 |
 |
|
Wednesday, 31 March 2010 11:04 |
|
Is it just me or does the phrase “Christian Milita” feel icky, slimy, and just wrong? The term has been in the news lately. Don’t you just love all the publicity about Christians lately! The FBI has arrested members of a “Christian Milita” who wanted to kill a cop and then bomb his funeral in order usher in a religious civil war.
I confess I have no clue what Bible verses or theology they are using to make their case. I can make the case, as the church has for centuries, about the need for Christians to defend their county. (There is, or course, a secondary but legitimate view that a Christian cannot ever bear arms and remain faithful to the Gospel.) But even if Christians have the right to defend themselves, there are strict limits about how one goes about such a task. The idea of a just war originated within the church as a way to limit the destruction of the war itself. For example,. Civilians were not ever to be considered targets. (Did you know that in the Battle of Gettysburg in which there were 50,000 American Casualties, there was only one civilian?) Revenge and reparations were limited. The idea was defense not offense. Obviously, nations and Christians have not followed these rules consistently, and certainly not in modern times.
But nowhere do I find the idea of a Christian militia whose purpose is to start a national religious crusade that leads to the apocalypse. I am not sure Jesus needs military force to defend him. Didn’t Jesus say he could have an army of angels to defend him but he chose not to call upon them. He gave himself up for violence to be done to him instead of using violence to defend himself. His witness is that love for others is a greater force than armed force. His witness is that while he was dying on the cross, he forgave those who nailed him to the cross. He was not forgiving newbie recruits. These would have been career soldiers who had performed hundreds of executions. Their hearts might have even been stone cold or even dead. So he forgives before he dies. So if he doesn’t need the angels why do we think he needs a militia? Maybe militias say more about us and our fears than about Jesus? And if put our trust in the Lord, why do we need to have militias? Just wondering…… |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, 18 March 2010 07:20 |
|
I find it particularly ironic that the Texas school board has changed history when they have no idea how history actually works.
In case you are not following the story, the Texas school board votes line by line on the textbooks the kids use. The very conservative majority has accepted language that enhances the role of American Founding Fathers as Christian, and de- emphasizes the role of people like Thomas Jefferson.
They think that if they revise history to fit the story they want to tell that they will defend and protect their faith, their country and their way of life. In the long run, such is rarely the case. The old phrase history is written by the victors—or in this case the elected majority—is only half true. What really happens is that the history left out goes underground.
When the Communists took over Poland after world war two, everything Catholic and Polish was banned and outlawed. Violators’ were jailed or shot. The church moved underground. They taught both the faith and the polish identity. And it was from this underground history that communism was toppled in the 1980’s.
In our own country, the white church in the early 1800’s taught that slavery was a god ordained necessity. Sunday morning church was full of sermons defending slavery as an act of goodness and benefit. (I.e. without our kind benevolence, these poor black would be starving in Africa.) But on Sunday evenings, in secret meeting and campfires, the black folk herd different gospel—God was on the side of the slaves, and one day would set them free. Or we could ask our Jewish brothers and sisters who kept their stories and traditions alive for 1900 years while other groups, including Christians, oppressed them and sought to destroy them. The true history cannot be extinguished by rewriting the history books.
And here is the second irony. By driving the true history underground, you weaken the thing you sought to protect. If the true history can only be taught and remembered in subversive ways, the very telling of that history undermines the structures and the culture that teaches the half history. Sooner or later, and often later, the truth and untold stories do come out, and the effects are destructive, especially to those rewrote the history.
Let me offer another history lesson. In the 3nd century BC there were two powers in the Mediterranean. Greece and Rome. The Greeks sent a general named Pyrrhus to Italy to wage war. He was great. He won every battle against the Romans. But he never had enough army and supplies to take advantage of the victory. He ended up losing the war even though he won every battle. The cost of winning was too high. From his sad tale, we get the idea of a pyrrhic victory; you win, but the very act of winning is so costly that you cannot achieve your goal.
I fear Christians are gaining pyrrhic victories. We are in battle mode with our brothers and sisters in the faith. We make different religious parties into enemies. We rewrite the school text books. We want to protect freedom but don’t extend freedom to all persons. We seek to win and have victories so that that we can control the outcomes. How does this help the faith?
One startling statistic shared by Diana butler Bass is that for people aged 16-29, the most common words associated with Christianity are: anti gay, bigoted, hypocritical. 84% of people 16-29 agree that Christians are all three! So what if we change the textbooks to reflect Christian ideals that young people are already declaring as irrelevant at best and destructive at worst. How does this help build faith? We are adding to the list of reasons why Christian is a bad name and a bad thing. Are we not undermining the very thing we are seeking to guard? We are becoming pyrrhic Christians.
