A friend took me trout fishing yesterday. I had a great time and we caught a few fish but it was hard not to notice the sophistication. If I were a lesser man—which would be hard to imagine—I could probably write a pretty funny blog about all the sophistication that goes into fly fishing. But instead, I thought I’d write about how little sophistication goes into so much of religion these days.
I mean, of course, there’s a point at which you begin to fall over the edge. I am not exactly sure how much the average fly fisherman spends on his/her passion but it is clearly more than say the average worm fisherman. You’ve got the rod, the flies, the extra license and the exotic location… And these are the absolutes. But very quickly you need to be thinking about vests and waders and hats and shirts and sunglasses. You should probably be thinking about a guide and digital camera and maybe a surgeon to safely remove the hook should you happen to actually catch one of these precious things. That would be unlikely though. What is the average SAT score for a trout anyway? It’s gotta be higher than most NCAA athletes.
As off-putting as all the regalia might be for some people, I’m a little drawn to it. It's kinda nice to be reminded that the whole world is not made out of particle board and cheeseburgers. Of course, I don’t have the time nor means to fund a fly fishing addiction at this point in my life but I do like the fact that those who do seem to genuinely respect their pursuit. They take the fish, the process and themselves pretty darn seriously… O.K., maybe a little too seriously.
There was a day when Christianity was more like this. The buildings were gargantuan structures of mystery and wonder. The priests wore the finest linens. In some places, even the service was offered in an exotic language that only a few people even understood. So when someone came into the sanctuary, they would quickly understand that there was a grace about the place. Worshipers and adherents were reverent and respectful because that was nature of the world that they had now entered. The process might be elaborate and the learning curve a little extensive but too was part of the value.
Contrast this with the consumer-driven examples out there today. There is no longer any danger of asking too much of the worshippers and adherents, at least in these most modern expressions of Christianity. If anything, the Church has fallen over backward in its effort to strip-out anything that might come across as exotic or exclusive. For many Christian bodies, mystery has become more an enemy than an attraction. Whereas worshippers and adherents were once humbled to come before the presence of God, it would now seem that God has been humbled before the appetites of consumers. I think of Kurt Cobain’s timely assessment, “Here we are now, entertain us!”
Of course, we are never going back to the days when the service took place in a foreign language and the priest was the only person who understood what was going on--and for good reason… But at the same time, I hope that the Western Christianity can recover some of the elegance and respect that it has traded away in the name of reaching people.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
What's Funny
Last night I showed "Year One" to our Monday evening Bible study. It seemed fitting. I thought it would be fun to take a break and laugh together. Besides, we had just spent five months working through Genesis and had not yet decided on what we would study next.
I had been dragging my feet on watching the film. I had seen the previews so many times that when it actually released, I didn't even want to see it. The over-promotion just killed my interest. The bits they showed over and over in the previews just made the story seem slapstick (which of course it was). I wondered if I would even laugh. My second son, Jackson felt the same way. He avoided it in the theaters and still has not sat down to watch it. My elder son, Will, did see it. And he had told us both that it was "pretty good." The problem, he said, was that the film came out at the exact same time as "The Hangover." So what ended up happening was the critics went in for the raunchy Vegas film to the expense of what probably appeared to them as a tired story about cavemen. Oh, and "The Hangover" was rated R which is always a bit of an advantage. In comedy, pitching to the absolute lowest point is generally a sure win, although I did recently see an exception. "Miss March" is perhaps the most low-ball sexploitative comedy ever made and it is really not funny.
When I finally picked up the DVD for "Year One" last Friday at Blockbuster, I saw that Harold Ramis directed the film. That's all it took, really. I wonder why they wasted all that advertising money on redundant previews when all they really needed to do was leak a story stating that this film was directed by the same guy who gave us Caddyshack, Stripes and Groundhog Day. He also wrote Ghostbusters and was one of three writers responsible for Animal House. Here's a rule: If the guy who wrote Caddyshack is Jewish and he makes a film that essentially retells some of the more curious parts of the book of Genesis, go see it. "Year One" is not the best movie ever made but if you know anything about the book of Genesis, it will make you laugh... and probably think a little as well. Which brings me back to my initial statement and/or confession.
I showed this film to my Bible study... in my office... which is in the church. It was rated PG-13 so it certainly could have been worse but there were a few words and plenty of suggestive humor. I struggled with whether or not I should show it but I wanted us to see it together... especially because we had just finished reading the very stories that Ramis was having fun with. Being able to laugh about your own story is a pretty healthy thing to do. Being able to laugh at your own religion without cheapening it is a very healthy thing to do.
The fact is we are funny creatures. Life is a funny thing. Of course, it's not all funny. I actually had to close my eyes during the scene in which Cain kills his brother Able. But the fact that Ramis did not ignore this and was able to carry Cain's character forward and allow us to laugh a bit at him, to see that the line between the monsters and the people runs right down the middle of most of us... that seems like a pretty interesting thing.
Of course, in making the film, Ramis told a story that was not exactly accurate (Sodom somehow avoids the hellfire pelting that it receives in the older version) but I sense that those who know the story understand this. They understand that a film like this is going to show things in a different light. The point is not to re-educate us. It is to entertain us--to allow us to look at ourselves and our beliefs with a little merriment.
I had been dragging my feet on watching the film. I had seen the previews so many times that when it actually released, I didn't even want to see it. The over-promotion just killed my interest. The bits they showed over and over in the previews just made the story seem slapstick (which of course it was). I wondered if I would even laugh. My second son, Jackson felt the same way. He avoided it in the theaters and still has not sat down to watch it. My elder son, Will, did see it. And he had told us both that it was "pretty good." The problem, he said, was that the film came out at the exact same time as "The Hangover." So what ended up happening was the critics went in for the raunchy Vegas film to the expense of what probably appeared to them as a tired story about cavemen. Oh, and "The Hangover" was rated R which is always a bit of an advantage. In comedy, pitching to the absolute lowest point is generally a sure win, although I did recently see an exception. "Miss March" is perhaps the most low-ball sexploitative comedy ever made and it is really not funny.
