Matt Tries to Write a Novel

the novel in progress

2005-11-04T13:47:00.000-06:00

The novel in progress does not yet have a name.

Some days I will post a new part of the story. Some days I'll chronicle what's going on with the writing or lack of writing process. Other days I will ask for specific feedback, help, or critique.

You can click here to go to the beginning of the story. Each post has a link to the next segment.

One more note: As you read along, some of the facts of the story may seem amiss, or you may notice other oddities. This is because I am editing as I write, as the story takes clearer shape in my mind. I will not be able to edit all the previous posts to make them align with the new form on my computer.

Of course, this bodes well for me financially. If this thing gets finished, and somebody wants to publish it, online folks will have to buy it to read the finished, coherent story. :)

3

2005-11-04T12:40:00.000-06:00

Nathan looked at Yavonne with frustration. “Why do you insist on torturing yourself, and Chinedu? How could this be good for Jule? How could this be good for you?”

“Uncle, you know that Chinedu is the most loyal, compassionate, and caring man in this village. Who could be a better father to Jule than he? Who could be a better husband? I do not rejoice in my widowhood, but I do thank God for the opportunity to do what should have been done many years ago.”

“Which god do you thank, Yavonne? They have all turned their backs on us.

“I do not speak ill of Chinedu’s character, I watched him grow to be a man under my own roof. I am his adopted father.

“No, I ask you what kind of a life would you have for Jule? You are gifted with the ability to see beyond Chinedu’s skin, and you are not alone, but so many Kanna look at Chinedu with fear and distrust; they think he is a crow!

“Yavonne, your love is strong, but Chinedu cannot be for you. I am too old to stop you, but not too old to warn you. He often sees himself as bent as the bent people, as his father called them. He is not comfortable in his skin. Until he can stand up straight, and accept his place as a Kanna, he must remain in his hut outside the village, alone.”

Yavonne said nothing. Her heart betrayed her to such a cruel fate. Nathan was stubborn, but he was also wise. How could she trust Chinedu if he did not trust himself? She would wait to see what became of his promise to talk to Nathan, and cried herself to sleep cursing the injustice of the world, and all its gods.

In his sleep, Chinedu dreamt of unrest. He had heard the rumors of wide spread feuding in the north and in the west. As clans were displaced, they disappeared, or so the rumors went. Supposedly, the bent ones were growing in number.

In his dreams, the rumors were all true. Old disagreements were stirred with new hatreds, fueled by a growing fear. Villages burned. Dark, hideous faces hid in the shadows. Death struck at random.

And then, he remembered his father, his mother, his brother and sister. They had all fallen victim to the same fears and hatreds. They had fled Tukt in hopes of finding peace. He dreamt of a dark shadow following at his heals across a barren landscape, through dark forests, and a across flowing water. He saw Nathan’s eyes red with weeping--sons swept away by the shadow.

Chinedu awoke slowly. The decision he had to make was beyond his strength. He loathed the coming of day.

He made his way to the stream that ran just a few yards from his hut. His parents were buried here near the place where the crow arrow struck him that fateful night. He grieved for his parents nearly every day. They had made Yevalde feel like home. This morning, kneeling by their grave markers, he felt more alone than before.

Rising, he groaned in pain. His left hip and leg had healed well as a child, but not quite straight. As he grew older, arthritis had set in. He groaned, again thinking of the many years of increasing agony that lay before him.

Thinking aloud he said, “If I am to return to my people, there is no better time than now. I am still able enough to make the journey, and Nathan has enough health to complete Sebastian’s training…”

Why was it so difficult to know which decision was best?

“I gave Yavonne my word. I must follow through. Nathan will speak wisdom. I will follow his guidance.”

Installment 2

2005-10-28T21:18:00.000-05:00

In his small thatched-roof hut, Chinedu knelt and prayed for understanding and courage. It was a short prayer, as his mind was too distracted to truly focus on an unseen deity. His thoughts wandered back to the beginning of his sojourn among the Kanna…

35 years ago, Chinedu traveled the long miles from Tukt with his father, Chimwa, and ailing mother, Anu. His village had been under constant attack by pillaging tribes and the bent people. When Chinedu’s elder brother and sister were killed, and his mother was seriously injured, Chimwa decided it was time to leave. Chinedu was 10 years old when they arrived on the borders of Kanna country. Anu had healed of her wound, but was not well.

A young man named Anthon found them seeking water from a small stream, and brought them home to his wife, Salara, who was nursing a baby girl. Chinedu’s family had spent two weeks circling around the limits of Kanna land, constantly chased away from wells and towns because of their dark skin.

Anthon and Salara took the family into their home, and began to teach them the heavy tongue of the Kanna, and neighboring clans. They also convinced the village leaders, including Nathan, Anthon’s elder brother, that the family was safe, and deserving of share in the common lands to raise food.

Chimwa quickly learned to farm, but continued to teach his son to build drums, to play the flute, and to sing the tales of the Tukt. He had been the tribe’s chief singer before coming to Kanna. In Yevalde, their new home, life was difficult. They managed to eek out enough to eat from their small share in the common lands; very few were willing to share space with them. And, they were able to build a small hut on the outskirts of town with the help of Anthon, and even Nathan.

Chinedu was a quiet boy who excelled in his father’s musical instruction. He found that he was good with animals, and was hired as a shepherd’s assistant when the talent was discovered. He lived in fear of the other boys in the village, and treasured the quiet times with the goats, sheep, and rams. His peers still saw him as a bogie, some dark outsider, and he longed for the ability to bleach his skin pale like theirs.

Nearly three years passed with peace throughout Kanna when a clan feud to the north forced many to move into new lands, lands inhabited by the bent people; the Kanna called them crows. When these people were pressed off their land they began to raid small villages for food. The crows continued to raid, as it was the only mode of survival they knew.

One night, they attacked Yevalde. The village was nearly taken by surprise, but Nathan’s two sons saw the crows approaching, and gathered the men to defend their property and families. Chinedu was too young to fight, and was sent to heard the livestock away from the raiders.

The townsmen fought bravely, but had little to defend themselves from the arrows of the bent people. Nathan’s eldest son was killed leading the first charge, and many men fell with him. Most of the crows were beaten back, but about a half-dozen broke through to the center of the village where they stole what food they could carry, beating down all who got in their way. Anu fell before their crooked blades, as did Salara.

A stray arrow found the hollow of Chinedu’s hip as he was leading the livestock into the cover of the woods. He stumbled and fell into a ditch breaking his femur. He immediately lost consciousness.

As the battle wore on, the crows became desperate, mounting one final assault in hopes of breaking the resistance, and finding a way of retreat. Three dark, hunched beasts with hideous faces surrounded Nathan. He was not trained for battle, but fought as best as he knew how. Chimwa came to his rescue from the left, taking one of the crows down from behind. His momentum carried him into a second. They tumbled into a heap, wrestling for a killing position. Nathan took the opportunity of distraction to attack his last assailant who fled at the sight of his fallen comrades.

Chimwa finished his opponent, but did not stand in victory. Nathan knelt down to see that Chinedu had fallen on the crow’s blade. It was impaled deep into his left lung; there was nothing to do to help him. Gasping for breath, Chimwa charged Nathan to care for his son.

Seeing that the enemy had fully retreated, Nathan called his youngest son, sending him to seek Chinedu and the livestock in the woods. The young man found Chinedu unconscious, and surrounded by scavenging wild dogs. He fought them off, and brought the boy to his father’s house. By the time Chinedu was able to leave his bed, Nathan’s son had died from a diseased wild dog bite.

next segment

looking for the right name

2005-10-25T09:22:00.000-05:00

I've got another segment written, but I've got a problem. This is a pseudo-fantasy novel--more reality based than a traditional fantasy novel, but still keeping some of those elements. There is a 'race' in the story that fills the role of the traditional orcs. They are not orcs, though, and I don't know what to call them. I can't tell you much about them, as that would spoil the story: everyone's afraid of them, some think they're demons, etc...

