McLaren on Worship

I like what author Brian McLaren says about art, propaganda, and the worship industry in this video. I've been deeply involved in worship at several churches and I can relate to what Brian says.

"Static" - N.T. Wright meets MTV

If I had seen Ron Martoia's web site or seen a picture of him before I purchased his new book "Static", then I'm afraid I wouldn't have read it. I'm probably shallow for thinking that way, but I have to confess that I really dislike all things with glitz, glamour, vibrant colors, and slick presentations. I've always hated MTV. In my opinion, MTV killed rock music. I only listen to talk radio and don't listen to ANY music, other than the occasional ambient meditation CD, because I don't think any form of performance based music can exist today free from the greed and vanity of mass marketing. Now, in the place of music is one big stupid fashion and sexuality show with a faint presence of melody somewhere in the distant background. I like so much of what the Emergent conversation is doing to help educate the Evangelical community, but when I see a preacher with hair gel and a cool shirt or hear about a conference with "christian rock bands", flashy graphics, and disenfranchised video game playing twenty-somethings I immediately tune out and assume it is another Marc Driscoll or imitation rock-star wannabe.

Ok, I'm done bitching now...

I was wrong, this book is wonderful! I'm glad this book slipped past my overly critical (and often flawed) radar screen. By the time I realized who Ron Martoia was, I was already hooked by this book. I've made a commitment to try and read books from a variety of theological camps so I decided to give this book a chance. "Static" is very reminiscent of Brian Mclaren's "New Kind of Christian" using fictional conversations to model how traditional Christians might begin to have more robust theological discussions and potentially make shifts in their view of the world. The book is targeted at Evangelicals, but its intent is to introduce the type of biblical exegesis and critical thinking that is rare and even off-limits in many Evangelical settings. It does this without being critical of the Evangelical worldview and won't seem foreign to most traditional Christians. "Static" has the potential to make a huge impact much like Donald Miller's "Blue Like Jazz", which caught fire in the twenty-something Evangelical crowd a few years ago.

On a personal level, the book challenged me to rethink how I discuss theology with my many fundamentalist friends. I've had my fair share of run-ins with fundamentalists lately and after reading this book I really feel challenged to take a different approach. Martoia is still very much an Evangelical, but he isn't an idiot, a religious bigot, or someone that shuts down theological discussions immediately.

The most exciting revelation in this book is that Martoia summarized many of the ideas that Marcus Borg and Dominic Crossan have written about which reveal the Jesus of the Gospels as a contrast to the Roman imperial theology of Caesar as the divine savior of the world (he doesn't cite Borg/Crossan but the themes are consistent). This will be new for most of the readers of this book and he does a great job of introducing these concepts without asking Evangelicals to let go of their concepts of the divinity of Jesus or a theistic/interventionist view of God. I don't see eye to eye with Martoia's image of God but it didn't seem to bother me because he doesn't shut down other views as outside the realm of possibility. He does entertain the idea of rethinking afterlife but he doesn't throw out the concept. Instead, he suggests a restructuring of our priorites and a focus on the presence of the kingdom in our lives now rather than something that happens "only" after we die. That is a big step in the right direction and one that I'm excited to see discussed. It is yet to be seen if people can have this "both/and" approach and still be able to understand the radical political and social implications in the Bible's message and let this message effect their day to day lives, spending habits, and voting patterns. I'm willing to step back and see if this mixed message will be potent enough to make an impact without devolving back into a mentality of small minded charity instead of large scale systematic transformation. I hope it is possible.

The bottom line is that the work of N.T. Wright is beginning to have an impact in Evangelical circles. I don't agree with everything that comes from Mr. Wright, but I like what these 2nd generation manifestations of Wright's influence are beginning to say. It is a step in the right direction and I have to admit that his message stands a better chance of impacting the lives of traditional Christians than the voices of Borg, Crossan, and Spong who write for an entirely different audience within the mainline church and the more secular educational forums. I'm very encouraged by what this book says and I'm optimistic about its potential ability to bridge the gap between different Christian groups. You certainly can't judge a book by its cover and I'm humbled to admit I was too quick to make a judgement about this emerging prophetic voice.

