's a good song by Tracy Howe, and my hand is in the video (the one that says, "listen. follow. love.") My friends who went to the conference: Are your hands in the video?
Brian just posted the below video on his blog that includes pictures of the "hands" (see the theme with the book?) It's a good song by Tracy Howe, and my hand is in the video (the one that says, "listen. follow. love.") My friends who went to the conference: Are your hands in the video?
What do you do with political emails?
Tweet
We get a lot of these type of political emails at school - some more "inaccurate" than others. By "a lot" I think I've received 3 over the past week. Depending on how wrong, inaccurate or offensive they are, I sometimes write back to the original author. But here are some of the questions/ideas I'm still wrestling with:
- Why are some Christians so adamant about political views? When it comes to politics, why can't we disagree? Why do we allow it to divide us so much? As I said in my previous post, this is one reason I appreciate and feel at home in Emergent groups, not only because many seem to share similar political views as myself, but because I know that in areas that I do differ, I am not ridiculed or judged for it. My friends in the cohort have talked about this recently here.
- How should I receive emails like this? I've come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as "just an email fwd." In casual conversation, I could drop a racial expletive and say, "It was just a joke" and expect others to let it slide. In the same way, I've decided it's not acceptable to electronically mail inaccurate slander against other humans and think that we should "just delete it." Email is one of the primary forms of communication in our world, and so what is written, fwd:, and replied to should be taken as if spoken word, and the senders should be held accountable (myself included). Of course, sometimes intentions and meaning can be misunderstood, but often the intentions are clear but are disregarded because it's online.
- How should I respond/reply to emails like this? When I asked Don Miller that question at the little coffeehouse conversation he hosted at Ohio Wesleyan a few weeks ago, he reminded me of the Matthew 18 principle. So I've tried to write back to the sender of the email. What is interesting is that the person (yes I am thinking of one in particular) usually doesn't respond...at all. I've tried to meet face-to-face. I've tried to call, set up an appointment, and it never works out. What should I do now? Take it to the "next level"? I guess we'll see.....
All of the above aside, this is why I'm most frustrated - the people who send the emails seem to think it is "no big deal," when to me it is a really big deal. For several reasons: If the email is factually incorrect (and perpetuating untruths), that's a big deal. But even more than that, I feel like these types of emails that circulate so regularly around conservative evangelical circles - whether they are in regards to politics, homosexuality, Islam, or another hot topic - it sends a message to me that "this" particular position is what every good evangelical Christian should believe. And if I disagree, then I am on the wrong side. And being on the wrong side of the conversation means I am wrong...plain and simple. There is no room for discussion, contemplation, or growth. Just the standard answers that everyone should agree upon.
Again, I appreciate the Emergent conversation, simply because it is a conversation with more than one side! As much criticism as it gets for refusing to take a stance on a lot of issues, I feel it is better than being forced to pretend that I agree with every position that is circulated through the email list.
We get a lot of these type of political emails at school - some more "inaccurate" than others. By "a lot" I think I've received 3 over the past week. Depending on how wrong, inaccurate or offensive they are, I sometimes write back to the original author. But here are some of the questions/ideas I'm still wrestling with:
- Why are some Christians so adamant about political views? When it comes to politics, why can't we disagree? Why do we allow it to divide us so much? As I said in my previous post, this is one reason I appreciate and feel at home in Emergent groups, not only because many seem to share similar political views as myself, but because I know that in areas that I do differ, I am not ridiculed or judged for it. My friends in the cohort have talked about this recently here.
- How should I receive emails like this? I've come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as "just an email fwd." In casual conversation, I could drop a racial expletive and say, "It was just a joke" and expect others to let it slide. In the same way, I've decided it's not acceptable to electronically mail inaccurate slander against other humans and think that we should "just delete it." Email is one of the primary forms of communication in our world, and so what is written, fwd:, and replied to should be taken as if spoken word, and the senders should be held accountable (myself included). Of course, sometimes intentions and meaning can be misunderstood, but often the intentions are clear but are disregarded because it's online.