In the current draft, they are called 'bogies'. It's a silly name, so I'm looking for suggestions. Let me know what you think.

I'll post the next segment, one way or another, in the next day or two.

It Begins

2005-10-20T17:17:00.000-05:00

Chinedu sat cross-legged in the dusty semi-circle in the center of the village. He knew the tale Sebastian sang better than the young bard—a good tale at that—but could not keep his mind from wandering from the song, as though it were a chore to listen. He glanced nervously around at the rest of the villagers, hoping he was merely distracted by personal affairs. As he glanced around the circle, he was diverted from his task by the strong gaze of Yavonne, sitting toward the front of the left end of the semi-circle.

Yavonne was holding her two-year-old son: he bore the name of his father, Jule, who had been killed in a quarrel over land just before his first son’s birth. Yavonne was the niece of Nathan, the old man reclining next to her; the village’s first bard—his face reflected the fears Chinedu tried to fight. When he finally broke his gaze from Yavonne, cursing his weakness, he saw Nathan’s discomfort. The old man’s face comforted Chinedu in more ways than one—he was not losing control over his mind—but confirmed his fears at the same time.

When the tale was finished, the townsfolk meandered off towards their homes rather quickly. No one stayed around; no one was moved to stay. Sebastian put away his lyre, nodded toward Chinedu, and left, as well. Chinedu wondered to himself how the young man could appear so calm in the face of such…failure, was the only word that came to Chinedu’s mind. He shuffled off towards his small hut at the south edge of the village, his head hanging low, his lips mumbling the tale Sebastian sang.

“Chinedu!”

He was so startled he nearly fell. When he realized it was Yavonne standing near the door of his hut, he did stumble, but managed to maintain his balance.

“You nearly stepped on Jule.”

The toddler was shuffling around on his untested feet just a foot and a half in front of Chinedu, and Chinedu had not even noticed. Yavonne’s dark hair framed her sun-tanned face in a way that made Chinedu feel 20 years younger. A man of 45 should not feel these things, he told himself.

“You are not a failure, Chinedu,” she said matter-of-factly, yet with clear empathy.

“How can you say that, Yavonne? The whole village hurried away from the telling, tonight. The heart of the tale was missing! When the people gather for a telling, it is not a chore. It is to be a delight, and a renaissance of our communal spirit. We cannot afford to lose our…I mean, the village cannot afford to lose their soul in such uncertain times…” He trailed off, looking lost.

Picking up again, he said, “35 years, I have sojourned among your kinsmen, and still, I cannot connect to their hearts. Sebastian learns all that I teach him; he memorizes every scrap of information with hardly any effort. But, he sings a tale as if he’s recounting a list of herbs. It’s a chore to him. There is none of his heart in the telling. I have failed to reach his heart with the stories of this people.”

“Chinedu, you carry the heart of the Kannah people as deeply as Nathan. And, you have always communicated to my heart. When will you sing me the love songs of your mother’s tongue, again? Jule has been gone for more than two years. My son needs a father, and I want no one but you. I hold you responsible for my widowhood. You backed down once, I beg you not to do so again.”

He was stunned. How dare she speak with no concern for propriety! How dare she accuse him of responsibility for her widowhood!

After a moment, he closed his mouth, and lowered his gaze. “You speak the truth. I was a fool and a coward to not stand for my claim to your hand so many years ago. I will speak to Nathan tomorrow. You should leave now. It is not proper, and I am no suitable company tonight. I must rest. I will redouble my efforts with Sebastian.” And, he turned towards the door flap on his hut with a great sigh.

Yavonne bowed slightly and let him pass. Her eyes beamed with intense energy, yet creased with a tear. She smiled with joy, but her lip quivered in concern. She gathered young Jule in her arms, and turned back toward the center of the village where her stone house stood next to Nathan’s.

Click here for the next segment.

hotel rwanda

2005-03-17T13:03:00.000-06:00

Why is Christianity in America struggling with questions of Relevance?

Have you gone to see Hotel Rwanda yet?

If you have not, and it is still showing in your city, you must see it!

I went to see this movie with a handful of XA students last night. Several of us wanted to learn more about the genocide that occurred in Rwanda after developing a great friendship with Paulin (Rwandan MPH student at Tulane) last semester. I did not expect to be moved as I was, as I had just recently done some more thorough research, and have been fairly knowledgeable about the massacre.

I watched most of the movie slightly on edge (it is a well acted and written movie) from the tension, and in mild shock. I was moved to tear a little at one point, but felt basically numb. Then the movie ended with the end of the genocide, and a picture, ever-so-brief, of hope and love. At the time, I did not understand why I broke into sobs. I have not cried like this since reading Cry The Beloved Country in highschool, and then in 2000, when my friend Matt VanRyn was killed in a terrible auto accident. My head still hurts from sobbing and shaking.

I prayed things like "Please take me out of this world that can do such things." I am terrified by the realization that I am a part of the world system that fosters, and turns a blind eye such things. I feel powerless, but powerlessness can be a consolation. I see now that what broke my emotions was the face of hope. I believe that I can make a difference, and that I must make a difference, but I don't know how. I hope for the Kingdom of God to come in peace and justice, but I am lost for what to do in that hope. Hope can bring rejoicing, but hope can bring sorrow. I wept in the face of humanity's evil, because I have hope that it can be defeated. If I had no hope, I would remain consoled and numb in my powerlessness.

blogII moves to xanga

2005-02-19T00:05:00.000-06:00

blogigo was annoying, so i moved my other blog to xanga

http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=nolakid

a very interesting article

2005-02-18T23:25:00.000-06:00

eightstar turned me on to this article

This is a very interesting article. It is also quite long, but worth the read.

The author recounts some of a story from his high school years: his 'born-again' phase, and a little about how we "left the fold".

What was profound for me was the kinship I felt with this guy as he spoke about how he is still "haunted" by this phase. He is haunted by his love for Jesus. I feel his pain.

I've had many mental wanderings in, around, and through faith, sometimes even out of, maybe. But, I cannot "leave the fold" for one simple reason; I am desparately in love with the Shepherd. Jesus holds my heart in a deep and seemingly unshakeable way. No matter where my mind goes, or even my emotions, I cannot let go of Jesus. And, he is so profound, powerful, and real to me as to keep me believing in his deity. I've never known of any other man or god so...AWESOME. He stands alone. I stand with him.

double duty

2005-02-15T23:05:00.000-06:00

Well, I've started a second, "safer" blog, which I will be able to "publicize" to a wider circle. There's a lot of stuff I've written here that would just fluster, even anger some folks, and I don't want to do that. Some people just see the world differently than I do, and I can't make them change. I hope I can influence them, and they will influence me, but reading this blog would be a step toward ending relationship, and I don't want that.

So, my time will be divided between here and www.blogigo.co.uk/chialphamatt

Regarding my most recent post, well, it blew up into a ranting and raving session at God. The questions went deep, and bundled with my inability to swallow the concept of hell as active torment for eternity. I'll spare everyone my rants. Here's something else:

The call of Christ flies directly in the face of all hedonism. His call is not to congregate in safe (boring) communities, insulated from the devestation of hedonism and wickedness. The world is wise and ardent in pursuing its aims. The follower of Jesus must be all the more. People spend gobs of money and time and energy to revel at Mardi Gras. Jesus followers ought to spend gobs of time and money and energy to confront wickedness, injustice and oppression, and to break the powers of poverty and ignorance--to encounter and share eternal joys and pleasures with every creature. Christ's call is a call to charge into battle, not retreat.

So, basically, it gets really difficult for me to divorce my efforts of sharing faith and the core of my faith, itself. The theology and philosophy behind those efforts is intimately tied to my relationship with God. If I am losing confidence in my "ministry" or leadership, or questioning the concept or current methods of evangelism, I end up losing confidence in faith. It's a tough pill to swallow, but it's actually kind of comforting to know that my belief and practice are so tightly knit together; that's never a bad thing.

there really is more to say about this. it will be on one of my blogs soon.

humility vs. ego and the fine line paradox

2005-02-09T21:37:00.000-06:00

I keep running up against the same question. Sometimes it's a nagging doubt in a relationship. Othertimes it saps my confidence from my work as a campus missionary. Occasionally, it threatens my faith.

