slippery slope (2)

Slippery slopes seem to be of much concern in the Christian community. Here I'm giving the usual idea a twist... suggesting that it's a problem for Christians because they would subsequently need to learn how to love more people.

For the record, I do believe that as the body of Christ we need to figure out how to love people who are sex offenders. No idea how to do this, but they are possibly the least of the least of these...

What do you think? Whom have you found it a challenge to love?

avoidable tragedy

This is avoidable.

That doesn't mean it will be avoided.

It really depends on all who attend St. Peas committing to following Jesus, loving one another, majoring on the mission statement of "love God and love your neighbour," loving others, being humble in our approach to Scripture, loving those who are not like me, valuing people over my own beliefs, striving to live in peace with one another, following Jesus....

Is this possible? Can we who follow Jesus live into the reality of whom he called us to be? Or perhaps I'm just naive....

---

This "extraordinary post" is in response to an "extraordinary meeting" which I unfortunately could not attend, at my real-life church, a meeting which was held "in camera" which means that no one is talking about it, a church which has a lot of good things going for it but is getting upset about the broader church denomination voting in favour of the option of same-sex blessings.

[quotes from Pohl]

I recently read Christine D. Pohl's book, Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition, and will be quoting from it in future posts as it ties in well with the themes of this site. Here's a summary of the book:

"Although hospitality was central to Christian identity and practice in earlier centuries, our generation knows little about its life-giving character. Over the past three hundred years, understandings of hospitality have shrunk to entertainment at home and to the hospitality industry's provision of service through hotels and restaurants. But for most of the history of the church, hospitality was central to the gospel and a crucial practical expression of care, relationship, and respect.This penetrating new work by Christine Pohl revisits the Christian foundations of welcoming strangers and explores the necessity, difficulty, and blessing of hospitality today. The book offers an original argument that traces the eclipse of this significant Christian practice, showing the initial centrality of hospitality and the importance of recovering it for contemporary life.Combining rich biblical and historical research with extensive interviewing of contemporary service communities -- the Catholic Worker, L'Abri,,L'Arche, Good Works, Annunciation House, St. John's Abbey, and others -- this book shows how understanding the key features of hospitality can better equip us to respond faithfully to contemporary needs and challenges." (book summary from Google books)

If you are interested in reading the book yourself, here’s the reference:
Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition
Christine D. Pohl, (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1999)

slippery slope (1)

Yes, this is cynical, but isn't it true that some people become worse after they become Christians? What's with that? If Jesus is all he's made out to be, shouldn't our lives be turned upside down when we decide to follow him?

Maybe the problem is that instead of following Jesus, we are following examples of western Christianity...

David Hayward has a great cartoon related to this:  "you were better before"

un

What do you think about that?

The 7Up ad, of course, used a twist on words to say that of all the colas you can find, something that was not a cola was better. And here is the suggestion that sometimes, a person who is not a christian makes a better christian than someone who is one.

Hmmm... perhaps some people who are christian in name are not christian in mind and action, and perhaps some people who are not christian in name are christian (viz., Christ-like) in their mind and action.

Not such a radical idea. Think of the parable of the two sons, where one said he would do something and didn't, and the other said he wouldn't do it but did. (Matthew 21:28-32). And at the end of that parable, Jesus says, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. ³² For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him."

[for the love of God: a conversation about the bible and homosexuality]

Darkwood Brew, a "groundbreaking interactive web television program and spiritual gathering that explores progressive/emerging Christian faith and values", is starting a series called "For the Love of God: A Conversation about the Bible and Homosexuality."

This six part series started on December 31, 2012 and ends on February 3rd, 2013. Episodes are typically one hour long, including introduction, music, social media moments, interview with a Skype guest, and discussion. You can watch them live online Sunday evenings, or watch the recorded episodes after the fact.

Guests include Bruce Van Blair. Dr. Jacq Lapsely, Dr. Jack Levision, Rev. James A Forbes, and others.