- How should I respond/reply to emails like this? When I asked Don Miller that question at the little coffeehouse conversation he hosted at Ohio Wesleyan a few weeks ago, he reminded me of the Matthew 18 principle. So I've tried to write back to the sender of the email. What is interesting is that the person (yes I am thinking of one in particular) usually doesn't respond...at all. I've tried to meet face-to-face. I've tried to call, set up an appointment, and it never works out. What should I do now? Take it to the "next level"? I guess we'll see.....
All of the above aside, this is why I'm most frustrated - the people who send the emails seem to think it is "no big deal," when to me it is a really big deal. For several reasons: If the email is factually incorrect (and perpetuating untruths), that's a big deal. But even more than that, I feel like these types of emails that circulate so regularly around conservative evangelical circles - whether they are in regards to politics, homosexuality, Islam, or another hot topic - it sends a message to me that "this" particular position is what every good evangelical Christian should believe. And if I disagree, then I am on the wrong side. And being on the wrong side of the conversation means I am wrong...plain and simple. There is no room for discussion, contemplation, or growth. Just the standard answers that everyone should agree upon.
Again, I appreciate the Emergent conversation, simply because it is a conversation with more than one side! As much criticism as it gets for refusing to take a stance on a lot of issues, I feel it is better than being forced to pretend that I agree with every position that is circulated through the email list.
A good post on the upcoming election...
Tweet
...and all the drama that goes along with it.
Tim Keel shares his experience at an Obama rally. I think I would probably react in much the same way (feeling uncomfortable with chants and cheers like O-B-A-M-A). But I also really appreciate Keel's honesty, his explanations, and his perspective. He also links to a good post by Scot McKnight about voting and politics.
The election season has offered another reason why I feel more uncomfortable in conservative evangelical circles, and more comfortable with so-called "Emergents." Authors/bloggers like Keel, McKnight and Brian McLaren do a good job offering their views and opinions, and even trying to persuade people, without offending the other side or slandering the other candidate.
See also Don Miller's recent political stumping for Obama.
Tim Keel shares his experience at an Obama rally. I think I would probably react in much the same way (feeling uncomfortable with chants and cheers like O-B-A-M-A). But I also really appreciate Keel's honesty, his explanations, and his perspective. He also links to a good post by Scot McKnight about voting and politics.
The election season has offered another reason why I feel more uncomfortable in conservative evangelical circles, and more comfortable with so-called "Emergents." Authors/bloggers like Keel, McKnight and Brian McLaren do a good job offering their views and opinions, and even trying to persuade people, without offending the other side or slandering the other candidate.
See also Don Miller's recent political stumping for Obama.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
New Video
Tweet
I put this together to promote the Schools for Schools program that Grove City Christian School is involved with. Invisible Children visited our school about a month ago and showed a very compelling video about the needs in Uganda. It's a really cool program and shows the power of the multimedia age - how just a few guys can produce a video and get thousands of people excited for a worthy cause.
I would have liked to have done a lot more with this promo, but since all my Uganda footage is from internet files (low quality) and I didn't spend as much time as I would have liked on it. But, hopefully it still encourages some students to get involved.
I put this together to promote the Schools for Schools program that Grove City Christian School is involved with. Invisible Children visited our school about a month ago and showed a very compelling video about the needs in Uganda. It's a really cool program and shows the power of the multimedia age - how just a few guys can produce a video and get thousands of people excited for a worthy cause.
I would have liked to have done a lot more with this promo, but since all my Uganda footage is from internet files (low quality) and I didn't spend as much time as I would have liked on it. But, hopefully it still encourages some students to get involved.
Celebration of the Faithful...
Tweet
When I talk with friends and family about the Emergent Cohort that Kellye and I go to, they often ask what it is we "do" exactly. Well, tonight we had our once-a-month "Celebration of the Faithful" which is our little name for a worship gathering. I thought I would post just a short run-down of what the gathering looked like tonight (Nick and Jane designed and led):
We started by singing "Be Thou My Vision" (which is always so meaningful to me)
Zack read a selection from Thomas A' Kempis' "The Imitation of Christ"
We sang "Better is One Day"
Nick read another chapter from "The Imitation..."