When I finally picked up the DVD for "Year One" last Friday at Blockbuster, I saw that Harold Ramis directed the film. That's all it took, really. I wonder why they wasted all that advertising money on redundant previews when all they really needed to do was leak a story stating that this film was directed by the same guy who gave us Caddyshack, Stripes and Groundhog Day. He also wrote Ghostbusters and was one of three writers responsible for Animal House. Here's a rule: If the guy who wrote Caddyshack is Jewish and he makes a film that essentially retells some of the more curious parts of the book of Genesis, go see it. "Year One" is not the best movie ever made but if you know anything about the book of Genesis, it will make you laugh... and probably think a little as well. Which brings me back to my initial statement and/or confession.
I showed this film to my Bible study... in my office... which is in the church. It was rated PG-13 so it certainly could have been worse but there were a few words and plenty of suggestive humor. I struggled with whether or not I should show it but I wanted us to see it together... especially because we had just finished reading the very stories that Ramis was having fun with. Being able to laugh about your own story is a pretty healthy thing to do. Being able to laugh at your own religion without cheapening it is a very healthy thing to do.
The fact is we are funny creatures. Life is a funny thing. Of course, it's not all funny. I actually had to close my eyes during the scene in which Cain kills his brother Able. But the fact that Ramis did not ignore this and was able to carry Cain's character forward and allow us to laugh a bit at him, to see that the line between the monsters and the people runs right down the middle of most of us... that seems like a pretty interesting thing.
Of course, in making the film, Ramis told a story that was not exactly accurate (Sodom somehow avoids the hellfire pelting that it receives in the older version) but I sense that those who know the story understand this. They understand that a film like this is going to show things in a different light. The point is not to re-educate us. It is to entertain us--to allow us to look at ourselves and our beliefs with a little merriment.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Bang for the Buck
I recently changed my start page. I had been using CNN on and off for several years. On because I like the convenience. Off because it feels more and more like I am watching Entertainment Tonight than reading from an actual news source. So last week I decided that my brain was probably turning into that gooey stuff they use to preserve ham so I ran a super-creative search: "Best Online News Sources."
The first three suggested were BBC, The Christian Science Monitor and Voice of America. I'd never really heard or read much about Voice of America so I decided to try that for a while... The problem now is that I am so addicted to the shiny-happy-people format of CNN, I can hardly force myself to tackle all those words on the VOA homepage. I guess this means that I'd like to imagine myself as someone who really cares about solid news and reporting but I just don't have the time and attention span. UGHHHH!
Now that the confession of the day is over, on to even lighter news... CNN has those cool links that take you to the main sites of partners like Sports Illustrated and Money Magazine. I must admit, this is pretty clever and a great example of that networking thing that everyone else seems to understand. Of course, in order to participate in all that cross promoting, the companies agree (happily, I'm sure) to dummy down all the material on their sites. For example, Money does these cheesy lists--top ten this and the best and worst of that... The articles are little more than pictures and tag lines. But naturally, I am right there clicking through them. Chalk it up; they've hit the target audience right in the middle of our vacant foreheads.
This morning, Money ran a list of the best and worst places to find housing deals. Not surprisingly, the best deals are in places like Detroit, Michigan and Youngstown Ohio; the worst are in New York and Los Angeles. The funny (read annoying or irksome) thing was the houses they pictured in the article. The article boasted about how much house $105,000 will buy you in Detroit but the picture showed a house that costs $239,000! What is that? In fact, every example showed a house that cost way more than than the average they had listed for the area and well beyond the medium income of people living there. So what was the message supposed to be? ....You can find some great housing deals out there as long as your interested in the kinds of houses that are so nasty that our corporate partners won't even let us show them on this website...
This got me thinking about real bargains--you know, things that might fit the criteria of say, desirable AND affordable. Right? 'Cause a fire sale on yachts or a yard sale in front of a strip club really only appeal to small or curious subset of people. So here's my list:
BEST BARGAINS for people who don't furnish their yacht with used brass from foreclosed strip clubs:
10. A sensible key chain: By this, of course, I mean something that you can lift. But beyond that, how about something that has some meaning to you. I admit, it seems a bit insignificant. But think about it. You touch these things every day. Why not get something meaningful? You have to have this thing in your pocket or purse so why not make it something that lifts your spirit or reminds you who you are? At the very least, keep it simple so you don't wreck your ignition.
9. Carbonated Soda: It's not good for you and I am by no means suggesting you start drinking more of it but it is actually less expensive than it was when I was growing up in the late 1970s and early 1980s. And I am not talking about inflation; a can of pop literally cost less than it did 30 years ago. The same is true for Levi's and many other things but I am pretty sure the reasons are different. I think Coke and Pepsi are produced stateside and do not involve the messiness of child labor. The exceptions here are craft sodas made with cane sugar rather than corn syrup and diet sodas of any kind. I know a lot of you drink diet soda but I don't know if you're really getting a deal here.
8. Calvin Klein Underwear: This is sort of the other side of #7. Jones Soda is without question better tasting than Coke or Pepsi but one bottle of Jones for the price of twelve Cokes? A treat maybe but not really a bargain. So how can $20 underwear be a bargain? I am not sure where they get the cotton and I'd rather not know who is sewing it together and under what conditions. But I'm saying, the stuff is better. But, Mark, you can get so much more for your money at Wal-Mart or even Target. How is a $20 pair of grunders a good deal? All I can say is, have you ever worn this stuff? It's only the TOTL boxers though--not the weird and crazy stuff that's everywhere at Marshalls.
7. Fish Food: This one almost doesn't qualify. But the obscurity is overcome by the math. How many fish (even Betas which are pretty durable) will you be flushing before you need another batch of this stuff?! You could go through a lifetime (yours not the fishes) and never need another one of those containers.