Want a little preview? Check out the trailers.

For the Love of God series homepage (this page will list direct links to episodes as they become available for online viewing; we will also list them below)

Pt 1: (Peter`s Kosher) Pickle (Bruce Van Blair, guest)
Pt 2: The Coherent and the Contingent (Jacq Lapsely)
Pt 3: Sodom and Gomorrah (Rev. Dr. James Forbes)
Pt 4: Romans 1, 2 and 3 (Dr. Jack Levison)
Pt 5: A New Twist on an Old Parable (Sue Fulton and Justin Lee)
Pt 6: The Greatest of These (Bishop Gene Robinson)

[alleluia]

Daniel Berrigan S.J., is a Catholic priest, peace activist, and poet. This story from his book, Love, love at the end ties in well with the themes of this site:

There was once a man who died, and rose again to life.

He had been a suburban man. He remembered trudging through the open fields, a Saturday in the country. Had he been struck by lightning? Had a bull charged him? He recalled a streak of horror coming through broken fences, crowned with daisies, demonic and bloodshot. His groin felt as though it had been ripped into by a scythe.

He stood up. No fields, no space, no landmarks. A city street. Cold. A musty doorway. His coat and face and hands covered with a dust of snow. Dazed and drunk, two legs under him like sticks of wood.

It was a city street, night, and infernal cold. The neon went off and on down the canyon, a bleary charade of eyes.

He shook like a dog, and took a few steps. The plate glass of a bar window drew him. He looked, and looked again. What was it, what face looked back? Black face? His mouth froze in a scream, his voice stuck in his throat. The neon winked him off and on, made and destroyed him,  the ugliest joke of all creation. A black face held him; it said like a bad joke, like a truthful ad; don't buy me. Danger. I'm poison. I don't beautify. Beware. No one recommends me, no family sings for me. Beware.

His hands went to his throat. A string of cheap beads. To his chest; two breasts. A whore's careless dress, a sack of anguish. A woman? Who died there? What arose there?

And then the neon took voice, the night erupted. A band of herald angels rose from the sewers, from the skies, sang this birth. "Welcome, sister, to a new skin. Welcome to the other side. Why, you're now two-thirds of all of us; black. The other half of us, woman. Black woman. What piety, what merits won this rebirth?" For country acres, for country matters, for wise polity, for good acts and good investments, this reward. For that I was hungry and you knew me not, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink. Welcome. Not to punishment, not to hell. To a new chance. To a new body, to the new city.

Now, at length, I love you. Now I choose you. Welcome, outcast, reject, welcome to cold and fear and exhaustion and the dead end of corrupt hope. I anoint you and summon you, I kiss you with the kiss of my lips. Arise my love, my dove, my beautiful one.

Love, love at the end by Daniel Berrigan, S.J. (pp. 23-24)

left behind

Yes, another rapture cartoon! (see previous cartoon) This one ties in with that idea that floats around that 144,000 will be left behind when the rapture happens, which ties in with another idea (perhaps completely untrue) that the Jehovah's Witnesses are the 144,000 faithful -- except that there are more than 144,000 JW's today and someone's got to decide who stays and who gets swept up in the rapture.

And wouldn't you know it, they conveniently decided to leave a minority group behind.

where's the rapture when you need it?

Growing up, the rapture was a big deal, especially in the Baptist churches which I frequented. Along with discussions about it, there were movies and comics giving scary previews of what it would be like. And yes, it was because of such stories (told by my best friend back then) that I first "gave my life to Jesus".

For the new millenium and with the end of the world rapidly approaching, here's a more recent twist on the rapture:

This cartoon was inspired by an ironic photo I saw online, where two gay men are wanting the rapture to happen now, in order to get rid of Christian protestors with their hateful signs and angry words:



Photo credit: Photo taken by "perfectionequalsoverrated" of her dad and step dad at LA Gay Pride. Original site of posting no longer online.