We said/chanted the Lords Prayer together
We sang "From the Rising of the Sun" and took communion together
Silent Prayer - then closed in Group Prayer
Hung out and talked while we got dinner together
Ate a really good meal!
These meetings are very significant and meaningful to me for a few reasons - 1) They are native to our community. In other words, we choose and lead the meeting, the prayers, the singing, the readings, etc. No two meetings are ever the same, and are almost always led by someone different month to month. 2) They are small and have lots of chances to get to know people. 3) They always include communion and a meal, which both have important significance in Christian worship.
There is a lot more that I could say, but I just thought I'd give those of you who have asked about what "emergent" is all about a little glimpse into one of our meetings. Of course, the standard emergent disclaimer is appropriate: This is only one of our meetings and certainly doesn't mean that every (or any) other emergent cohort meets in this fashion.
When I talk with friends and family about the Emergent Cohort that Kellye and I go to, they often ask what it is we "do" exactly. Well, tonight we had our once-a-month "Celebration of the Faithful" which is our little name for a worship gathering. I thought I would post just a short run-down of what the gathering looked like tonight (Nick and Jane designed and led):
We started by singing "Be Thou My Vision" (which is always so meaningful to me)
Zack read a selection from Thomas A' Kempis' "The Imitation of Christ"
We sang "Better is One Day"
Nick read another chapter from "The Imitation..."
We said/chanted the Lords Prayer together
We sang "From the Rising of the Sun" and took communion together
Silent Prayer - then closed in Group Prayer
Hung out and talked while we got dinner together
Ate a really good meal!
These meetings are very significant and meaningful to me for a few reasons - 1) They are native to our community. In other words, we choose and lead the meeting, the prayers, the singing, the readings, etc. No two meetings are ever the same, and are almost always led by someone different month to month. 2) They are small and have lots of chances to get to know people. 3) They always include communion and a meal, which both have important significance in Christian worship.
There is a lot more that I could say, but I just thought I'd give those of you who have asked about what "emergent" is all about a little glimpse into one of our meetings. Of course, the standard emergent disclaimer is appropriate: This is only one of our meetings and certainly doesn't mean that every (or any) other emergent cohort meets in this fashion.
iLike Sidebar
Tweet
Just installed the iLike sidebar - seems to be the same idea as iTunes new Genius bar, except you can stream free music (full songs, not just previews - and videos) which is greating for checking out new artists, and you can connect to friends and what they are listening to - works seamlessly with iTunes as well - check it out
Just installed the iLike sidebar - seems to be the same idea as iTunes new Genius bar, except you can stream free music (full songs, not just previews - and videos) which is greating for checking out new artists, and you can connect to friends and what they are listening to - works seamlessly with iTunes as well - check it out
The Great Emergence
Tweet
I just started reading the book - Emergent Village is really pushing it - If you haven't heard anything about it, check out this website with videos and let me know what you think. If nothing else, watch them to see how great Phyllis Tickle is -
I just started reading the book - Emergent Village is really pushing it - If you haven't heard anything about it, check out this website with videos and let me know what you think. If nothing else, watch them to see how great Phyllis Tickle is -
Going Public
Tweet
I've thought about putting up a blog for a long time. I really enjoy reading other blogs around the web (I use "brief" which is a great add-on for Mozilla's Firefox). But I've debated on the usefulness and personal motivations for a long time. Since I just sent out an email to most everyone I know and who might possibly have some remote interest in reading a blog of mine, I'll let you in on my deliberations:
Pro: I think a blog can be a lot of fun - it's a great way to tell people about yourself and stay in touch with family and friends, beyond just "how are you? good." Of course, most blogs are about something, which leads me to...
Con: A lot of blogs feel like personal rants that don't really benefit anyone. I learn a lot from bloggers who write meaningful entries and share their opinions about issues in a thoughtful way, but it seems a lot of "amateur" blogs aren't really about anything but an individual's boring life....so -
Pro: A blog would force me to try to put down my thoughts in a way that make sense to other people and are somewhat meaningful and/or interesting to read. I enjoy writing a lot, and have more than once considered trying to write more often in some form or another (books, blogs, journals, etc.) So, hopefully this blog won't include just rants, but actually useful opinions, as well as a format to discuss and engage those opinions - but
Con: I can spend a lot of time obsessing about what I will/won't/should/n't write!! For example, I've probably spent 2-3 hours today writing and designing the blog, since I finally decided I would actually publish something and tell other people about it - which brings me to my final....