It can be phrased many ways. Here are few to help draw out the nuances I wrestle with:
Where is the line between the concern of love and the demands of selfishness?
What is the difference between a bold defence of truth and a bigoted belittling of another's perspective?
How much of my truth is the Truth, and how much is contextual construction?
Where does one fall from humility and teachability to the quicksand of relativism?

The challenges of postmodern philosophy, the outspoken claims of irate and disillusioned "postChristians", and the realization of my own undercurrent of arrogance have combined to make me very conscientous of this fine line paradox. I have a significant amount of experience with "street witnessing" or "contact evangelism", and it is in these scenarios that I began to see the battle. When I meet someone to share faith with them, I can take a couple of different approaches. However, the most often used approach is a rather domineering approach that I have come to see as being more about the expressing of one's ego, and/or the fulfillment of a religious obligation than about truly sharing the truth in love. If I am to love someone, I must do my best to express that love in a way s/he will understand as honest care. Love is not something I can express on my own terms.

I know I'm jumping around in this a bit, please bear with me.
Where does love enter the picture? Well, I am convinced that the Great Commandment (Love God, Love your neighbor) comes first in priority, over and above the Great Commission (make disciples of all nations/preach the Good news). When I seek to fulfill my role in the Great Commission, I must do so in obedience to the Great Commandment. The people I interact with, whether it be in a faith conversation, through public speaking, or in a day-to-day relationship must be honored more than myself.

...that's all for tonight. I will continue, hopefully tomorrow.

eightstar strikes

2005-02-01T20:58:00.000-06:00

eightstar

this article is exqusite, and hints at the feelings behind my resolution, below

my new year's resolution

2005-02-01T20:08:00.000-06:00

22dec2004
I have decided to waste my life.
In the words of the post-modern philosophers, "every action takes place in a web of social struggle." No action is without violence, and every embrace carries exclusion with it. This is the world I live in. This is the world I will waste my life on.
There is no utopia I can create. There is no great eternal peace that I will foster, nor will I impose my own peace on the world. I cannot end racism, sexism, ageism, or any other form of bigotry, hatred or prejudice. But, I will waste my life in pursuit of this dream.
In the midst of my struggle for justice, truth, peace--embrace--I may just bring reconciliation into a broken friendship, or help an international student find truth and justice buying a used car. Maybe, I will find the courage to uncoditionally face and embrace my wife without exclusion. Certainly, I will find Jesus i the midst of it all. I'm convinced that he will be in this struggle with me, as he wasted his life on the same dream. He embraced exclusion itself. He will be with me.
And, in the midst of this waste, I hold onto hope that the Kingdom truly is at hand, that Jesus is returning with the light of all truth, the reconciliation of perfect justice, and the liberation of real peace. It's a fantastic, foolish dream. I believe it in the core of my being.

grad school essay

2005-01-21T22:38:00.000-06:00

This is a rought draft of an essay for my application to UNO's MA of Sociology program. I had no idea what to write when I wrote it, and still don't have much of a clue. Any criticism/comments/editing you have to offer would be gladly accepted. email me or leave a comment

My desire to pursue an MA in Sociology is a culmination of a life-long interest in history. This interest first took an anthropological turn early in my undergraduate studies, as I investigated and grew to love the panorama of human cultures. Since then, a growing interest in the social structures that mold the human experience has taken primacy in my academic pursuits. More specifically, I am deeply intrigued by the formation of individual and group identity.
In this MA program, I see an avenue to pursue my academic interests in such fields as philosophy, linguistics, history and politics, religion and culture, while directing these pursuits toward practical application. I have a strong interest in, and a passion for action regarding such issues as interpersonal understanding, racial reconciliation, and justice for the underprivileged/oppressed.
I believe I would add value to the Sociology department, as well. I have a unique perspective to share due to my undergratuate education in a small evangelical Bible university, and my vocational experiences as a clergyman working in the university setting. Also, I have an ardent desire for learning, as is demonstrated in my academic record, and my personal reading during schooling and since graduation. This desire for learning has helped me avoid bigotry and narrow-mindedness while developing strong and well-informed convictions.
I look forward to the opportunity of furthering my formal education in sociology at UNO. New Orleans is my new home, and is a great place to investigate the workings of society with its distinct cultural heritage, obvious social conflicts, and real need for justice on the social level. This program will be a formative experience in my personal and educational development, and I hope that I will be a real asset to UNO's Sociology department.

tongues

2005-01-19T21:01:00.000-06:00

What is the gift of tongues? Why did God give it? Why does God give it? What do we then do with it?

These are questions of utmost importance to a minister licensed with a Pentecostal fellowship; a minister that believes in the Holy Spirit empowerment the Pentecostals treasure. Being that minister, I have made some notes in answer to these questions.

This gift, first reported on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), acts as a sign of the Spirit’s presence. This is seen especially in the account of Cornelius and his household (Acts 10), and the subsequent discussions over what to do with Gentile converts (Acts 11 and 15). The Jewish followers of Jesus come to the conclusion that God truly has chosen to save the Gentiles because of the sign of the Spirit’s presence, namely, the gift of tongues.
This is very similar to the account of pre-king Saul in the Old Testament (1 Sam 10). Saul was anointed to be king, and he then “prophesied” as evidence of the Spirit coming upon him for this role. Another instance of this ecstatic sign of the Spirit’s presence can be seen is the narrative of the 70 Elders (Num 11).
God uses the expectation of a sign to teach the original disciples a lesson: “I am with you to empower you,” and the Jerusalem Council a lesson: “I am saving the Gentiles.” Through the rest of Acts, God continues to use physical signs to show that the Spirit has come upon a group of people (Acts 8, 10, 19).
It seems that God continues to use the Gift in much the same way today. The Pentecostals have developed a distinctive doctrine over this experience: The Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the Initial Physical Evidence of Speaking in Other Tongues (IPE). It seems to me that this may be a bit of an overstated case in light of Paul’s teachings on speaking in tongues, but I cannot say from Biblical insight that this experience is invalid or untrue. God certainly does initiate His servants into empowered ministry, and many experience the Gift of Tongues as a sign that this initiation has taken place. In this light, it is always important to recognize that the IPE is an initial experience, not a culmination of all that the Spirit has to give.
Looking at the doctrinal statements about tongues in the New Testament, an interesting dichotomy takes shape. There seems to be two or even three different kinds of Spirit-enabled tongues. The first is the most obvious, the initiation we just spoke of. Paul also talks about a speaking in tongues that is followed by interpretation within the worshipping community as a form of prophecy. Actually, the experience of the 120 in Acts 2 functions in this way to some extent, as well, as the nations present heard the greatness of God praised in their own languages by Galileans. Finally, there is the “personal prayer language” idea that seems to be present in 1 Corinthians 14, and possibly Romans 8.
It is difficult to be dogmatic about the existence and practice of the personal prayer language. The statement that most supports its existence, and promotes its practice is Paul’s thanksgiving that he speaks in tongues more than all of the Corinthian Christians (1 Cor 14:18).
However, it is important to look at this statement in its context; Paul is speaking about the corporate worship of Christians, and the proper usage of gifts like tongues and prophecy. In this context, some very helpful instructions are given that clear up much of the controversy about this gift. Let me try to summarize these insights as bullet points.

o Love is greater than all spiritual gifts, and every Christian is an important part of the Body of Christ, regardless of giftedness, or the lack thereof (1 Cor 12:12-27; and 13).
o Every Christian ought to desire spiritual gifts, including prophesy and tongues (1 Cor 12:31; 14:5, and 26-28).
o Those who speak in tongues edify themselves (1 Cor14).
o No one should pray only in tongues (1 Cor 14:15-16).
o When gathered together as a worshipping community tongues should only be used in decent order with the goal of interpreting, as tongues alone can become distracting, even hurtful (1 Cor 14:1, 13, 23, 32-33, and 40).