[mercy not sacrifice]

From Richard Beck's blog, a simple post called "Jesus in Microcosm" giving us two verses contrasting the way of sacrifice and holiness with the way of mercy:

Leviticus 13.45-46
Anyone with such a defiling disease must wear torn clothes, let their hair be unkempt, cover the lower part of their face and cry out, "Unclean! Unclean!" As long as they have the disease they remain unclean.

They must live alone; they must live outside the camp.

Matthew 8.2-3a
A man with leprosy came and knelt before him and said, “Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean.”

And Jesus reached out his hand and touched him.

(source)

Jesus could have just told a parable about lepers, or added another paragraph or two in the sermon on the mount:
"You have heard it said, 'Lepers must live outside of the camp,' but I tell you, live outside the camp with them!"

That would be pretty extreme. Due to the emphasis on purity and holiness,the people of Jesus' day would have had trouble living with lepers anywhere, especially the religious leaders. I might have trouble with that too, as I like a clean house with all the comforts. And invariably, it would be possible to 'live in the camp with them' while still keeping a distance.

But Jesus was talk and walk all in one. The life he lived showed us the better way. He reached his hand right through the rules to touch the man with leprosy.

What rules do we need to reach through to touch the lives of others? How can we embody Jesus' teaching that God desires mercy, not sacrifice?

treasures in heaven

Perhaps some followers of Jesus have transferred their materialism to heaven. Instead of owning many things and having full bank accounts here on earth, they strive to do good things so that they will have treasures in heaven.

I get the idea of building up treasures in heaven instead of down here where they rot and rust. But wouldn't it be enough just to be with our heavenly Father? And what if loving others didn't result in heavenly treasures?

Some people, like the third person here, have been given the message that they won't get in, that they might be excluded.

[does a conservative belief have to translate into hateful attitudes and behaviours?]

Over the past year the news has had various stories about evangelical pastors with conservative perspectives on same-sex relations who are saying hateful things. Even extreme hateful things like "all gay and lesbian people should be rounded up and put inside an area with an electric fence and left to starve". And there are christians who you don't hear about, who snub their gay colleague or speak badly about their lesbian neighbours, or kick out their gay teenager. Granted, there are many pastors who are loving — but we don't hear much about them on the media.

Perhaps you are a christian who has a conservative or traditional view about homosexuality, yet you don't want to be mean and hateful to other people. Do you have to be? Does having a traditional or conservative view about same-sex relations have to go hand-in-hand with hating gay and lesbian people? Or is it possible to love others and be respectful of differences?

Wendy Gritter discusses this question in "A Study in Contrasts: how those with traditional views can speak publicly about homosexuality." The post offers two specific examples of people with traditional views of marriage: Dr. Richard Mouw who is the President of Fuller Seminary, and Kirk Cameron in an interview with Piers Morgan.  The specific context here is speaking in public about one's views, but the lessons can be applied when speaking and interacting individually as well. Wendy examines the ways in which they communicate and the attitudes which exist behind the words they spoke.

I did not listen to the Kirk Cameron interview, as I've heard enough similar things. But in light of Christian colleges and universities dealing with the question of same-sex relations, I did listen to the first 25 minutes of Dr. Mouw's address to the Fuller community, and while we have different theological perspectives, I respect the attitude of love, humility and generosity he showed as brought out in what he shared about conversations and interactions he has had with those who are part of a sexual minority.

What do you think? Does having a traditional or conservative view on homosexuality oblige a person to be hateful?

How can a person hold certain beliefs and yet act civilly – no, more than that – Christianly toward those who have different beliefs or who have taken a different path in life?

---

Learn more by reading "A Study in Contrasts: how those with traditional views can speak publicly about homosexuality" and watching the video clips.

two questions

Two questions, each with strange answer choices.