6. Air Purifier/Humidifier: Huge difference in price and purpose but both can be well worth the money. This rationale is similar to the underwear. As a rule, you shouldn't really skimp on things that go on your body or pass through your lungs.
5. FJ80 Series Toyota Land Cruiser: Of course I have one; this is a blog, right? These were produced from 1991-1997. But what about the "no yachts!" objection? I hear ya, but these things are like fish food. You don't want to buy one new--unless, of course, you can. But look at the value now. At $60K they were worth every penny--they'll go anywhere and outlast years of abuse... Today, you can buy them for under $10,000. Sure, you will probably get a vehicle with worn seats and a few scratches but remember these are the same vehicles they are still driving around the deserts in Africa and yours has spent the last fifteen years parked in some doctor's three-stall garage. Caution: This is not a politically correct bargain. And don't buy the Lexus version. Those are just decadent.
4. The National Park System: Biggest bargain in the world, at least in terms of size and it will be here for millions of years...provided we resist the temptation to trade it away... You can buy an Eagle Pass for less than $100 and visit every National Park, Monument or Historic site in the country for one year and you can return as many times as you like. The experience will bless you in the moment and spawn memories that will last a lifetime.
3. Pie and Coffee: O.K., it doesn't have to be this exactly... But taking time to enjoy a conversation with a friend or a moment of peace and quiet... UNDERRATED! This is the bees knees people! Call a friend and meet them. Call your mother or your dad or pick you kid up from school in the middle of the day. This is the stuff that Mastercard commercials are made of. Apart from my Land Cruiser and Swiss Army key-chain, I'd trade just about anything for coffee, pie and a good conversation. Or I should anyway.
2. An Education: Make no mistake--Schooling can be a terrible deal. Lots of people borrow or spend tons of money to go to college and then waste the investment. The truth is that most learning is actually free. [Stick your finger in a spinning blender sometime and you'll see what I mean.] But sometimes an education does cost money. College, especially, can be very expensive. So when can we call it an actual "bang for the buck?" Two answers: When it helps you follow a dream and when you begin to appreciate learning for its own sake. The real deal is not in the diploma or credentials. It's in learning to value education itself.
1. A Pet: I am thinking of dogs and cats but as long as we're talking about companionship, the return on the investment is unquestionable. You can even get a pet for free but there will be a maintenance cost that you really don't want to avoid. I know that people sometimes have trouble with their pets. But these folks are probably excluded by the "companionship" rule. Besides, the carpet stains and obedience issues are probably their fault anyway.
Happy hunting! Now let's hear some of yours...
The first three suggested were BBC, The Christian Science Monitor and Voice of America. I'd never really heard or read much about Voice of America so I decided to try that for a while... The problem now is that I am so addicted to the shiny-happy-people format of CNN, I can hardly force myself to tackle all those words on the VOA homepage. I guess this means that I'd like to imagine myself as someone who really cares about solid news and reporting but I just don't have the time and attention span. UGHHHH!
Now that the confession of the day is over, on to even lighter news... CNN has those cool links that take you to the main sites of partners like Sports Illustrated and Money Magazine. I must admit, this is pretty clever and a great example of that networking thing that everyone else seems to understand. Of course, in order to participate in all that cross promoting, the companies agree (happily, I'm sure) to dummy down all the material on their sites. For example, Money does these cheesy lists--top ten this and the best and worst of that... The articles are little more than pictures and tag lines. But naturally, I am right there clicking through them. Chalk it up; they've hit the target audience right in the middle of our vacant foreheads.
This morning, Money ran a list of the best and worst places to find housing deals. Not surprisingly, the best deals are in places like Detroit, Michigan and Youngstown Ohio; the worst are in New York and Los Angeles. The funny (read annoying or irksome) thing was the houses they pictured in the article. The article boasted about how much house $105,000 will buy you in Detroit but the picture showed a house that costs $239,000! What is that? In fact, every example showed a house that cost way more than than the average they had listed for the area and well beyond the medium income of people living there. So what was the message supposed to be? ....You can find some great housing deals out there as long as your interested in the kinds of houses that are so nasty that our corporate partners won't even let us show them on this website...
This got me thinking about real bargains--you know, things that might fit the criteria of say, desirable AND affordable. Right? 'Cause a fire sale on yachts or a yard sale in front of a strip club really only appeal to small or curious subset of people. So here's my list:
BEST BARGAINS for people who don't furnish their yacht with used brass from foreclosed strip clubs:
10. A sensible key chain: By this, of course, I mean something that you can lift. But beyond that, how about something that has some meaning to you. I admit, it seems a bit insignificant. But think about it. You touch these things every day. Why not get something meaningful? You have to have this thing in your pocket or purse so why not make it something that lifts your spirit or reminds you who you are? At the very least, keep it simple so you don't wreck your ignition.
9. Carbonated Soda: It's not good for you and I am by no means suggesting you start drinking more of it but it is actually less expensive than it was when I was growing up in the late 1970s and early 1980s. And I am not talking about inflation; a can of pop literally cost less than it did 30 years ago. The same is true for Levi's and many other things but I am pretty sure the reasons are different. I think Coke and Pepsi are produced stateside and do not involve the messiness of child labor. The exceptions here are craft sodas made with cane sugar rather than corn syrup and diet sodas of any kind. I know a lot of you drink diet soda but I don't know if you're really getting a deal here.
8. Calvin Klein Underwear: This is sort of the other side of #7. Jones Soda is without question better tasting than Coke or Pepsi but one bottle of Jones for the price of twelve Cokes? A treat maybe but not really a bargain. So how can $20 underwear be a bargain? I am not sure where they get the cotton and I'd rather not know who is sewing it together and under what conditions. But I'm saying, the stuff is better. But, Mark, you can get so much more for your money at Wal-Mart or even Target. How is a $20 pair of grunders a good deal? All I can say is, have you ever worn this stuff? It's only the TOTL boxers though--not the weird and crazy stuff that's everywhere at Marshalls.