In conclusion, the Gift of Tongues is a valuable gift to the Body of Christ when properly understood and administered with love. This gift is of great encouragement to those who receive and practice it. It is a gift that may be for all believers in one form or another, and should not be under or de-valued, nor should it be overvalued. This gift can be used to edify the whole Body if used decently, out of respect for all others present, and accompanied by an interpretation.
I see that for most circumstances, those of us who experience tongues should use this gift in the privacy of our personal worship of God. If we sense that we are being empowered to deliver a message to the gathered Body through the vehicle of tongues and interpretation, we should also feel empowered by our community to do so, and pray for the interpretation. Those who do not speak in tongues ought to desire this gift, along with the greater gifts, and encourage the proper usage of this gift by others in the community.
There are two common usages of this gift that I see as out of spirit with the Spirit of Jesus’ teachings and the cannon of the NT. The first is when tongues is used as a litmus test, dividing the truly Spirit-empowered from the lesser. This is a travesty, no matter how “Biblical” the doctrinal support is. Second, the classic Pentecostal prayer meeting, where everyone tries to shout in tongues louder than the person next to her or him. Corporate prayer and worship requires the “Amen” of 1 Corinthians 14:17. The community must speak together to God in words that all understand. As mentioned above, the only apparent use for tongues in corporate prayer and worship is the message in tongues followed by an interpretation.

it's impossible - a poetic contemplation

2005-01-19T10:04:00.000-06:00

It's impossible that You could be,
yet here You are
with me.

It is impossible,
and yet, You create possibility,
and I'm alive
despite the numbers of probability.

It is impossible that You would come,
the chances zero,
that an impossible God
would become a man
for the sake of me,
to die in humility.

Who stacked the odds?
You don't add up.
I can't find room for you in the smallness of my logic,
And Yet,
You are
breaking all my best bets
standing alone where nothing ever was.

defining my identity

2005-01-15T01:04:00.000-06:00

In my recent reading (Exlusion & Embrace, Race Matters) I have come across an interesting theme: the evil of seeking to define identity, either as an individual or as a group.

First, seeking to define identity is based on a false premise; there is no absolute identity for us, as we form our identity in relationship with the people around us and the situations we find ourselves in. Groups are the same as individuals for this; as West says "there is no essential blackness", there also is no "essential whiteness" or "essential Americanness", etc., etc., ad inifitum. Identity is something always in flux between the give and take of relationships, and the constant action and reaction of life.

Second, seeking to define an essential identity is an act of violence. Usually, this violence is done to the other, as we scorn committing violence against ourselves. When we seek to define our own identity, we do so by excluding the other. For our identity to be pure and absolute, we must exclude the other from ourselves. Hence, selfish people push others out of their lives, and communities seeking absolute identity (like Arians), push others into concentration camps.

This is a very brief and simplistic outline of the argument. I hope to come back and give it a more thorough treatment soon.

professional athelete

2005-01-11T19:08:00.000-06:00

I had my first ever real conversation with pro athelete last week. I met my mother-in-law's cousin, Jay Bell (of Pittsburg Pirates, and Arizona D-backs fame). He's actually retired now, but I think he's currently working with the Diamondbacks organization as some kind of coach, in his second year of retirement.

Anyway, I only report on it, because the guy was genuinely nice to talk to. Actually, I did something I've never done in a conversation before; I asked about his kids. Weird, eh? It flowed in the conversation, though. It was in no way random or prying.

I'm a bit of an anti-celebrity guy, so I don't make much of meeting people in the public eye. I found it somewhat refreshing to talk to this guy, and see how humble and real he is. There's more to what I'm trying to say, but it's totally eluding me.

To summarize: I enjoyed meeting Jay Bell.

The Day of Judgment

2005-01-04T10:07:00.000-06:00

I was reflecting on John the Baptist's statement, "Look the Lamb of God!"

The Day of Judgment is a promise of hope for the upright. David and the Psalmists, the Prophets, too, longed for their deliverance and vindication by the hand of God before the Judgment seat. But, there is a problem…
Not one of us is righteous, not even one. David wrote that one, himself. None of us can even claim to understand what uprightness, in an objective sense, is. We are locked in our social constructs, blinded by our ego and Maslow’s Pyramid of Needs. Our hearts are crafty, and invent ways of doing evil. We certainly shall not be vindicated at the Day of Judgment, but declared guilty of small-mindedness, petty jealousies, and world wars.
But, God knows us in our context, which the Church Fathers have called “original sin”. God is merciful in the midst of our individual egos, seeking not to annihilate us into His being, but to recreate us in His own perfect state—an objectively upright existence. This is the other longing of the Bible’s poets and preachers, redemption, the coming of the Upright One who would suffer on behalf of all.
I do not claim to understand God’s justice. I do not grasp the Atonement. But, I recognize it as true. There is reconciliation through the Messiah, as each evil act and thought and word is put to rest with Jesus’ body. “It is finished,” and we need not learn war anymore!

books of the month

2004-12-11T19:55:00.000-06:00

Last month I read East of Eden by Steinbeck, and Recapture the Wonder by Raavi Zacharias. Partnered with my current reading of Exclusion & Embrace by Miroslav Volf, I have had a profound interest in the Genesis saga. I'm reading through Genesis in The Message paraphrase for the first time. There is so much raw literary power in these narratives. The current construction of my faith sees it as real history, but not literal history. The impact of these stories is so big that I feel less and less need to worry about the depth of their actual historicity. Not that I don't care if it's pure myth or pure history, but that it really doesn't matter that much. However, if there was no historicity to it, I would never have given it the time and energy I have. The narratives communicate God and ourselves to us, but if none of it was real, than it could just as easily be a made up god and humanity that they are communicating.
I hope I made sense in what I just typed. I'm a little fuzzy headed, and my hip muscles are a bit in spasm, and I'm slightly hurried. Sorry for the whining.

a good article from sojo mail

2004-12-11T19:53:00.000-06:00

Don't put a restraining order on God

by David Batstone

In Cupertino, California, a public school teacher ignited a cultural powder keg this semester when he supplemented the standard-issue history book with materials backing up his contention that religion was central to the founding fathers.

In New York City last week, several major television networks banned a paid advertisement produced by the United Churches of Christ. The commercial features a core value of the UCC church - that it welcomes with grace all people into its community regardless of an individual's background.

These recent, high-profile events give us a clear view into the often muddled moral values debate that rages from shore to shore in America today. They show both cultural conservatives and cultural liberals using the same arguments to restrict public conversation. More pointedly, each side of the polar (as in cold...war) divide is happy to ban a message from the public square if that message does not align with its own cherished beliefs.

I expect a spirited debate from both ends of the spectrum, so better to address the assumed frontline counterattacks. Liberals claim they are upholding the cherished separation of "church and state" when they put a restraining order on God from entering public schools. The Constitution, however, nowhere stipulates that religion should be deemed a taboo subject in public life. The state (and by extension public schools) is prohibited from the establishment of religion, indeed. But that's a far cry from outright exclusion.

Steven Williams wants to teach his fifth-graders how deeply Christian values shaped early America. So he passed out to his class William Penn's "Frame of Government of Pennsylvania" in which Penn wrote, "Government seems to me a part of religion itself, a thing sacred in its institution and end."

Talk about crossing the church-state wall! With that kind of pedigree, we should kick Pennsylvania out of the Union posthaste. Wait a minute, put Delaware on that list as well. A list of religious clauses in the 1776 Delaware state constitution requires officeholders to "profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son."

To ban any reference to religious conviction in the early history of America would be rewriting history. So that's ridiculous. But the complaint goes deeper in the Cupertino case, because Williams is a practicing Christian who wants his students to realize that faith in God continues to be an important element in government. A parent of a student at the Cupertino school complains, "This is not about teaching history, this is about indoctrination."