The first question relates to the reality that some people who are not of the Christian faith, find christians to be irrelevant and outdated; others find christians to be hateful and undesirable. So it's really a question about the role we who follow Jesus play in the world. Are we full of love and grace? Are we salt and light? Or are we divisive and hateful? Does the world need christians and if so, why?

The second questions relates to the reality that some straight christians do not believe that a person can be gay and christian, others do not want anything to do with gay Christians, and in any case, few can see anything good coming out of gay and lesbian people being part of the church. Are we not all God's children? How can we say "we don't need that group" or "we can do without her"?

What answers will you choose?

what I wish our churches taught us...

From reactive to proactive. Where does your church land on this scale? When it comes to controversial matters like abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, and hell, many tend to be reactive, which means most of the time they ignore such matters. And then when there’s a pressing reason like proposed changes to legislation, an adult club renting the building next door, or a Rob Bell asking questions about heaven and hell, they marshal their resources, preach sermons, picket and boycott, and tweet tweets which they sometimes later regret.

A current example of this is the response churches are giving to the legalization of same-sex marriage in the U.S. or the granting of same-sex blessings in Canada, where gay marriage is already legal.

Take my church, for example.

 At its recent meeting, our diocese held a vote to allow the bishop to give permission to priests who want to provide a blessing to same-sex couples who are in civil marriages. To say it another way, if a legally married same-sex couple asks the priest to give them a blessing, the priest must first ask for the bishop’s permission. Note that this resolution does not oblige any priests to provide such blessings; it simply gives the bishop permission to say “yes” if a priest asks. Now, the church we attend officially has a conservative view on marriage and was not pleased that the vote passed, in fact by a significant margin. In response to this, the leadership discussed the matter at the church’s semi-annual meeting, and will have a task group consider what response to make.

They also discussed it with the youth. And when our children came home from a youth day, one of them expressed that they didn’t know why the church was making such a big deal about blessing people who love each other when there’s more important things like KONY2012 happening in the world.

Some people might suggest that the leadership needs to do a better job of explaining how this really is a significant issue, and that the church should have been proactive in teaching its beliefs more clearly before a resolution like this one came up.

I would suggest that there’s a bigger picture that’s being missed here. And while it involves being proactive, it’s not about clarifying “what’s right and what’s wrong” before it becomes critical. It’s about perspective, respect for others, and God’s heart for people.

Here are four things that I wish pastors and others in church  leadership were teaching, with some recommendations for each point:


1.  The reality that God loves gay and lesbian people

Of course we are told in church that God loves everyone. When said generally like this, it is easier to forget this reality when we encounter people we don’t like or who are different from us. But when it is said with a specific people group in mind, it has more impact and is harder to ignore.

• State clearly that God loves lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Repeat on a regular basis.
• Affirm that Jesus gave his life for gay people and straight people and transgender people and everyone else.
• Emphasize that loving our neighbours includes loving LGBT neighbours, relatives, and colleagues. Give a similar emphasis to other particular neighbours depending on current events, your city or neighbourhood, etc. For example, emphasizing God’s love for Muslim neighbours would be particularly helpful after 9/11. The goal is not to single out a people group, but to emphasize God’s love for people whom we might find it easier to ignore or hate.

Related to this is the concept that the self of the other person matters more than my truth. As Miroslav Volf says, “I may not sacrifice the other at the altar of my truth. Jesus, who claimed to be the Truth, refused to use violence to ‘persuade’ those who did not recognize his truth.” (Exclusion and Embrace, page 272).

nothing nice to say

I'm sure my mother told me this in my childhood too, as the saying is definitely sunk deep into my brain. However, a reading of some of the cartoons on this blog might lead some to suspect that it hasn't sunk deep enough....

Then again, Ezekiel and the other prophets regularly said things which aren't nice. So why can't a regular guy like me, especially when it's for the purpose of provoking thinking about our attitudes and actions.

The balance? As Jamie Arpin-Ricci says, "The prophet rebuke must always point to the redemptive possibility." That's the challenge for me too, in writing this blog.