7. Fish Food: This one almost doesn't qualify. But the obscurity is overcome by the math. How many fish (even Betas which are pretty durable) will you be flushing before you need another batch of this stuff?! You could go through a lifetime (yours not the fishes) and never need another one of those containers.
6. Air Purifier/Humidifier: Huge difference in price and purpose but both can be well worth the money. This rationale is similar to the underwear. As a rule, you shouldn't really skimp on things that go on your body or pass through your lungs.
5. FJ80 Series Toyota Land Cruiser: Of course I have one; this is a blog, right? These were produced from 1991-1997. But what about the "no yachts!" objection? I hear ya, but these things are like fish food. You don't want to buy one new--unless, of course, you can. But look at the value now. At $60K they were worth every penny--they'll go anywhere and outlast years of abuse... Today, you can buy them for under $10,000. Sure, you will probably get a vehicle with worn seats and a few scratches but remember these are the same vehicles they are still driving around the deserts in Africa and yours has spent the last fifteen years parked in some doctor's three-stall garage. Caution: This is not a politically correct bargain. And don't buy the Lexus version. Those are just decadent.
4. The National Park System: Biggest bargain in the world, at least in terms of size and it will be here for millions of years...provided we resist the temptation to trade it away... You can buy an Eagle Pass for less than $100 and visit every National Park, Monument or Historic site in the country for one year and you can return as many times as you like. The experience will bless you in the moment and spawn memories that will last a lifetime.
3. Pie and Coffee: O.K., it doesn't have to be this exactly... But taking time to enjoy a conversation with a friend or a moment of peace and quiet... UNDERRATED! This is the bees knees people! Call a friend and meet them. Call your mother or your dad or pick you kid up from school in the middle of the day. This is the stuff that Mastercard commercials are made of. Apart from my Land Cruiser and Swiss Army key-chain, I'd trade just about anything for coffee, pie and a good conversation. Or I should anyway.
2. An Education: Make no mistake--Schooling can be a terrible deal. Lots of people borrow or spend tons of money to go to college and then waste the investment. The truth is that most learning is actually free. [Stick your finger in a spinning blender sometime and you'll see what I mean.] But sometimes an education does cost money. College, especially, can be very expensive. So when can we call it an actual "bang for the buck?" Two answers: When it helps you follow a dream and when you begin to appreciate learning for its own sake. The real deal is not in the diploma or credentials. It's in learning to value education itself.
1. A Pet: I am thinking of dogs and cats but as long as we're talking about companionship, the return on the investment is unquestionable. You can even get a pet for free but there will be a maintenance cost that you really don't want to avoid. I know that people sometimes have trouble with their pets. But these folks are probably excluded by the "companionship" rule. Besides, the carpet stains and obedience issues are probably their fault anyway.
Happy hunting! Now let's hear some of yours...
Monday, October 5, 2009
The Kingdom of God
On Sundays, we have an 8:30 and a 10:30 service here at St. Francis. Sunday school meets between the two services. I have been visiting in the adult classes the last few Sundays and discovered that two of the four classes are using curriculum that is led by the same person, John Ortberg. In addition to his work as a pastor, Ortberg has had success writing and teaching on Christian formation. While the Sunday school studies were different, both dealt with real-world challenges and offered practical suggestions on how we can live more fully and faithful as Christians in the world.
There is a hunger for this kind of teaching in the Church. People sense that we live in a secular age. There are many aspects of our lives that mitigate against spiritual health and, because of this, believers are grateful for any kind of practical advice that will help them navigate the challenging spiritual climate of modern society.
As I watched Ortberg's discussion of pride on the class' DVD, it struck me that what he is doing looks and sounds a lot like modern psychology. In that, what he is offering believers are helpful and practical coping strategies. And in a way this makes a lot of sense. We live in a time that has a corrosive effect on people's lives. The values, practices and patterns of modern secular life are not only antithetical to the Christian life, they are in a lot of ways destructive and inhumane regardless of what people might believe about God. Pointing to Jesus' life and teachings, Ortberg explains central Christian values and practices such as humility and service. Embracing and employing these not only helps believers live more faithfully, it also helps us cope with the inhumanity around us.
For example, Ortberg notes that pride, an age-old sin, often parades as a value in our time, even though it ultimately serves neither our spiritual health nor our happiness in the world. Ortberg suggests that the way that we cope with pride is by becoming a servant. He suggests that nothing overcomes our tendency toward pride more effectively than the practice of service.
In this way, we cope with the challenges of the secular world through the employment of Christian principles. Nothing wrong with this and it is certainly understandable why Ortberg's books and curriculum have sold so well. Modern people like practical answers. We like the idea of coping strategies. And I celebrate what leaders like John Ortberg are doing here. At the same time, I have a slightly different take on all this.
The underlying assumption behind Ortberg's approach, and, indeed, a great deal of strategy or self-help counseling is that it imagines the world as a largely God-less place. That is, the world is a place where God isn't so it is up to us to sort of fight it off through our faith and our coping strategies. The assumption here is that we are largely on our own against the inhumanity or the world.
While there is certainly an inhumanity about the world. Christians also believe that God is working to redeem the world. Indeed, the Church teaches that the Father has sent the Son into the world to save it. Jesus himself proclaims that the Kingdom of God has come near. Other translations read, "The Kingdom of God is at hand." The reference is specifically to Jesus--his coming, his teaching, his authority and leadership.
In this way, perhaps our problem with things like pride and competition and selfishness is less about coping and more about seeing. That is, if the kingdom is indeed near to us, then perhaps we simply need to believe in it, embrace it and, thereby, enter into it. If we can do this, then the world is no longer a place where we have to cope so much as it is a place where we can enjoy our fellowship with God and serve as ambassadors of Christ to those who do not yet see what is in fact very near to them.
The example that I used to explain this to the class was the monastic life. When we think of those who intentionally seek to embrace and live the Christian message full-time, we might think of a monastery or an abbey. We imagine monks or nuns living extraordinarily faithful lives because we assume that it is only in such a protected place that this could even be an option. We believe the world to be simply too compromised, competitive and inhumane for full-time Christianity. We figure that whatever the Kingdom is, it certainly must be very different and very far from the harsh, secular world that most of us know.