I honestly do not know if Williams is directly proselytizing in the classroom. I bet not, though I would not be surprised if he hopes that a seed of faith might be planted in his students' lives. For most secularists, it does not matter. Any teaching about religion in history or contemporary life is akin to "indoctrination."

Cultural conservatives likely are standing atop their chairs cheering at this point. But why don't they apply that same enthusiasm to defend the right of the United Church of Christ to proclaim its message on national television? It's because they are no less interested in legislating their own narrow stream of moral values. They, too, want all Americans to be converted into their own image.

After reading all of the hype about the "controversial" commercial, I went to view it on an Internet site. I was totally shocked at how innocuous it was. In my opinion, it also captured the gospel stories of Jesus accepting into table fellowship those very people that his society deemed as "unclean." Like it or not, UCC theology and ethics has a firm grounding in the biblical tradition of grace and freedom.

The commercial does not address gay marriage as much of the conservative media would lead you to believe. It does not even address the gay lifestyle, beyond showing two men who fit the stereotype approaching the church steps and being turned away by a bouncer. At another point, two women standing together smile broadly at the camera. I suppose that's the offensive "lesbian" moment.

But even if the United Church of Christ did promote more directly its theological position that God blesses gay people, even to marriage together, is that sufficient reason for censoring its message? I hope you agree with me that it is not, for I would like to reserve that same open platform for other faiths and other values. Surely, we could all come up with extreme, destructive viewpoints that do not merit public access, whether they offer divine justification for their values or not (the KKK comes to mind). But that's not the case here.

Maybe the toughest challenge of living in a democracy is to respect the freedom of other people to live according to values that are not your own. Real freedom, however, does not thrive in a moral vacuum (the ardent secularist) or a moral straightjacket (the ardent theocratic). What does my ideal of democracy look like? I can sum it up in a single sentence: A person arrives at faith freely, practices it openly, and uses dialogue with others about their own life path to deepen their understanding.

Secular Christmas

2004-12-04T13:12:00.000-06:00

Christmas is a funny time in America. It's the only time of year where you'll here the Gospel of Jesus clearly preached in song over PA systems in shopping centers all over America, and across the airwaves of radio, even television. It is also, the only time of year your typical "family-friendly, listener-supported, Christian" radio station will play "secular" music by "secular" artists. On top of that, some of American Christianity's greatest musical saints can be heard singing blatently "secular" Holiday tunes. And, in the midst of all of this, most everybody is very happy with the arrangement: Christians are happy to hear the "secular" songs, and nonChristians are satisfied with the Gospel music. It's a funny time.

Maybe, it's a sign of the reconciliation Jesus came to do: eradicating our religiuos mumbo-jumbo for the sake of our souls by Truth.

Heaven IV (dropping prose)

2004-11-27T14:25:00.000-06:00

Heaven rises beyond words,
rides upon a silent, shifting cloud. Imperceptible,
but true.

Heaven speaks its own language,
a longing and a hope--
perfect consummation.

Heaven pushes the envelope;
You can't write it to your loved ones--
it doesn't cooperate,
plays by its own rules.

Heaven never forgets.
It cannot be forgotten;
not a memory, not a dream.

Heaven III

2004-11-24T16:44:00.000-06:00

I saw Heaven as a forever adventure, a continual path of exploration and discovery. Zacharias references Chesterton in the celebration of monotony; the child's monotony.
Could Heaven be a constant chant of "Again, Again!" "Holy, Holy, Holy"? Is it astonishment and wonder at the uncovering of God's face before our freshly remade eyes; The One revelation constantly replayed, rejoiced, renewed? This dance of expectation, consummation, celebration, and fresh expectation is very similar to the idea of continual discovery, except the Identity of God is fixed. Can a fixed reality be so wonderful as to evoke eternal celebration?
Only God could be this reality. Is He?

Heaven II

2004-11-22T23:29:00.000-06:00

Some thoughts from my journal. This is just as I wrote it. Some of it is borderline heresy that needs some major working out, but that's for another time.

Heaven is the dream of humanity, the pinnacle of desire; consummation.
Heaven is an equlibrium of inifinity. In God's presence is fullness of joy, but not the fullness of a large and delicious meal. This fullness is of joy, which is strength, a dynamic life-giving thing. The equilibrium is fullness of joy; it is found at the convergence of two peaks: desire and satisfaction.
Satisfaction is most complete the instant it exists, and detiorates rapidly. Desire (longing) is a thrill, a joy of its own, and the joy of it grows with the intensfication of the desire, if the desire is moving toward satisfaction. In God's presence we find the moment of most intense longing, and most complete satisfaction in the same eternal instant.
Heaven is not a static good feeling. It cannot be an instant everything, because the instant everything is received the joy begins to decrease. God is infinite, which, logically, means He does not even know the end of Himself. You could see Him as constantly expanding, like the Universe He created, and He is always a moment behind Himself, in awe of what He sees. When we join Him in this eternal adventure is when we experience fullness of joy.

...I think I just made Heaven sound like fun to myself, a fun that really would last forever. It's still terryfing, but it's good.

Heaven

2004-11-22T01:02:00.000-06:00

I am now reading Ravi Zacharias' Recapture the Wonder. He's got some good intellectual fodder here, and some strong spiritual exhortation. It's far from exquisite literature, but good for contemplation and conversation. He quotes CS Lewis from The Weight of Glory:

In speaking of this desire for our own far off country, which we find in ourselves even now, I feel a certain shyness. I am almost committing an indecency. I am trying to rip open the inconsolable secret in each of you--The secret which hurts so much that you take your revenge on it by calling it names like Nostalgia and Romanticism and Adolescence: The secret also which pierces with such sweetness that when, in very intimate conversation, the mention of it becomes imminent, we grow akward and affect to laugh at our selves; The secret we cannot hide and cannot tell, though we desire to do both. We cannot tell it because it is a desire for something that has never actually appeared in our experience. We cannot hide it because our experience is constantly suggesting it, and we betray ourselves like lovers at the mention of a name.

Now, that is exquisite literature, and exquisite longing.
What is heaven? What is this place or state of being that we long for, and know must be? How could it be that we would pass from this existence to nowhere or nothing, or something as gray and false as Sheol? No, there must be some Other World that our hearts lift up to. There must be, else our whole existence is a mockery, a very small mockery.

hopeless optimism strikes again

2004-11-13T13:59:00.000-06:00

I'm currently reading East of Eden by Steinbeck. He writes a good story. He does what I like best in a novel: character development. The characters are deep, full, and very well developed.

I had just finished Section 1 of the book, and was wrestling with the deeply entrenched evil in Cathy and Charles. I was thinking about why I get so frustrated with such characters in a story. The reason is that I constantly long for redemption at every turn. This tendency becomes very apparent when I read a good story or watch a good movie, because of the focus on a small number of characters, and that most stories are a microcosm of real life magnified into the veiw of the reader/viewer.

My life is completely focused on the idea of redemption. I refuse to believe in fate, unforgiveness, or incorrigibility. I cling to hope at all times, that all men, all women, all children can be redeemed, remade, reborn.

more poetry

2004-11-11T17:07:00.000-06:00

I wrote this yesterday, too. Maybe I'm moving into another prolific time of writing poetry. I've had 2 primary prolific periods of poetry: senior yr. of high school (97-98), and senior yr. of college (01-02).
Anyway, here are the words:
-------------------------------

You are so gracious to recreate me every moment,
as I stand, fixed on the temporary universe, your potter's wheel.

I am a vapor, yet you've found some way to hold me,
and you said that you would carry me for eternity;
Nothing can steal me from your perfect hand.

This is bliss,
to live in the impossibility of the moment,
held by invisible hands,
in the midst of becoming

solid.