The way to grow the faith is to tell the truth. Gee, didn’t Jesus himself say that the truth will set us free, and that he himself is Truth. So here’s the truth. Some of the founding fathers were Christians. Most of the founding fathers were deists. They believed in a God who was creator, and then left the universe alone. In particular the deists were reacting to the idea that God controlled everything.
In a third irony, much of the constitution was written not to guarantee the rights of religion but to prevent religion from taking away the individual rights of persons. The founding fathers were deeply concerned that Europe had just finished 200 years of religious wars, and wanted to make sure we avoided them. Does anyone else see the connection between the school board editing history texts and the Taliban controlling knowledge? We are now doing in the name of defending faith and country the very thing the founding fathers were afraid might happen.
My concern is for the Christian faith. Churches of both liberal and conservative persuasion are locked in a battle mode. We are against things, parties, platforms, people, policies, etc that are country to our own. We want to win so we can control. We want the power to reshape and dominate. But we are doing so at our own peril. We are losing both our moral authority and our faith witness. Maybe its time to stop being in battle mode.
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, 05 March 2010 08:49 |
|
We had our skylight replaced. The old skylight was in the family room. It leaked. Not on us. Or even in the house. But water had leaked in-between two layers of the plastic. Since it hasn't been warm enough to evaporate the water, green and brown algae started growing. Yuck! It looked so attractive. Personally, I thought the green algae matched the green in the couch, but it was still disgusting to look up and see algae growing.
So we replaced the skylight. The skylight itself was old, faded, and actually had a crack in it. The new skylight is double-paned glass. You can actually see out of it. the new skylight also changed the room. The shade of light is different. Its softer but more clear. The whole room is lighter.
I think this is a perfect image for all the different religions. We all have different shades of light. Each one makes the room look different. Each one has a different shade of coloring that sees the Divine differently.
This image is powerful for me because it allows for there to be truth in every religion without denying the truth in your faith, and by not watering down the truth in your own faith. Too often people try to honor the truth in other religions by denying the core differences. The common expression is that all roads lead to God. But doesn't the road you take make a fundamental difference in the journey and the God you meet at the end?
Now we can stop arguing over who has the light and who does not have the light. We can start seeing how our light and their light changes the room, and makes a difference in the world.
And we can move onto the real issue; all those folks who have no skylights for their souls. |
|
|
|
|
Sunday, 21 February 2010 07:34 |
|
I like Elton John’s music. So I have largely ignored his “loud” antics. But he got my attention recently by declaring that Jesus was gay.
For the record, there is absolutely no biblical reference to even hint at Jesus sexual identity. The reason is simple; biblical writers had no concept of sexual identity. Sex was a choice and an action. The biblical writers never speak of any form of sexual identity. This is one of the reasons the modern debate is so difficult to resolve; those being faithful to the bible can say “Here in this verse homosexuality is forbidden.” And those who desire to be faithful to their experience of God say “But that verse refers to persons who make moral choices to engage in homosexual sex, not those who are gay by nature.” Both are correct.
Complicating things even more, we never see most of Jesus life. The Gospels tell only the story of his public life—which he begins around thirty. (Note: In those days 30 was not young, but retirement age! Think 60 today.) And they only told stories that talked about Jesus ministry. Jesus himself never speaks about his sexaulity, intimate relationships, or sex at all.
So some fiction writers have suggested that Jesus got married and had kids. After all, everyone else in society got married at 10, 11, or 12. (Most people were dead by 40!) However, the absence of information cannot be construed as positive proof or confirmation for any theory. So its possible he might have had a wife and kids or gone to Palm Desert for Spring Break or not been celibate or even gay. We will never know and cannot prove any such position.
Sir Elton John may or may not know any of this. Reading the text of his whole statement, Elton is talking about the character of Jesus. He says Jesus is loving and kind and non violent. In Elton’s mind this fits the pattern of what gay persons embody, hence Jesus must be gay. I am truly sorry that Elton thinks that only gay persons are loving and kind and non violent. I am also sure that there are gay persons who are none of those things. What Elton is doing is what people have always done with Jesus—using his name to reinforce their own ideas.