Pro: Blogging can be a form of discipline. I've read a few entries from bloggers I respect about how blogging can actually be a sort of spiritual discipline, an engagement with God and other people that can bring you closer to God. I tend to live my life inside of my head (as most of us do), playing out scenarios and examples, but never really doing anything. So, my hope is that by blogging, I will discipline myself in a few ways: To say and do what I believe - and to keep my life in a bit of balance and not obsess over an insignificant website.
I've thought about putting up a blog for a long time. I really enjoy reading other blogs around the web (I use "brief" which is a great add-on for Mozilla's Firefox). But I've debated on the usefulness and personal motivations for a long time. Since I just sent out an email to most everyone I know and who might possibly have some remote interest in reading a blog of mine, I'll let you in on my deliberations:
Pro: I think a blog can be a lot of fun - it's a great way to tell people about yourself and stay in touch with family and friends, beyond just "how are you? good." Of course, most blogs are about something, which leads me to...
Con: A lot of blogs feel like personal rants that don't really benefit anyone. I learn a lot from bloggers who write meaningful entries and share their opinions about issues in a thoughtful way, but it seems a lot of "amateur" blogs aren't really about anything but an individual's boring life....so -
Pro: A blog would force me to try to put down my thoughts in a way that make sense to other people and are somewhat meaningful and/or interesting to read. I enjoy writing a lot, and have more than once considered trying to write more often in some form or another (books, blogs, journals, etc.) So, hopefully this blog won't include just rants, but actually useful opinions, as well as a format to discuss and engage those opinions - but
Con: I can spend a lot of time obsessing about what I will/won't/should/n't write!! For example, I've probably spent 2-3 hours today writing and designing the blog, since I finally decided I would actually publish something and tell other people about it - which brings me to my final....
Pro: Blogging can be a form of discipline. I've read a few entries from bloggers I respect about how blogging can actually be a sort of spiritual discipline, an engagement with God and other people that can bring you closer to God. I tend to live my life inside of my head (as most of us do), playing out scenarios and examples, but never really doing anything. So, my hope is that by blogging, I will discipline myself in a few ways: To say and do what I believe - and to keep my life in a bit of balance and not obsess over an insignificant website.
Currently Reading
Tweet
I just started two books and I'll probably be writing some thoughts about them in the upcoming weeks: "The Great Emergence" by Phyllis Tickle, which is highly touted by the entire Emergent Village community - and "Praying with the Church," a slightly older book (2006) by Scot McKnight, well-known blogger of Jesus Creed -
I just started two books and I'll probably be writing some thoughts about them in the upcoming weeks: "The Great Emergence" by Phyllis Tickle, which is highly touted by the entire Emergent Village community - and "Praying with the Church," a slightly older book (2006) by Scot McKnight, well-known blogger of Jesus Creed -
Courting Evangelicals
Tweet
NPR had two reports on the "evangelical vote" this past week, Thurs. & Fri. Find them here and here. If you didn't catch them on the radio and you are an evangelical voter, take a listen - they are very interesting. Some thoughts I had:
After listening to the report on John McCain, I was really frustrated for a few reasons.
1) I felt like my vote was just an object to be won over. The phrase "courting evangelicals" feels so offensive to me. I get the very strong impression that McCain and other Republicans figure out what they need to say, how to say, and when and who to say it to so that evangelical Christians will vote for him. It feels a lot like a horny teenager telling his girlfriend she is the prettiest girl in school so she'll sleep with him - then he breaks up with her. This is how I feel about G.W.Bush right now. He said all the right stuff to get me to vote for him - pro-life, pro-family, finish the war, protect embryonic stem cells, go Jesus! And then his administration is so very un-Christ-like it makes my stomach churn.