But what if Jesus really is correct? What if the Kingdom has come in Jesus and continues in the life of the Church? What if we really can follow Jesus and embrace the ways of the kingdom--not merely to cope but to celebrate God's good work in our midst? In other words, perhaps what we need is not a good set of coping mechanisms but rather a bunch of monks and nuns who have the faith to leave the monasteries and abbeys. Men and women who are willing to make their homes in the world, trusting that the real kingdom is beyond those protective gates and, in fact, among the very people who are suffering the inhumanity of a world that simply does not yet see.
There is a hunger for this kind of teaching in the Church. People sense that we live in a secular age. There are many aspects of our lives that mitigate against spiritual health and, because of this, believers are grateful for any kind of practical advice that will help them navigate the challenging spiritual climate of modern society.
As I watched Ortberg's discussion of pride on the class' DVD, it struck me that what he is doing looks and sounds a lot like modern psychology. In that, what he is offering believers are helpful and practical coping strategies. And in a way this makes a lot of sense. We live in a time that has a corrosive effect on people's lives. The values, practices and patterns of modern secular life are not only antithetical to the Christian life, they are in a lot of ways destructive and inhumane regardless of what people might believe about God. Pointing to Jesus' life and teachings, Ortberg explains central Christian values and practices such as humility and service. Embracing and employing these not only helps believers live more faithfully, it also helps us cope with the inhumanity around us.
For example, Ortberg notes that pride, an age-old sin, often parades as a value in our time, even though it ultimately serves neither our spiritual health nor our happiness in the world. Ortberg suggests that the way that we cope with pride is by becoming a servant. He suggests that nothing overcomes our tendency toward pride more effectively than the practice of service.
In this way, we cope with the challenges of the secular world through the employment of Christian principles. Nothing wrong with this and it is certainly understandable why Ortberg's books and curriculum have sold so well. Modern people like practical answers. We like the idea of coping strategies. And I celebrate what leaders like John Ortberg are doing here. At the same time, I have a slightly different take on all this.
The underlying assumption behind Ortberg's approach, and, indeed, a great deal of strategy or self-help counseling is that it imagines the world as a largely God-less place. That is, the world is a place where God isn't so it is up to us to sort of fight it off through our faith and our coping strategies. The assumption here is that we are largely on our own against the inhumanity or the world.
While there is certainly an inhumanity about the world. Christians also believe that God is working to redeem the world. Indeed, the Church teaches that the Father has sent the Son into the world to save it. Jesus himself proclaims that the Kingdom of God has come near. Other translations read, "The Kingdom of God is at hand." The reference is specifically to Jesus--his coming, his teaching, his authority and leadership.
In this way, perhaps our problem with things like pride and competition and selfishness is less about coping and more about seeing. That is, if the kingdom is indeed near to us, then perhaps we simply need to believe in it, embrace it and, thereby, enter into it. If we can do this, then the world is no longer a place where we have to cope so much as it is a place where we can enjoy our fellowship with God and serve as ambassadors of Christ to those who do not yet see what is in fact very near to them.
The example that I used to explain this to the class was the monastic life. When we think of those who intentionally seek to embrace and live the Christian message full-time, we might think of a monastery or an abbey. We imagine monks or nuns living extraordinarily faithful lives because we assume that it is only in such a protected place that this could even be an option. We believe the world to be simply too compromised, competitive and inhumane for full-time Christianity. We figure that whatever the Kingdom is, it certainly must be very different and very far from the harsh, secular world that most of us know.
But what if Jesus really is correct? What if the Kingdom has come in Jesus and continues in the life of the Church? What if we really can follow Jesus and embrace the ways of the kingdom--not merely to cope but to celebrate God's good work in our midst? In other words, perhaps what we need is not a good set of coping mechanisms but rather a bunch of monks and nuns who have the faith to leave the monasteries and abbeys. Men and women who are willing to make their homes in the world, trusting that the real kingdom is beyond those protective gates and, in fact, among the very people who are suffering the inhumanity of a world that simply does not yet see.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Stress and Process
My eldest son, Will, is a senior in high school this year. For all of the things that he does or doesn't do that drive his mother and I crazy, I have to admit that he has done a truly remarkable job in school. He has made good grades, challenged himself in terms of the workload and stayed out of trouble. Because of these things he is now in a position to entertain some exciting options for the next step in his life. Given this, you might expect our family to be celebrating and enjoying this final year that Will is living at home.
And there is some of this. But the joy seems to be increasingly competing with stress. The stress is coming through something that Will's high school counselors have termed the college-application process.
A full year ago, the school sponsored an informational meeting to make sure that the parents of the junior-class were sufficiently anxious about college preparation. One of the counselors began the meeting by saying, "Your children are getting ready to begin the college-application process. As parents, I am sure that all of you are already stressing." I remember thinking to myself, "actually no; but thanks for getting me started."
Last night, it dawned on me that I actually am sort of stress about all this. I suppose that this is fair and probably even expected. My son is getting ready for the next step in his life and his mother and I certainly want it to go well for him. So if I am stressed about this, I figure that is either my prerogative or my fault. And I can appreciate that. What I can't appreciate is seeing that my son is stressed as well.
I certainly want him to be awake. I want him to be responsible for getting the information. I want him to fill out the applications and attend to the logistical expectations and deadlines. But the thought of him being stressed out not only makes me sad, it actually angers me. Will has done the work. He has put in the time and effort demanded by the high school process. So it gripes me to imagine that the reward for this would be a new level of stress tied now to the next process.
I suspect that part of my anger here has to do with this whole language of process. [See me last blog entry] The suggestion that education can be reduced to some kind of process is equally appalling and familiar.