Three Poisons

Tikkun is a wonderful cross cultural progressive faith magazine. One of its contributors is the well know progressive Rabbi Michael Lerner. This month it has an article about the Three poisons - greed, ill will, and delusion as they have been institutionalized in our society.

If the article seems a little weird at first for a non-buddhist, then please get through the intro and get to the guts. It is worth the effort and is something that you don't need to be a Buddhist in order to understand. The principle is universal and relevant for all of us. One of the most interesting points is how delusion is institutionalized in our society through the media organizations.

Each of us lives inside an individual bubble of delusions, which distorts our perceptions and expectations. Buddhist practitioners are familiar with this problem, yet we also dwell together within a much bigger bubble that largely determines how we collectively understand the world and ourselves. The institution most responsible for molding our collective sense of self is the media, which have become our “group nervous system.” Genuine democracy requires an independent and activist press, to expose abuse and discuss political issues. In the process of becoming mega-corporations, however, the major media have abandoned all but the pretence of objectivity.

Keith Olbermann is not holding anything back!

If you didn't watch this last night, then please check it out now.

The Story That Changed My Life

In his book "Why Christianity Must Change or Die", John Shelby Spong points out that Paul's letters do little to explain the meaning of Jesus, but are much more concerned with proclaiming Jesus through ecstatic proclamations. Then, Spong suggests that the Gospel writers take up the task of expanding Paul's work by crafting narratives around Paul's words about the importance of Jesus. He mentions the word "distorted" but he goes on later to describe that this word is not meant to devalue the work but only to frame it within context of the limitations of human language. These stories are no longer an obstacle for me. They come to life when I see them through this lens of creative story-telling woven together around important metaphorical truths.

The experience of Jesus clearly needed to be narrated. In these Gospel stories the Jesus experience would be explained, interpreted, and rationalized in terms of a first-century Jewish worldview. Inevitably, this meant that the Jesus experience would be distorted.

This point must be heard: the Gospels are first-century narrations based on first-century interpretations. Therefore they have never been other than that. We must read them today not to discover the literal truth about Jesus, but rather to be led into the Jesus experience they were seeking to convey. That experience always lies behind the distortions, which are inevitable since words are limited. If the Gospels are to be for us revelations of truth, we must enter these texts, go beneath the words, discover the experience that made the words necessary, and in this manner seek the meaning to which the words point. One must never identify the text with the revelation or the messenger with the message. That has been the major error in our two thousand years of Christian history. It is an insight that today is still feared and resisted. But let it be clearly stated, the Gospels are not in any sense holy, they are not accurate, and they are not to be confused with reality. They are rather beautiful portraits painted by first century Jewish artists, designed to point the reader toward that which is in fact holy, accurate, and real. The Gospels represent that stage in the development of the faith story in which ecstatic exclamation begins to be placed into narrative form.

I've always seen this process backwards because it appears that Paul was expanding the Gospel stories, but we know that isn't possible since his work came first. I guess the biblical ordering confused the issue. Paul uses bold statements about Jesus as the incarnation of the spirit, the need to be transformed through death, and becoming new creatures through resurrection. Then the Gospel writers gradually expanded on these truths to give us a better picture by crafting the stories about Jesus' virgin-birth, baptism and descending of God's spirit, death and resurrection, and ascension. All these stories contain elements of Paul's symbolic language illustrated in vibrant narrative form.

Iraq For Sale

I finally got to see the whole documentary. It was not a great film, but the information was very important. The best information may be in the bonus features that detail many of the attempts to pass oversight measures to monitor or limit Iraq spending fraud since the war started. The measures were all voted down and the voting records are displayed which fall very much along party lines. When the leaders of one party (and the leaders of the free world) all have millions in Halliburton stock options waiting to be cashed after they leave office (which can't come too soon), it is easy to imagine why the measures didn't pass and the war profiteers continue unchecked.

The Pope and Relativity

Can two people really hear the same story and come away with two different meanings? The answer is obviously, “Yes”. The images of Pope Benedict XVI arriving in Brazil highlight this fact of life. The more I think about this, the more I stop trying to fight the notion of relative interpretations based on different life experiences.