You are so gracious to recreate me.
Every moment I am made more true,
and my existence moves closer to Reality.

poem today

2004-11-10T17:36:00.000-06:00

This is not silence.
In the stillness of infinity
I am still speaking my mind.

My thougts pierce the comforting blanket of peace,
and I analyze this tranquility to shreads;
my mind is so slow to shut up.

Wholeness versus individuality;
my ego is bigger than me.
I can destroy the universe with a word.

Peace offends me.
I am absent without leave,
I have forgotten everything with impeccable timing.

Awe. I should worship,
I should take off the dirty sandals of my intellect,
for this is holy ground.

I should be filled with infinity, if only for a moment,
and give up my game:
words against the void of space.

November is Here

2004-11-08T14:50:00.000-06:00

Well, the election came and went. I was proud to exercise my civic right/duty. I felt I cast the most informed votes of my brief voting career (the third time I've ever voted). The choices were less than stellar in most of the elections, and my third-party revolution failed miserably, but I am glad to have played my part in the national and local electoral scene. I look forwar to increased political involvement over the next four years.

I'm also looking forward to reading The Politics of Jesus, which I am ordering from Amazon.com today. I applied for a credit card and they're giving my $30 in free books! Woot!
Book 2 of that purchase is scheduled to be Mirsoslav Volf's Exclusion and Embrace, unless I get disctracted by Cornel West's Race Matters.

Speaking of Reading, here's my list of October reading:

A Generous Orthodoxy Brian McLaren
Blue Like Jazz Donald Miller
Foucalt's Pendulum Umberto Eco

I've already written a bit of my reaction to McLaren. I am looking forward to grabbing a copy of Miller's new book soon. He writes in a very entertaining style, and makes astute observations in a clean, clear, and crisp manner. Eco is heavy reading.

The interesting thing about Foucalt's Pendulum is how I see it as the culture from which The DaVinci Code was born. I had heard a lot about Eco, so decided to pick up one of his novels from the local library. I saw the name Foucalt, and thought it had something to do with the French philosopher. I was wrong. But, it seemed quite clear to me, from the very beginning, that Dan Brown read this late 80's release, and decided to plug it into his American, Indiana Jones arch-type formula. The result was the run-away best seller The DaVinci Code.

Kudos to Brown for picking Eco's dense novel over for the foundation of his two Robert Langdon novels. He's made a lot of money (a lot more than Eco made on Pendulum), and had to do a fraction of the work. I just think it's sad how eager Americans are for a novel that says Jesus has no relevance to their lives. The novel they chose to worship is a formula novel to the core, with little real scholarship, and no creativity.

an interesting thought on Taxes

2004-10-28T09:57:00.000-05:00

I am a member of Renovare
In the most recent Perspective newsletter Lon Fendall, Director of the Center for Global Studies and the Center for Peace and Justice, as well as the former Legislative Director and Campaign Manager for US Senator Mark Hatfield, was interviewed. He said this:

Generosity. For some, April 15 is a day of mourning, as if paying taxes were the greatest imaginable burden for being Americans. The Bible teaches us that we are to give cheerfully to the Lord's work, even with reckless abandon. It seems reasonable the we would rejoice on "Tax Day" as well, as we think about cheerfully giving a portion of our earnings to those in need.

Wow!
Of course, there is still the issue of whether our tax dollars are actually helping those in need, which is much of current political debate. However, the point is well taken. If many Americans, myself included, would get our thoughts off from our own comfort, even for a little while, taxes would not be such a burden. Our tax dollars support the common good; roads, law enforcement, national parks and forests, national defense, support for children whose homes are unlivable, etc...

I think that this idea could revolutionize the face of the "Religious Right". If we begin to see ourselves as agents of change, people whose job it is to bring freedom, justice, hope, and succor to the week, needy, sick and imprisoned (as Jesus commanded us), our ideas regarding taxes, social economics, and so on would all be changed. Our political choices might range beyond the topics of tax cuts and abortion. There is more at stake, and a grateful, cheerful attitude should be the first step toward changing our nation for the good.

Vote all Your Values

Holy Feet - originally penned in 2003

2004-10-26T18:15:00.000-05:00

Holy Feet

I wish I could have washed them
(dust covered and sandaled), but
I never realized the need,
the honor

when they walked desert roads,
the desserted wilderness.

I was in awe when they stepped upon the waves.
I was in fear when the walked the Roman stairs.
I was foolish
until they were crushed
with nails--bloodied and dead

like my hopes upon that cross.
All my good intentions went to hell
when he stopped breathing,
cried out!

I cried out--cried myself out,
buried my tears behind that massive stone.
I was stoic

for three days,
dead
as long as he was in my unbelief.

Until, once more, my tears unleashed
when the dead stone moved alone,
moved by an unseen Power,
made alive once more.

This is why you find me on the floor
face down at his feet,

Holy feet, I worship
kissing God without sandals.

There is nothing more between us.

my online indulgences

2004-10-24T22:46:00.000-05:00

I've realized that several of my recent posts are a bit less than ... well, they're not particularly good reading. In fact, they're bad. I apologize. Hopefully, I'll be able to write some stuff of real quality over the next few weeks.

In the meantime, here are a few diversions:

homestarrunner.com
you've gotta love Strongbad emails
hattrick.org
online fantasy soccer, yay!
megatokyo
goofy online comic about some fanboys. i dig it.

my political rant

2004-10-19T22:31:00.000-05:00

I am not typically inclined to desire a meeting with celebrities; however, I would jump at the opportunity to meet George W. Bush in a personal setting. He seems like a real man, with real faith, and real flaws. I’ve seen him succumb to party politics, and the evil of mud-slinging in this election, but all in all, he seems like a genuine guy. He believes what he says, and he says what he believes—it’s beautiful.

Yet, I disdain the idea of endorsing his politics. He is convinced of the ridiculous idea that America is God’s nation in the world today; the peace-keeper, the law-maker, the bearer of the “white man’s burden”: democracy, capitalism, and Christianity to everyone, everywhere. This mindset has embroiled us in a disgusting war in Iraq, while we do nothing in the land of Sudan where Saddam Hussein looks like a non-threat, and Saudi Arabia where most terrorists come from and are funded from. Of course, we can’t get in Saudi’s face, they’re our oil friends…

Ok, I’m getting ranty, already. It boils down to this: Bush has bad foreign policy (you can’t force democracy on a nation, that’s tyranny), Bush has bad economic policy (you can’t fund a government by increasing spending and decreasing income; and the rich of America need no more incentives to continue oppressing the poor and sending work over-seas), Bush has a skewed view of America (we must be held accountable by someone, even if that someone [UN] is a bit tacky).

But, Kerry….eie, what’s the difference? First, I can’t vote for a guy whose unofficial campaign slogan is, “Bush sucks, vote for me!” Second, his official slogan, “Building a Better America,” or whatever it is, is just as much a joke. The guy runs his mouth on and on about how he was not in favor of the war in Iraq, the way it happened…who, the heck, cares?! We’re in it, now, and it’s got to be solved. As far as his plan to medicate the whole nation…umm, we can’t even afford Social Security as it stands, how are we going to fund a $1.5 trillion a year program without totally ransacking the whole country’s economy? He has no answers, because there are no answers. Our nation is not ready for this kind of a plan, and I’m not so sure it would be a good thing, even if we could fund it.

Otherwise, Kerry is pretty much in line with Bush. His view of America in the world is slightly less arrogant, but only in a “it’s cool to be against the war” kind of way. He shows no more concern, maybe less actually, regarding areas of the world where real nasty stuff is happening. He’s just the other side of the same old political system coin. The coin lands heads up or tails up, it still crushes everyone underneath it.

It’s time for something new. The political scene in America is polarized beyond salvation. I’m voting third party, and I’m sticking with Badnarik, the Libertarian. The Green Party is too socially “secular”. They want to mandate funding for abortion in America and around the world. They want to remove all vestiges of faith of any kind from the public square…. They’re a bit scary with their insistence on secular, naturalism. Humanity is a faith-based organism, you can’t remove faith from its inner or outer workings, and expect it to survive long.