In addition to my work here in the parish, I have also had the opportunity to work as a part-time instructor at Appalachian State University. For a number of years, I taught in the School of Education at ASU. The course was entitled, "Foundations of Education," and was required of all education majors prior to their student teaching. In teaching those courses, I learned something disturbing about college students. I learned that many of them approached their classes, and their education generally, as a means-to-an-end. That is, most of my students were far more interested in their grade then they were in whatever it was that they might learn in the course. The revelation should not have surprised me because many students go to college to get the degree to get the job... It was just disappointing to learn that teachers do the same thing. How depressing to consider that the people who would be teaching my children were already cynical about education.
Acknowledging this, I would make it a point to explain to them that we teach who we are. That is, their own appreciation for learning, or lack thereof, will not be lost on their own students. Furthermore, I explained that their own students were likely to treat them and the classes that they would soon be teaching in the same way that they treated me and the course that they were currently taking. Some of them seemed to get it--the irony of representing something that you can't be bothered with. But the vast majority either didn't understand or didn't care.
This was hard for me to see. I imagined my own children someday sitting before these students as teachers themselves who had lost all sense of appreciation and passion for learning. Of course, it happens. Things get reduced--school, work, marriage, family, faith... Nothing is completely safe from the decaying effects of process and means-ends.... So we have to be vigilant. We need to be awake and grateful. We need to maintain that sense of fascination with life and the world and the people around us.
This is what we should be up-in-arms about--the fact that our children are growing up in a world of reduction. If we're going to stress about something, it should be this--the danger of having beautiful things degraded into nothing more than the next process.
And there is some of this. But the joy seems to be increasingly competing with stress. The stress is coming through something that Will's high school counselors have termed the college-application process.
A full year ago, the school sponsored an informational meeting to make sure that the parents of the junior-class were sufficiently anxious about college preparation. One of the counselors began the meeting by saying, "Your children are getting ready to begin the college-application process. As parents, I am sure that all of you are already stressing." I remember thinking to myself, "actually no; but thanks for getting me started."
Last night, it dawned on me that I actually am sort of stress about all this. I suppose that this is fair and probably even expected. My son is getting ready for the next step in his life and his mother and I certainly want it to go well for him. So if I am stressed about this, I figure that is either my prerogative or my fault. And I can appreciate that. What I can't appreciate is seeing that my son is stressed as well.
I certainly want him to be awake. I want him to be responsible for getting the information. I want him to fill out the applications and attend to the logistical expectations and deadlines. But the thought of him being stressed out not only makes me sad, it actually angers me. Will has done the work. He has put in the time and effort demanded by the high school process. So it gripes me to imagine that the reward for this would be a new level of stress tied now to the next process.
I suspect that part of my anger here has to do with this whole language of process. [See me last blog entry] The suggestion that education can be reduced to some kind of process is equally appalling and familiar.
In addition to my work here in the parish, I have also had the opportunity to work as a part-time instructor at Appalachian State University. For a number of years, I taught in the School of Education at ASU. The course was entitled, "Foundations of Education," and was required of all education majors prior to their student teaching. In teaching those courses, I learned something disturbing about college students. I learned that many of them approached their classes, and their education generally, as a means-to-an-end. That is, most of my students were far more interested in their grade then they were in whatever it was that they might learn in the course. The revelation should not have surprised me because many students go to college to get the degree to get the job... It was just disappointing to learn that teachers do the same thing. How depressing to consider that the people who would be teaching my children were already cynical about education.
Acknowledging this, I would make it a point to explain to them that we teach who we are. That is, their own appreciation for learning, or lack thereof, will not be lost on their own students. Furthermore, I explained that their own students were likely to treat them and the classes that they would soon be teaching in the same way that they treated me and the course that they were currently taking. Some of them seemed to get it--the irony of representing something that you can't be bothered with. But the vast majority either didn't understand or didn't care.
This was hard for me to see. I imagined my own children someday sitting before these students as teachers themselves who had lost all sense of appreciation and passion for learning. Of course, it happens. Things get reduced--school, work, marriage, family, faith... Nothing is completely safe from the decaying effects of process and means-ends.... So we have to be vigilant. We need to be awake and grateful. We need to maintain that sense of fascination with life and the world and the people around us.
This is what we should be up-in-arms about--the fact that our children are growing up in a world of reduction. If we're going to stress about something, it should be this--the danger of having beautiful things degraded into nothing more than the next process.
Monday, September 14, 2009
The Spoken Word
Yesterday I preached a sermon on the human capacity for speech. It was based on a passage from James in which the apostle suggests that the tongue is a grave and dangerous tool. "With it," He contends, "we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing..."
How true. Words can be used for good as well as for ill. So many of the great things that have come upon the earth have begun and ended in the spoken word. Remember that this is actually how God creates-- "...and God said..." Perhaps this is the likeness that we share with God that is mentioned in Genesis 1... our own capacity to create by way of words and language. To name, communicate and reason our way together... It really is a gift, a power that God has given to us...
I remember when I first started to understand this. It was during my sophomore year in college. I read a series of books about language, culture and religion; the most notable was entitled, The Human Condition. Hannah Arendt was female, German and Jewish--probably all mitigating factors in 1958 when The Human Condition was published. None of this mattered to me when I read the book some twenty-five years later. After all, I was a young, free, Christian living in America and enjoying the care-free world of higher education. I could sit back and listen to Arendt's speech without fear of jail or even censorship. Nevertheless, the argument that she was making set me free--it set me free from something I didn't even understand.
The way that I explained it in the final paper for the class was that she had set me free from the process train. Reading her words, listening to her voice, it struck me that many people are taught and come to believe that life is merely process--that we simply find ourselves on the train and we have no choice but to ride this thing out. [Of course, most of us never even notice.] But Arendt suggests that human beings are capable of action--authentic action in the world. It is this action that creates the world and ultimately tells the story of life and history. And speech is the primary form of human action. It is our capacity to name, discuss and reason together that enables self-disclosure and allows us to enter into and take action in the world.