Nobody will argue that a central element of the Bible is social justice. We may disagree about its priority or application, but we will all agree that it is vital to the kingdom of God. Moses was passionate about Justice for his people, the prophets were passionate about ending injustice at the hands of their leaders, and Jesus was passionate about creating a kingdom with a strikingly different view of social status. What do you hear in a simple command to feed the poor? Could it depend on your level of poverty? That single statement to feed the poor intentionally conveys two completely different messages. On one hand, this command is a call to action for those that are blessed but on the other hand, it is a profound statement of hope for those that are in need. For some, that statement suggests sacrifice and for others it suggests the possibility that their suffering may have an end. It is clear that one statement can have two audiences and two targeted messages. The meaning is relative to your own experience.

For those people in need of justice, hope is their salvation. The despair that is often caused by people telling them their situation is a product of their own sin is one of the things that they need to be saved from. It should not be a surprise to anyone that Latin America is more responsive to the message of hope and a style of worship that reflects their own experience. Pope Benedicts oppostion to liberation theology hasn't played well with this audience, but by doing that he strengthens the forces that hold these people in bondage.

Jesus and Myth

One of the most important ideas that Marcus Borg has presented in his many books about the New Testament are his terms “Pre-Easter Jesus” and “Post-Easter Jesus”. I found this difficult to understand at first because I tried to force fit my own understanding of physical and supernatural into his terms. I wanted this to mean physical-Jesus vs. spiritual-Jesus. That was a mistake and it slowed my understanding of his writings. In addition, we should understand that these terms are not meant to create a competition between the pre and post Easter Jesus.

Here is a brief summary of how I now understand these valuable terms:

Pre-Easter Jesus - the historical man that walked the earth and may have even said some of the things mentioned in the gospels.

Post-Easter - The "legend" or the character in the gospel stories which we have all fallen in love with in our Christian walk. This is the Jesus that we Christians experience as we live out his vision and continue to tell the story and allow it to influence our lives.

The post-Easter Jesus is alive in our hearts and minds today, but because of that, our views of him are uniquely shaped by each heart and mind. The Jesus that lives in my heart is not shaped the same as the Jesus that lives in the heart of Pat Robertson. Comparing the four NT gospels reveals four different leading characters in their four different narratives (even more if we count non-canonical texts). Each character is a little different based on the perspective of each individual storyteller. That doesn't change who the pre-Easter Jesus was, but it does change our perspective because we only know about the pre-Easter Jesus through the post-Easter stories about him. Confusing the two would be like confusing Charlton Heston with Moses. The post-Easter stories are extremely valuable to us because it is through these stories that we come to know and experience Jesus.

Several people have asked lately: “Do you think the authors lied to us?” No, I don't think the storytellers lied. Does anybody ask if Homer lied about the battle of Troy in his epic poem "The Iliad"? Nobody would see that poem as either literal history or as lies. There is another, more obvious choice. Most believe there is some type of history behind such stories but the techniques used to tell the story are metaphor and myth so nobody takes them literally even if they do take them very seriously. Was there literally a Trojan horse or was that a myth meant to tell the readers that the Greeks won a battle by outsmarting their opponents? The answer seems obvious. Why would we expect Biblical myths to be any different? Did the young David really kill a giant? I don't think so, but I do believe that story is truthful. More than likely, it references a battle that was won by a small undermanned army over a much larger enemy army. The value is in the meaning of the myth, not the historical accuracy. Through that myth, we are told that even though Israel was smaller and less powerful, they were victorious over their enemies because God was on their side and they remained faithful. The myth is told to encourage faithfulness to God and the facts are irrelevant.

You might ask, why would anyone follow a myth? Only a modern western mind would think that calling a story mythical or metaphorical is an insult. Symbolism is actually a higher form of writing that elevates the story to “mythical proportions”. It is MORE than literal. It is “Truth PLUS” not “history MINUS”. When a writer takes the time to craft a myth then we know it's underlying truth must be extremely important. That goes for Pandora’s box as well as the prodigal son.

We may never know how much of our Jesus is myth and how much is history, but I say that it doesn’t matter. The important point is NOT to determine if it really happened that way. The important point is to understand why these people told the stories the way that they did. We should then look at the dramatic impact of lives that have embraced the story of Jesus and the vision this story presents. We should accept this man and these myths as our own vision and pattern for life. This treatment of Jesus also echoes that Easter is the definitive point where the life of Jesus ended and his powerful life changing story began. The story of Jesus was born on Easter and it is this mythical narrative about a historical man that saved my soul and can save the world. Metaphorically speaking, Jesus is the whole ball of wax!