The Libertarians would deregulate everything, but without the anti-faith design. Power would break down to local levels, and real solutions to social problems could be advanced. A Libertarian America would be anarchy. A Libertarian Federal Government could be the freedom our nation needs to get itself back together.

Regardless, it’s time to do my part in the “third party revolution”. I’m not voting against Bush or Kerry. I think voting against a candidate is stupid. If you can’t vote for someone, then it’s time to vote against the system that denies us real choice. I’m voting against the current political system!

Let the earth tremble and shake at my ballot!

Intersections: Bumper Sticker Theology : a post about the importance of faith.

2004-10-18T13:41:00.000-05:00

I've been thinking so much about recovering a Jesus-centered understanding of love the past couple of years, that I've left off a clear understanding of faith, to some extent. It seems that faith needs some redefinition these days, as well. Life in Christ is about three things: faith, hope, and love. To belittle or to be ignorant of any of these three is a mark of a shallow Christian spirituality.

Check out this article. It briefly makes a powerful point.

Intersections: Bumper Sticker Theology

Let it Blow

2004-10-14T21:40:00.000-05:00

I pulled out my old poetry notebooks today, and was pleasantly surprised. Either I've lost my eye for good poetry, or I actually did write some half-way decent stuff. You can tell me, eh?

Anyway, this piece is one of my best, I think (written July 02).

She was looking for Jesus in fine clothes,
flowing robe, colorful tunic, and shining hair--
a glowing halo-face would complete her picture.

That's when she met a nice man with shocking eyes
and beard and shabby, worn out shoes.

He was dancing with a faded cap near his feet,
loose change in the bottom, a dollar blowing out
in the breeze from his excited twirling.

She stopped to grab the dollar. He said,
"Let it blow, it will go where it's needed."

So she stood up hesitantly with diverted eyes--
he had stopped swirling, and was loving her
with his eyes, so aflame with the music in his head.

Then the melody rangout from his chest, resonating
within her heart and lungs and spine.

He offered his hands to her as he began to move again.
The dollar flipped into the street, into the wind;
she turned to save it, mumbling, "I don't understand."

current thoughts

2004-10-11T21:57:00.000-05:00

I emailed president W, my Rep, and Senators tonight, regarding the funding of AIDS relief for the world. You can do the same at www.seekjustice.org
I still hope to put a call in to the White House regarding this issue. I've never called about something, and I'm certain that taking the effort to call communicates more to politicians than a simple email.

In the meantime, I read a Generous Orthodoxy by Brian McLaren last week. I was challenged in one particluar area:

I follow McLaren's idea of a generous orthodoxy in many areas. I believe this train of idealogy is in the path of Jesus, the way of love, and is gracious toward the world and all who live in it, yet faithful to the Truth. McLaren challenged me in the area of generosity toward other Christians, even the majority church of America. I have journeyed a good distance from the idea of Christianity that I came up in, and have ventured away from Foundationalist thinking in some areas. However, I still struggle with "right" and "wrong". It's so natural for me to think that God has led me away from what is "wrong" in the majority church and into what is "right". Of course, this is a seriously exclusivist thought. It's arrogant and repugnant.

I have wondered and wandered around Christianity because of arrogance and exlusivism, and in my reactions, have become reactionary to a certain extent. I readily admit that I do not have it all put together. I still have much to learn from brothers and sisters of the more Fundementalist strains of Jesus's followers, but more often feel that I have something to teach them.

Granted, some of my angst grows from feeling excluded myself. If some people knew my views on politics, theology, and the art of doing church--how I wander from the standard Evangelical/Fundementalist/Religious-Right idealogy--I would be excluded, judged, etc... I often feel like less of a citizen of Christ's Body just listening to some folks talk, and knowing that I cannot express my heart, as it would blow up into a huge controversy. But, this is no excuse for the self-righteousness I have found lurking in my heart.

I do not know if God will be leading me back toward my roots, or continue leading me in "new" directions (yes, I still think God has been a major part of my journey), but I know the Spirit is convicting me of sin, and looking to lead me deeper into the way of love.

Lord Jesus, Son of David, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Save the Millennium Challenge! - DATA, Debt AIDS Trade Africa

2004-10-08T21:13:00.000-05:00

Save the Millennium Challenge! - DATA, Debt AIDS Trade Africa

A way to get involved ... YES!!!

I will be calling on Monday. Do it.

some thoughts

2004-10-08T15:46:00.000-05:00

I was commenting on another blog, and ended up typing this. I want to share it.

I am convinced that following Jesus is more about living a life of active love and spontaneous compassion than it is about anything less miraculous. It's in the midst of this complete revolution of the entire world system that the Spirit shows up does the fireworks (visible miracle-type things) to celebrate the advance of God's Kingdom in our hearts and in the world.
Of course, this isn't a box, by any means. Spirit is Sovereign, and acts outside of my pre and subscriptions. However, I find this way of living to be the most sure way of finding God in the midst of the ever pressing apathy and despair of our world.

more evil and my meandering thoughts

2004-10-08T15:36:00.000-05:00

International News Article | Reuters.com

Ok, more tragedy. More prayer. I'm going to be active somehow, despite the helpless feelings, as BAB commented.

I read about this in today's USA Today. The article makes this note regarding tension in Israel, as the targets of these bombings were Israeli tourists in Egypt:
Israeli forces have killed 84 Palestinians in Gaza in the past eight days in response to Palestinian rocket attacks that killed two Israeli toddlers...

Is it just me, or is there something wrong here? The typical American, and especially Christian American thinking is a blind support of all things Israel. I think this amounts to racism: "84 of you are worth 2 of us." This is wrong.

I'm thinking about voting for Kerry.

more on that soon, i hope.

evil is alive and well

2004-10-04T15:17:00.000-05:00

This is not even new news anymore--I read about it Friday, but prayer is still needed.

Militants in Iraq blew up three cars in Baghdad, killing dozens of people; about three dozen children, in the midst of a celebration of some sort. There is something seriously wrong in our world, and only something, someone divine can fix it.

Let us weep.
Let us mourn.
Let us pray.

Reimagining Spiritual Formation

2004-10-04T15:13:00.000-05:00

I did not plan to purchase Reimagining Spiritual Formation. It was offered in a package deal on Amazon.com with A Generous Orthodoxy by Brian McLaren (my first ever McLaren book), and after the discount and the free-shipping incentive, RSF came into my possession quite cheaply, and I figured that if it turned out to be cheesecake, I could at least recoup my money on half.com, or even make a dollar or two, so I gave it a try.

It hooked me quickly by its communal composition—including six individuals’ thoughts and experiences through excerpts of their journals, which make up a good portion of the book. So, I continued reading.

I found in the book a solid board of ideas that I could butt up against, think through, and accept, tweak, or leave on the page. It did not read like church growth hum-bug, nor re-dressed Christian consumerism—like Emerging Church/Emerging Worship, wherein Dan Kimball seeks to avoid that trap, but seems to fall in, to some extent, nonetheless. The book presents what it intends to, a re-imagining of spiritual formation, and it does so without presenting itself as the right or true understanding, but as an attempt to step into God’s story with the whole person in the context of an open, sincere community.

Pagitt and company differ from the likes of Kimball in that reading this book does not lead me to the thought that I need to institute any particular practice into the community I am attempting to lead, but helps me redefine the context of that community. Granted, much of what was said was not new to me, but the individual experiences recounted, and the experimental steps taken by Solomon’s Porch (the community the authors belong to) really helped sharpen and focus some thinking, and challenged my reticence towards some ideas that have been floating around in my head, or the heads of others I have become acquainted with.