I still don't fully understand everything that I read in that book. But reading it offered to me one of those moments in which we are offered a chance to be reborn, into a world much more interesting than the one we've known.
Twenty-five years have now passed since I read The Human Condition. Sadly, I feel that much of that time has been spent riding the process train. Of course, that's what most people say when they reach their mid-forties. But still, I feel like I should know better. I understand, at least conceptually, the meaning and import of speech and action. I can only hope that even in the midst of my disappointment, I am still speaking toward a world that is more interesting than the one to which we seem to be settling.
How true. Words can be used for good as well as for ill. So many of the great things that have come upon the earth have begun and ended in the spoken word. Remember that this is actually how God creates-- "...and God said..." Perhaps this is the likeness that we share with God that is mentioned in Genesis 1... our own capacity to create by way of words and language. To name, communicate and reason our way together... It really is a gift, a power that God has given to us...
I remember when I first started to understand this. It was during my sophomore year in college. I read a series of books about language, culture and religion; the most notable was entitled, The Human Condition. Hannah Arendt was female, German and Jewish--probably all mitigating factors in 1958 when The Human Condition was published. None of this mattered to me when I read the book some twenty-five years later. After all, I was a young, free, Christian living in America and enjoying the care-free world of higher education. I could sit back and listen to Arendt's speech without fear of jail or even censorship. Nevertheless, the argument that she was making set me free--it set me free from something I didn't even understand.
The way that I explained it in the final paper for the class was that she had set me free from the process train. Reading her words, listening to her voice, it struck me that many people are taught and come to believe that life is merely process--that we simply find ourselves on the train and we have no choice but to ride this thing out. [Of course, most of us never even notice.] But Arendt suggests that human beings are capable of action--authentic action in the world. It is this action that creates the world and ultimately tells the story of life and history. And speech is the primary form of human action. It is our capacity to name, discuss and reason together that enables self-disclosure and allows us to enter into and take action in the world.
I still don't fully understand everything that I read in that book. But reading it offered to me one of those moments in which we are offered a chance to be reborn, into a world much more interesting than the one we've known.
Twenty-five years have now passed since I read The Human Condition. Sadly, I feel that much of that time has been spent riding the process train. Of course, that's what most people say when they reach their mid-forties. But still, I feel like I should know better. I understand, at least conceptually, the meaning and import of speech and action. I can only hope that even in the midst of my disappointment, I am still speaking toward a world that is more interesting than the one to which we seem to be settling.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Present Company
I have an eight-year-old daughter. This means that we have pets--more than one and always the chance for more. You see this in movies or read it in books about children. Little girls love animals, especially young ones, and will freely inquire about taking them in.
I should have seen this coming. Even before my daughter was born, my wife, Diane--a grown woman who readily complained about dog hair and cleaning the litter box--could not resist taking in a stray kitten who found its way to our porch in Watauga County. We already had a cat at the time and my wife insisted she was allergic. But it didn't matter. It was a long-haired calico, it belonged with us!
Not long after, a group of raccoon triplets were making their way across our front lawn. Diane was enthralled. I tried to explain to her that things were not as they appeared. "But they're so cute!" She insisted, reaching down to pick up the nearest. The ensuing scene was telling. Raccoon babies don't look quite the same when their backs are raised up and they are hissing and bouncing around like Taz. I am not sure who was the more angry, though. Diane seemed to imagine that the thing should be ashamed of itself for not letting her cuddle with it. The experience left her momentarily disgusted and she steered clear of nature for about a week. And then she discovered that den of bunnies in the shrubbery...
Apart from a few butterflies and a brief stretch with a clam, our house has lately been reserved for more domesticated creatures. Here is an update on some of the other members of the Evans' household:
Atticus is a Sheltie. Sheltie is an abbreviation for Shetland Sheepdog. But to most people it means miniature collie. There is actually no such thing as a miniature collie but if there were, this is exactly what they would look like. Atticus has been the subject of a few of my sermons. This is probably a compliment because it means that he is capable of things like attitude, behavior and personality. I used to get angry at him because he would always bark and make a scene around other dogs but act perfectly normal around any human. But I've figured out in the last few months that this is not a personality problem. Atticus just does not know he is a dog. It sounds weird and that's probably why it took me so long to get it but I am pretty sure that it is true. And it makes sense if you think about it. The pack that he runs with are all people and the only times he sees other dogs is when he is out for a walk or a hike or maybe at the vet. He even barks at his own reflection... Do you suppose there are people who think they're dogs?
We don't have any cats right now. Diane swore them off when we left Watauga County seven years ago. If you're a cat person, that's a long time to go without a cat. But since 3/5 of our family are not, it will probably a lot longer before I see another cat.
My daughter is responsible for the rest of our animals. These are what I call quick-decisions pets. Right now, we have a fish (Beta) that now lives in the office here at the church and two dwarf hamsters that live in a plastic mansion in my daughter's bedroom.
The Beta is named Ruby, mostly because our last fish was Turquoise and Mallory wanted to stay with the precious-gem theme. Ruby has really grown on me, mostly because he (I know, but it's not like you can see anything) is so resilient. Not only has he lasted for nearly two-years, Ruby has suffered the experience of fading affection. Right? Because that's what happens. A little girl gets a pet, a kitten or a mouse or whatever... But soon enough the newness wears off. Or, worse yet, her affections fall in the next adorable direction... And we're talking about a fish in this world. I mean, imagine competing with things like kittens and bunnies. Heck, stuffed animals can probably draw more affection than a Beta... And yet, Ruby soldiered on. He was even expelled from the house. But God is good. He landed in the church office, right next to Michele, our administrative assistant. She's probably the nicest little girl in the world so Ruby is just fine.
Obviously I am partial to Ruby. And for all kinds of reasons--not the least of which being low-maintenance. So you can imagine my disappointment [Sheltese for disgust!] to learn that our Beta had been replaced by a rodent. Hamsters, even dwarf hamsters, are pretty much everything fish are not. Unless, of course, you fail to clean their bowl.