A New Abraham and a New Earth

Real Live Preacher has published a great post about the problems with religious exclusivity. As always, his post is emotional and challenging. Please read the whole post. Here is a sample:

At some point don’t you start listening to the spiritual stories of other people and find the beauty and the common ground in them? At some point don’t you realize that our myths are delicate, like environments? The oldest ones are very fragile, and many have already been lost. At some point don’t you come to understand that these things are worth saving?

Is this Blasphemy?

A group of Atheists have launched a campaign to encourage people to make a video of themselves renouncing the Holy Spirit then posting the video on YouTube.com. I give them credit for creativity and passion and I even understand why they are upset with religion.

I find it hard to blame them for their reaction but I feel it is a lack of education about Christianity that leads them to their conclusions. What they are rejecting is a poor image of God that Christianity has suggested is the only possible image of God. I like Marcus Borg's response to atheism. He says, "Tell me about the God you don't believe in. I probably don't believe in that either".

It is unfortunate that Christianity has only given people 2 choices: A) believe the literal and absurd view of the supernatural or B) become an atheist. There are more than 2 choices in this debate.

Also, I think the makers of this challenge misunderstand blasphemy. Denying the literal existence of a literary metaphor is hardly “blasphemy”. Accepting the Holy Spirit is not something you do by speaking, it is something you do by living. The Holy Spirit is not a human being. It is a symbol that represents compassion and specifically the type of compassion that Jesus embodied which involves self sacrifice. To commit actual blasphemy against the Holy Spirit you would need to reject all compassionate behavior and feelings. In a sense, every time we reject an opportunity to be compassionate we commit blasphemy. These people need to do more than speak a phrase if their goal is blasphemy. A life of blasphemy is a life that rejects compassion as a transformational feature of humanity. For instance, I find it interesting that this group is holding a blood drive and seems to support very compassionate minded causes. Sincere blasphemy against the Holy Spirit would mean rejecting their own blood drive or maybe even abandoning their own children or doing something fundamentally against the idea of compassion. That might get you an "A+" for blasphemy. It seems if these people are willing to start a blood drive then they are already incarnating the spirit of Christ (i.e. they are being compassionate at their own expense).

I do feel like these types of campaigns could produce some valuable changes in religion. Maybe it will be a wake up call to Christianity, but more than likely it will lead to further polarization and conflict. I'm not sure what makes me more sad, the reaction of these Atheists or the Christian theology that created their reaction.

Courage

"Until we are ready to have the courage for peace that people have for war, nothing is going to change." - Dan Berrigan

Where have all the leaders gone?

I'm not a big fan of the Detroit auto industry. I'm outraged that I don't have the option of buying an electric car and I feel certain that people are dying in Iraq today simply because our government caved under pressure from lobbyists and rolled back the fuel efficiency standards that were put in place in the Carter administration. Had we continued with those CAFE standards since the late 70's then we would be energy independent today. That mandate called for the average passenger car fuel efficiency to be 48 MPG by 1995. What would that be worth to our economy and our lives? Oh! I forgot, Carter was an unpopular president that asked us to make a few sacrifices to help avoid disaster in the future. Thank God we "fixed" things. I would hate to have stuck with Carter's plans to be energy independent, have health care for all our citizens, saved billions wasted fighting a losing war on drugs, and created peace in the middle east through diplomacy. Being a great leader in tough times means resisting the urge to take the easy way out by saying what is popular. Instead of following Carter's plans, by making short term sacrifices to solve these long term problems, we turned our nation over to questionable leaders that decided to drive our nation into drastic debt with tax cuts and defense spending and then climb in bed with oil companies and the national powers that would end up attacking us on 9/11.

Despite my suspicion of the auto industry, I just picked up Lee Iacocca's new book and I was pleasantly surprised. He has always been known for being a straight shooter, but I wasn't expecting him to be a voice of prophetic critique of our current administration and a champion for change. I don't agree with everything, but like to hear diverse opinions and I'm really enjoying the book. He admits his mistake of supporting Bush in 2000, but was willing to correct that in 2004. Now he is very vocal and very prophetic. Here is what he has to say:

Had Enough?

Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course."

Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore. The President of the United States is given a free pass to ignore the Constitution, tap our phones, and lead us to war on a pack of lies. Congress responds to record deficits by passing a huge tax cut for the wealthy (thanks, but I don't need it). The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling in Iraq, the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving pom-poms instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of America my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. - Lee Iacocca

No place for pride

According to the teaching of the Buddha, in true love there is no place for pride. One of the biggest seeds of pride is our inability to listen. In the book “True Love”, Thich Nhat Hanh has this to say about the importance of deep listening:

"In everyday life, deep listening, attentive listening is a meditation. If you wish to maintain calm and living compassion within you, then deep listening will be possible
…
Through meditation, we can cultivate awareness and we can cultivate compassion, and that way we will be able to sit there and listen to the other. The other suffers as long as he is in need of someone to listen to him; and you – you are the person who can do it. "

This has many implications in our private relationships. However, as I’m writing this, I’m also listening to a political commentary on TV so I find it hard to ignore the public implications of this lesson. Pride manifests in our relationships as well as our public political polarization.

I’ve made several shifts in my political views. I am a conservative, turned Libertarian, and turned progressive. The truth is that I have been blessed by the conservative political shift in our federal government over my adult life. I’ve reaped financial rewards due to the massive defense budget (I started my IT career working for a government subcontractor). I’ve been blessed by lower tax rates, federal deficits, generous incentives for my businesses, manipulated interest rates, and billions in borrowed federal funds used to stimulate the economy during my career. I’ll never be drafted to fight in any of our nations selfish global police efforts and it seems that my government won’t even ask me to pick up the tab. I’ll be dead long before our horrible enviornmental policies will have a serious effect on my life and my faith is the accepted norm so it is very unlikely that my religious practice will ever be compromised. So why shouldn’t I continue to support the status quo? Why shouldn’t I want to keep things going in the same direction?

I’ve decided to accept the message of Jesus and that means I can’t place my own well being as my top priority. Followers of Jesus can’t ignore the fact that the status quo is setup to make certain people successful and many others are excluded from the opportunities. I have to listen to others and I have to give their concerns a higher priority than my own. More importantly I have to be political and that means I have to support the public implementation of Jesus' values. That isn’t an easy thing to do. Our political process tends to encourage us to support the policies that help our own case. I don't think true followers of Jesus can continue making those choices. Followers of Jesus have to think about the future, think about the “least of these” and listen to the people that rarely get a chance to speak. Faith starts with humility and humility demands listening. Thich Nhat Hanh was right, there is no place for pride in love. I think every person of faith must ask themselves the tough question - Who benefits the most from my own political positions? If the answer is myself, then I wonder if that is a position of faith or a position of convenience.

True Love by Thich Nhat Hanh

This is a great book for anyone curious about Zen practice, Buddhism, or anyone that wants to develop a more loving attitude. I do (just ask my wife!). It is really short but not lacking substance. Thich Nhat Hanh offers us a Buddhist view of love along with techniques for manifesting it in our daily lives. He explores the four key aspects of love as described in the Buddhist tradition: loving kindness, compassion, joy, and freedom. Thich Nhat Hanh explains that in order to love in a real way, we need to learn how to be fully present in our lives. He offers very practical techniques of meditation and conscious thought as a way of synchronizing the mind and the body and conditioning our selves for love.

Even reading the few pages of this book is guaranteed to change your perspective on love and cultivate a deeper motivation to employ it's transforming power in your life. If your life needs a little injection of love or you need to recapture the ability to love freely then read this book as soon as possible. The people around you will be blessed.

"Training is needed in order to love properly; and to be able to give happiness and joy, you must practice DEEP LOOKING directed toward the other person you love. Because if you do not understand this person, you cannot love properly. Understanding is the essence of love. If you cannot understand, you cannot love. That is the message of the Buddha." - Thich Nhat Hahn

New Blog Address....

If you haven't noticed yet, I changed my blog address.

Welcome to my new "Progression of Faith" located at http://www.faithprogression.com. It seems like my old blogger address will continue to work, so you won't have to update your links if you don't see fit.