2) How can evangelicals be so dumb? The McCain report was laughable in uncovering his two-sidedness. Direct quotes from 8 years ago in his campaign against Bush in which McCain was unwilling to "pander to the outer reaches" of religious extremism - and he mentions Jerry Falwell by name! Quotes from James Dobson saying he would "never" vote for McCain - the evangelical attitude toward McCain was that he did not hold the same values at all. And then one appearance in a church with Rick Warren where McCain states "Life begins at conception" (whatever the hell that means for legislation or actually providing social programs to care for young mothers? uh.....???) Then McCain chooses Sarah Palin for his running mate, and she is staunchly pro-life, and so all the evangelicals are back on board. Now the conservative Christians are confident that McCain is the right man to run the country. How did we so easily forget what he said 8 years ago? This is why I feel insulted, embarrassed and ashamed to even be slightly connected to the evangelical camp (when it comes to politics especially).
Regarding the Obama report - I didn't actually hear it in the car, where I usually listen to NPR and have more time to think and reflect, so I don't have as much to say. Except that I get the sense that Obama's faith is much more genuine. I know that is a judgment call I can't really make, but when he says, "My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won't be fulfilling God's will unless I go out and do the Lord's work," it sounds like the man is speaking with conviction about what he believes, not just what he thinks will get him the vote. I appreciate that he was willing to speak honestly to Rick Warren and answer the same question about when life begins by admitting it's a tough question.
Overall, the reason I appreciate (and have already voted for) Obama over McCain is that I don't feel like he is insulting my intelligence or my faith, but rather he is someone who genuinely holds to the same worldview that I do.
Of course, he could just be a better politician than McCain.
NPR had two reports on the "evangelical vote" this past week, Thurs. & Fri. Find them here and here. If you didn't catch them on the radio and you are an evangelical voter, take a listen - they are very interesting. Some thoughts I had:After listening to the report on John McCain, I was really frustrated for a few reasons.
1) I felt like my vote was just an object to be won over. The phrase "courting evangelicals" feels so offensive to me. I get the very strong impression that McCain and other Republicans figure out what they need to say, how to say, and when and who to say it to so that evangelical Christians will vote for him. It feels a lot like a horny teenager telling his girlfriend she is the prettiest girl in school so she'll sleep with him - then he breaks up with her. This is how I feel about G.W.Bush right now. He said all the right stuff to get me to vote for him - pro-life, pro-family, finish the war, protect embryonic stem cells, go Jesus! And then his administration is so very un-Christ-like it makes my stomach churn.
2) How can evangelicals be so dumb? The McCain report was laughable in uncovering his two-sidedness. Direct quotes from 8 years ago in his campaign against Bush in which McCain was unwilling to "pander to the outer reaches" of religious extremism - and he mentions Jerry Falwell by name! Quotes from James Dobson saying he would "never" vote for McCain - the evangelical attitude toward McCain was that he did not hold the same values at all. And then one appearance in a church with Rick Warren where McCain states "Life begins at conception" (whatever the hell that means for legislation or actually providing social programs to care for young mothers? uh.....???) Then McCain chooses Sarah Palin for his running mate, and she is staunchly pro-life, and so all the evangelicals are back on board. Now the conservative Christians are confident that McCain is the right man to run the country. How did we so easily forget what he said 8 years ago? This is why I feel insulted, embarrassed and ashamed to even be slightly connected to the evangelical camp (when it comes to politics especially).
Regarding the Obama report - I didn't actually hear it in the car, where I usually listen to NPR and have more time to think and reflect, so I don't have as much to say. Except that I get the sense that Obama's faith is much more genuine. I know that is a judgment call I can't really make, but when he says, "My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won't be fulfilling God's will unless I go out and do the Lord's work," it sounds like the man is speaking with conviction about what he believes, not just what he thinks will get him the vote. I appreciate that he was willing to speak honestly to Rick Warren and answer the same question about when life begins by admitting it's a tough question.
Overall, the reason I appreciate (and have already voted for) Obama over McCain is that I don't feel like he is insulting my intelligence or my faith, but rather he is someone who genuinely holds to the same worldview that I do.
Of course, he could just be a better politician than McCain.