I was intrigued that Sir Elton referred to Jesus as a gay lord. The media persons assume he meant lord in the English way—a leader, a position of authority and prestige. But we all know that the use of the word lord when applied to Jesus sometimes means Lord. Lord of our heart and Lord of our life. It becomes a faith statement, a witness of our trust in Christ. I hope and pray Elton used the word in this way, and that is some measure he has begun a deeper spiritual life.
|
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, 17 February 2010 10:49 |
|
He was 19. He ended his own life. We probably will never know exactly why. He may not have known for sure. He would probably be surprised that many people cared about his dying and wished he was still with us. Persons who commit suicide often feel as if they are carrying all their burdens themselves, and that they face the world alone. Sometimes they can’t even hear us when we tell them that they are loved. The weight of what they feel inside shapes their hearing.
There are churches that list suicide as a mortal sin. They view suicide as a selfish act—one chooses one’s own view of things instead of trusting others or God. I suppose from an objective view, they might have a point. But we can also view suicide as a way of healing. It’s a way to end the internal pain. It’s a way to seek release. It is a violent end, but it does end the internal violence.
Those who are left behind often look backwards. They want to make sense of it. They want to try and understand. Their hope is that by figuring out “why?”, they will find some consolation. I think this is the wrong approach. Rarely can we reconstruct our rationales to others—even when we are not in pain. I think the hope lies in looking forward. We need to ask the question “What happens next?”
He was 19. God had plans and hopes for his life. So did we. Now those are ended. But do we reject him because he ended his own life? Do we write him out of our lives? Do we stop the hurting by denying he ever lived? Don’t we deep down do the exact opposite? We hang to the good memories. We retell the stories that are in our heart. We find ways to honor his dying by changing how we live. Surely God will do nothing less.
God will welcome him home. God will greet him at Heaven’s front porch, and say “Come on in. I kept dinner warm for you. Its all your favorites. " Then, when the supper is over, maybe while sipping hot chocolate, they will talk. God will offer the words of healing and absolution, Maybe they will meet every evening for a while. Until the pain is gone. Then god will offer him some new adventure that will grow his soul, and give him back the life he could not hold on to while he lived with us.
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, 11 February 2010 12:52 |
|
This was too good to pass up. CNN is reporting that drug smugglers have been arrested in Texas. This is not unusual. But they were smuggling pot in pictures of Jesus Holy Smoke! This gives new meaning to the term Holy Rollers. The smugglers obviously did not know their Bible. They could have declared it was a Bible study aid—for the parable of the wheat and the weeds.
I am not surprised about the misuse of religious icons. After all, the cross is used as a piece of jewelry, or a tattoo, or even a sign of hatred. People misuse and abuse symbols all the time. The news story caught my attention not just for the innumerable puns and bad jokes, but I was intrigued by the artwork.
The artwork of Jesus being smuggled in was terrible. I am not sure exactly what Jesus might have looked like, but I am pretty sure he didn’t look how he was painted in the 1950’s. I am hoping the artwork was just camouflage. I really hope there was not a secondary market for the Jesus pictures. Frankly, I think the artwork was more religiously offensive than the pot smuggling. I hope no one is buying this stuff anymore.
I don’t have anything against religious artwork, unless its bad or tacky or worse. Christians have always tried to have a visual image of Christ—whether in painting or icons or chalk. I have seen pictures of Christ as Black, Korean, Native American, and even Female. Christ is always going to be bigger and deeper than our pictures of Christ. But some artists try to create a portrait of Jesus instead of a symbolic picture of Christ. Inevitability they paint Jesus to look like us. I think these pictures tell more about our religious values than they reveal God. I know the border patrol will mostly likely keep the artwork and burn the pot. I think they should add the artwork to the fire.
Peace
Pastor Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, 25 January 2010 08:05 |
|
I know what they were thinking. They wanted every American solider to know that they were cared about and prayed for no matter where they served. They wanted our soldiers to know that they were not alone.
But the way they expressed their thoughtfulness pushed them into the ranks of the theologically challenged and the symbolically clueless. I am speaking about the manufacturing company who inscribed Bible verses on their gun sights.
What were they thinking? The concept that there might be something wrong in having a Jesus quote on a sniper rifle never occurred to them. The idea that their Bible verse-inscribed gun sight might be interpreted as a religious act--Christians blessed for killing Muslims--never occurred to them either.
Now their sin--which they would no doubt say is not a sin--is one of not thinking critically about their actions. We are to love God with our heart and soul and mind and strength. We are very good with honoring God with our heart, but no so good in our thinking.
Unfortunately, their mistake is not even on my top ten list. One of the most offensive was twenty years ago when the U.S. Navy wanted to name one of their subs Corpus Christi. They were naming it for a city. It never occurred to them that there was something wrong having a nuclear sub with the ability to wipe out a billion people named "The Body of Christ."