Enter Peanut and, just a few days later, Chestnut. This is why parents need to avoid commercial pet stores. We need to just stay away because this is what happens. Of course, they have dogs and cats and birds at places like this. But who buys a cat or dog from Pet-mart? If you take a child into one of those places, parents have got to know that they are going to be confronted with guilt and pleading. You're almost certain to leave the place with something that poops. So unless you can discipline yourself and get a fish, it's like choosing to live in Calcutta.
Diane must have sensed this would have been one of those rare times when I would have tried to play my man-of-the house card. [Like it would have mattered...] So the girls went on their own--twice! And now we've got a room full of plastic and two hamsters. [I keep trying to put a "p" in there because it would then rhyme so easily with dumpsters. But the spellchecker won't have it...]
Now to be fair, the rodents have worked out pretty well. We bought an air freshener and Diane actually takes the time to get the critters out. It sort of works as a mother-daughter bonding time. I let Atticus in there when they have them running around in those little balls. But I'm really hoping my daughter starts noticing kittens!
All in all, it is a bit of a microcosm--a little of this and a little of that. Not unlike the world in general. And, of course, it's not over. I wonder sometimes what other creatures will share my time on this planet. It's a good thing--even the rodents. Diane likes to go on and on about how cute they are when they "clean themselves." Is that what they're doing?
I should have seen this coming. Even before my daughter was born, my wife, Diane--a grown woman who readily complained about dog hair and cleaning the litter box--could not resist taking in a stray kitten who found its way to our porch in Watauga County. We already had a cat at the time and my wife insisted she was allergic. But it didn't matter. It was a long-haired calico, it belonged with us!
Not long after, a group of raccoon triplets were making their way across our front lawn. Diane was enthralled. I tried to explain to her that things were not as they appeared. "But they're so cute!" She insisted, reaching down to pick up the nearest. The ensuing scene was telling. Raccoon babies don't look quite the same when their backs are raised up and they are hissing and bouncing around like Taz. I am not sure who was the more angry, though. Diane seemed to imagine that the thing should be ashamed of itself for not letting her cuddle with it. The experience left her momentarily disgusted and she steered clear of nature for about a week. And then she discovered that den of bunnies in the shrubbery...
Apart from a few butterflies and a brief stretch with a clam, our house has lately been reserved for more domesticated creatures. Here is an update on some of the other members of the Evans' household:
Atticus is a Sheltie. Sheltie is an abbreviation for Shetland Sheepdog. But to most people it means miniature collie. There is actually no such thing as a miniature collie but if there were, this is exactly what they would look like. Atticus has been the subject of a few of my sermons. This is probably a compliment because it means that he is capable of things like attitude, behavior and personality. I used to get angry at him because he would always bark and make a scene around other dogs but act perfectly normal around any human. But I've figured out in the last few months that this is not a personality problem. Atticus just does not know he is a dog. It sounds weird and that's probably why it took me so long to get it but I am pretty sure that it is true. And it makes sense if you think about it. The pack that he runs with are all people and the only times he sees other dogs is when he is out for a walk or a hike or maybe at the vet. He even barks at his own reflection... Do you suppose there are people who think they're dogs?
We don't have any cats right now. Diane swore them off when we left Watauga County seven years ago. If you're a cat person, that's a long time to go without a cat. But since 3/5 of our family are not, it will probably a lot longer before I see another cat.
My daughter is responsible for the rest of our animals. These are what I call quick-decisions pets. Right now, we have a fish (Beta) that now lives in the office here at the church and two dwarf hamsters that live in a plastic mansion in my daughter's bedroom.
The Beta is named Ruby, mostly because our last fish was Turquoise and Mallory wanted to stay with the precious-gem theme. Ruby has really grown on me, mostly because he (I know, but it's not like you can see anything) is so resilient. Not only has he lasted for nearly two-years, Ruby has suffered the experience of fading affection. Right? Because that's what happens. A little girl gets a pet, a kitten or a mouse or whatever... But soon enough the newness wears off. Or, worse yet, her affections fall in the next adorable direction... And we're talking about a fish in this world. I mean, imagine competing with things like kittens and bunnies. Heck, stuffed animals can probably draw more affection than a Beta... And yet, Ruby soldiered on. He was even expelled from the house. But God is good. He landed in the church office, right next to Michele, our administrative assistant. She's probably the nicest little girl in the world so Ruby is just fine.
Obviously I am partial to Ruby. And for all kinds of reasons--not the least of which being low-maintenance. So you can imagine my disappointment [Sheltese for disgust!] to learn that our Beta had been replaced by a rodent. Hamsters, even dwarf hamsters, are pretty much everything fish are not. Unless, of course, you fail to clean their bowl.
Enter Peanut and, just a few days later, Chestnut. This is why parents need to avoid commercial pet stores. We need to just stay away because this is what happens. Of course, they have dogs and cats and birds at places like this. But who buys a cat or dog from Pet-mart? If you take a child into one of those places, parents have got to know that they are going to be confronted with guilt and pleading. You're almost certain to leave the place with something that poops. So unless you can discipline yourself and get a fish, it's like choosing to live in Calcutta.
Diane must have sensed this would have been one of those rare times when I would have tried to play my man-of-the house card. [Like it would have mattered...] So the girls went on their own--twice! And now we've got a room full of plastic and two hamsters. [I keep trying to put a "p" in there because it would then rhyme so easily with dumpsters. But the spellchecker won't have it...]
Now to be fair, the rodents have worked out pretty well. We bought an air freshener and Diane actually takes the time to get the critters out. It sort of works as a mother-daughter bonding time. I let Atticus in there when they have them running around in those little balls. But I'm really hoping my daughter starts noticing kittens!
All in all, it is a bit of a microcosm--a little of this and a little of that. Not unlike the world in general. And, of course, it's not over. I wonder sometimes what other creatures will share my time on this planet. It's a good thing--even the rodents. Diane likes to go on and on about how cute they are when they "clean themselves." Is that what they're doing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