Technology and Faith
Tweet
How does Christian faith change within a life infused with technology? The internet, cell phones, web pages, blogs, iChat, etc. Does Christian life and practice simply exist alongside these changes in our everyday lifestyle, or will Christians find new ways to express and practice our faith by using technology?
I've been mulling over those questions, or something to that effect, for a few weeks now. Obviously blogs are one of the most common ways that Christians have found to express their faith via technology. But I feel like it is more like writing about or talking about faith and religion that actually practicing it. PowerPoint presentations in church services, Christian worship playlists on the iPod, podcasting sermons, webcasting conferences - these are all more what I think are ways that we can actually practice our spirituality through technology.
The term or phrase I've been thinking about is techno-mysticism. Technology and mystical spirituality, by which I mean how we actually put physical actions to the everyday expression of spiritual life - or in other words, practicing the spiritual disciplines. Kneeling for prayer, singing songs of praise, fasting and meditating would all be things I consider examples of non-technology mystical practices. But how might these actions change by using the power of the internet - its amazing resources and widespread availablity?
One idea that I've tossed around with some friends but hasn't yet come to fruition is practicing fixed hour prayer via video conferencing (iChat, or some other program). I've read and been intrgued by fixed hour prayer for almost a year now, but I don't live in a close community. My community of friends and family is spread out over a large city, but we are tied together through the internet. My community is all online. So can we practice prayer together through the internet? Actualy together, not just posting on a blog at different times?
One more quick example: Time had a article post today about online confession - here. And honestly, I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I think this rasies the question we have to consider: Is it always appropriate and "better" to move mystical/spiritual practices toward greater use of technology. The Protestant church has long ago abandoned regular, meaningful, private and/or public confession. Even in liturgical communities that recite a prayer of confession every week, I'm not sure there is a general understanding of confessing sins and receiving forgiveness as a spiritual discipline. So in the sense that online confession brings more people back to the practice, it could be good. But in my mind, confession that is anonymous and impersonal is essentially changed into something other than the Christian discipline of confessing sins to one another and receiving forgiveness.
How does Christian faith change within a life infused with technology? The internet, cell phones, web pages, blogs, iChat, etc. Does Christian life and practice simply exist alongside these changes in our everyday lifestyle, or will Christians find new ways to express and practice our faith by using technology?
I've been mulling over those questions, or something to that effect, for a few weeks now. Obviously blogs are one of the most common ways that Christians have found to express their faith via technology. But I feel like it is more like writing about or talking about faith and religion that actually practicing it. PowerPoint presentations in church services, Christian worship playlists on the iPod, podcasting sermons, webcasting conferences - these are all more what I think are ways that we can actually practice our spirituality through technology.
The term or phrase I've been thinking about is techno-mysticism. Technology and mystical spirituality, by which I mean how we actually put physical actions to the everyday expression of spiritual life - or in other words, practicing the spiritual disciplines. Kneeling for prayer, singing songs of praise, fasting and meditating would all be things I consider examples of non-technology mystical practices. But how might these actions change by using the power of the internet - its amazing resources and widespread availablity?
One idea that I've tossed around with some friends but hasn't yet come to fruition is practicing fixed hour prayer via video conferencing (iChat, or some other program). I've read and been intrgued by fixed hour prayer for almost a year now, but I don't live in a close community. My community of friends and family is spread out over a large city, but we are tied together through the internet. My community is all online. So can we practice prayer together through the internet? Actualy together, not just posting on a blog at different times?
One more quick example: Time had a article post today about online confession - here. And honestly, I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I think this rasies the question we have to consider: Is it always appropriate and "better" to move mystical/spiritual practices toward greater use of technology. The Protestant church has long ago abandoned regular, meaningful, private and/or public confession. Even in liturgical communities that recite a prayer of confession every week, I'm not sure there is a general understanding of confessing sins and receiving forgiveness as a spiritual discipline. So in the sense that online confession brings more people back to the practice, it could be good. But in my mind, confession that is anonymous and impersonal is essentially changed into something other than the Christian discipline of confessing sins to one another and receiving forgiveness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)