I am not objecting to Bible verses imprinted on things. "In and Out" has verses imprinted on their cups! I don't object to anything in their place. What I think is wrong is not thinking theologically and symbolically about our actions. If we are to be Christ's witnesses, then we have to look at our actions as how they reflect upon Him. We need Jesus in our sight, not on our sights.
Peace
PM
|
|
|
|
|
Sunday, 17 January 2010 10:45 |
|
I think Pat Robertson is quickly becoming the most embarrassing member of our Christian family. He is like the distant family uncle who tells inappropriate stories that the rest of the family barely tolerates and has to constantly arrange damage control. I only wish the media would understand his position and stop giving him so much media attention.
His latest statement is that the Haiti earthquake was divine punishment for a pact the people of Haiti made in 1790. This is wrong in so many ways I had to respond.
First, his theology is terrible. The idea that God punishes people 200 years after the fact for something they had no control over or responsibility in making turns God into a Being that is neither loving nor kind nor merciful. Even when Cain killed Abel, and was banished for his evil deed, God still offered protection to Cain. Frankly, I would not want to worship a God that was so uncaring.
Second, the Biblical record is that God always cares for the poor and those who are mistreated by the system. The event to which Pat Robertson refers is the Haitian slave revolt in 1790’s. The revolt was started by a Haitian priest who said a blessing for the revolt. The Haitian religion is a blend of Roman Catholic and African rituals. It is often caricatured as demonic or voodoo. But if God is punishing them for such rituals, then God by default is on the side of the masters, thus embracing slavery. This goes against the very core of the Old Testament in which God frees the slaves as a demonstration of God’s caring.
Third, God is always on the side of those who suffer. Jesus dying on the cross was a witness of the degree to which God understand suffering. So, where is God in Haiti? God is with those who are dying under slabs of concrete. God is with those who are digging out love ones with their bare hands. God is with those who are sacrificing to come to the aid of those in great need. God is with the aid workers trying to figure out the best way to care. God is with all those who weep and grieve, and even those who have lost hope. God is even with those who have misguided theology. |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, 07 January 2010 13:53 |
|
Today is the last of the Christmas season—the 12th day. Today is the day when the Magi arrived to bring their gifts. Every gift we give at Christmas can trace its roots to the Magi’s gifts on Epiphany. They were gifts of allegiance, honor, and authority. They were symbolic gifts; gold for Jesus Kingdom, frankincense for his divinity, and myrrh for his burial. They were also political gifts—only nations really controlled gold in those days.
I have always wondered what happened to the gold. We may never know how much gold he received, but even one gold coin was real money. One gold talent was worth almost ten years of a persons working life.
There is a preacher in Arizona who is making headlines declaring that Jesus was in fact wealthy. The preacher is using this approach to justify extravagance. I think this misses the point. The Biblical principle is that blessings received become blessings shared. Accumulation is not the goal. The sharing of the blessing is the purpose. Wesley’s advice is very sound: Earn all you can. Save all you can. Give all you can.
I suspect the gold was used to fund Jesus ministry. After all, how did Jesus and the 12 disciples (not to mention their families) survive for three years with no time out for income? Some of the gold could have been spent hiding out from Herod in Egypt for three years or so.
But if we see the Magi’s gift as a spiritual teaching tool, there are two questions we need to pursue to go deeper in our faith walk. First, what are the gifts and/blessings that God has given you with the intent of those gifts to be shared and given away? Second, what are the gifts we are willing to give to the Christ Child as signs of our devotion and allegiance? |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, 08 December 2009 11:40 |
|
Yesterday I rushed to Vons to buy Hot Chocolate for my Advent class. You just can't teach a class during December without Hot Chocolate. So while i was shopping I noticed the store's background music. Usually I don't notice. I especially don't notice during the Christmas music. I have no idea who chooses the music but its usually bad. Most of the Christmas music seems performed by over the hill pop or rock stars who are past their prime, and need the sales of Christmas music to early some extra income. I mean really, how many versions of "Little Drummer Boy" do we need?
But Von's sunk to a new low. They were playing "Ghost-busters." Ghost busters! At Christmas! I would have asked them what they were thinking but clearly they weren't thinking. Its a terrible song--even when its not in the Christmas Season. There is absolutely nothing in the song that remotely even hints at Christmas. Truthfully, the only ghosts I remember associated with Christmas are the ones in Dickens's Christmas Carol. The ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future. i don't want these chased away by ghost busters.
So i have learned my Advent Lesson. I am not going whine about the lack of good Christmas background music anymore. The Christmas music may be bad, but now I have heard it worse. Lots worse. So let us pray for Christmas music. Little Drummer Boy anyone?
Merry Christmas
PM
|
|
|