Finally, reading Eldredge’s Epic earlier in the same month had me very much ready for this book—a book about entering into God’s story, as opposed to believing a set of propositions about God. I love this.

words and readings

2004-10-03T22:18:00.000-05:00

Books I read/finished in Septemeber (more on these later this week)

<>Epic John Eldredge
The Essential Rumi Rumi/Coleman Barks
Reimagining Spiritual Formation Doug Pagitt

Some Words I wrote last week:

I want to read the sky,
as if there might be words there;
etched in a silent hue above,

beneath an ocean of stars,
a single wave.

A single wave or a stroke of some pen,
it might be true
it might shine inside/against the blue,

or in the twilight, a sign,
an open book to teach the Sun.

The moon waves good-bye
but never speaks-
"Where are the words?"

As if there might be words there.
I want to read the sky.

---and, indulge my words, one more time---

Drawn into a world of cycles,
undulating in and under--
me--I am awash with circles,
spinning under, always under.

But I see or perceive or wish into being
a Rock that becomes or Was, yes Was, and Is
more real than me--above and free;
a forward motion unforgettable.

This is learning and formation--
a million billion years under pressure,
but still spinning, spinning, spinning--
No, it must be forward, I can see that way.

I can see the motion,
I can believe a quickening rhythm,
and a consummation.
God makes love to the world.

A Son dies and rises, the cycle
is undone--no more pedals,
no more power. No spinning.
The downward spiral is cliche and over.

the underdog

2004-09-28T09:52:00.000-05:00

I was reading in Luke 18, today. I was there a couple of weeks ago, too.

The truth of the matter is that American Christians, especially of the WASP persuasion, know very little about the experiences of the people Jesus came as champion for. Jesus came for the underdog; the socially, religiously, and economically depressed. As a WASP in America, I am part of the social, religious, and economic majority.

This makes things interesting when it comes to learning to live in the way of Jesus today.

haiti

2004-09-26T22:25:00.000-05:00

Jeanne blasted Haiti.

I'm beginning to think there is a specific connection to this island nation so full of despair that God is arranging with me.

This is interesting. I did not remember this until now, as I type. Before I met Jen, she was convinced God had called her to Haiti. That perceived call ended up being a part of an experience that nearly destroyed her, but I wonder now, if God is looking to restore what the locusts have eaten.

Please pray for the suffering people of Haiti.

Intersections: Is Postmodernism just a White Thing?

2004-09-25T17:42:00.000-05:00

Intersections: Is Postmodernism just a White Thing?

I wrote this in the corner of a book--some EC book, I can't remember which one--over a year a go, but had kind of forgotten about it. This is an interesting post, and some of the comments are definitely worth reading (this is not a plug for my comment).

I think it's about time I express some of my current thoughts, and even journey through and about the whole emergingChurch movement. I'll be thinking about it, and see if I can supply some words here in the next week or so.

part three of 3

2004-09-24T23:24:00.000-05:00

3: Did Jesus die to vindicate God's law or to restore broken humanity?

I think the preacher may have misspoke when he said something to the likes of, “Jesus came to restore the Law that we had broken and shattered through sin and rebellion…” However, the thought struck me, and I know that thoughts along this line are somewhat widely held among Christians. The idea that Jesus was somehow persuading God not to unleash the wrath He so longed to release upon humanity is in this camp of thought.
Granted, there is some sense of Jesus appeasing the wrath of God on our behalf—substitutionary atonement. Yet, the Bible is clear that God sent His only son, because He loved the world, and to bring salvation. Jesus said of himself that he had come to seek and to save the lost. The mission of Jesus was quite clear. He had come to bring grace and mercy, because the Father had grace and mercy to express to the world.
Jesus was on a rescue mission, not a “saving face” assignment, which brings me back to the idea of vindicating and/or restoring God’s law. Yes, humanity has been bucking against the Law since it was given; kind of like Saul’s “kicking against the goads”. I like the word picture Jesus used when he appeared to Saul. The goads used to keep the plow animal in line would inflict pain upon the animal if/when it chose to kick against them. The goads were not easily broken. This is even truer with God’s Law. The more we buck against it, the more we are broken and shattered, but the Law stands alone, cold, and unfeeling. God’s Law is never broken. It breaks those who rebel against it, or it grinds them to powder, just as Jesus does.

part II of 3

2004-09-22T17:33:00.000-05:00

2: I struggle with the idea of a static God.
for more from me on this subject : Proverbial Paradox

Humanity longs for purpose, meaning, identity, worth.I long for worth, a part to play in the story of the cosmos. Sometimes, it seems that the idea of God reduces rather than enhances the feeling of human, individual worth.

There are really two basic worldviews regarding humanity’s purpose and worth:

Materialism: what you see is what you get.
You are an ape with an overactive brain, and too many emotion chemicals. Real materialism ends in nihilism—there is no meaning, everything is blind chance.

Existentialism / Post-modernism / New-Ageism:
All of these are basically the same. There is no objective meaning to life, or at least if there is, it is ineffable. So, meaning is created. We create it ourselves in our fight against blind nature, or as a part of consensual reality, or through ecstatic (many times drug induced) “spiritual” experiences.

Then there are the Theistic versions of these two:
I will stick to Christian theology, as that’s what I know best. However, from what I can tell, all other theistic religions function basically the same, and non-theistic religio-philosophies are either not-so-new versions of the New Age trick, or an inverted materialism that ends in annihilation; nihilism.

Nihilistic Theism:
In most Christian theology, God replaces the universe as the blind chance in our existence. He starts the story. He ends the story. He inserts and discards us in the story as He sees fit. Our existence or non-existence has no effect on the direction, or the conclusion of the story. We are merely actors speaking our lines in a story determined before time.
This is the basic worldview of Reformed (Calvinist), and Armenianist theology. Nothing we do ultimately affects the PLAN. You can see this in the belief that we truly cannot oppose God’s will. If He wills it, it will come. If we cannot oppose, we cannot consent. We cannot work with or against. We simply are and play our role—the role determined for us. I cannot live this way.

Existentialist / Post-modern / “New-Age” Theism:
Existentialist equaling Open or Progressive theism; Post-modern being communally, rather than dogmatically driven; and “New-Age” representing mysticism. I find myself in all three camps, barring the Progressive variety of existentialist Christianity.
It’s a mystery. I take comfort in the statement that “Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever.” But, there are times when that makes Jesus look very cold and aloof, almost ineffable. I want God to be dynamically involved in my daily life, not statically faithful to His PLAN.
Of course, what I want has no effect on reality, but I do believe in and worship a dynamic God. Am I orthodox, Biblical? I think so. I hope so. Somehow, someway, God is perfect (un-improvable and un-defilable), yet active and moving. The Bible calls Him the Living God; alive with joy and love and wrath!

part 1 of III

2004-09-21T21:11:00.000-05:00

in church Sunday, a series of events and thoughts led me to jot down 3 struggles in my faith and intellect:

1: I struggle with Christian Triumphalism.
2: I struggle with the idea of a static God.
3: Did Jesus die to vindicate God's law or to restore broken humanity?

Today, I wrote a response to #1:

I believe wholeheartedly in the total and complete triumph of God over evil, and in the impending doom of "the world" at Jesus's soon coming return and judment. Jesus is the winner of that victory, and the judge that will enact the required destruction on the Day of Justice.
I follow Jesus as one rescued from the doom of judgment; resting on the grace of mercy under the covering of redemption justice. I do not, however, rejoice at the destruction of the wicked, despite my hope for restoration and justice.
I do not rejoice in that doom, because Jesus does not rejoice in it, but weeps. I do not rejoice in that doom, because it is my doom--a doom I have been rescued from due to no good work of my own. I stand in humble solidarity with those to be condemned, urging and praying that they, too, might receive mercy. Jesus, also stood in humble solidarity with us, and too our doom into himself. He weeps, bleeds for the condemned.
The Kingdom of God is a subversive power, not a strong-arm tactic. My role, the role of all Christians [the Church] is to love--to love God, and to demonstrate that love in relationship to my neighbor; friend, and especially, foe; rich, and especially, poor; strong, and especially, weak. My triumph is the triumph of love over hatred and apathy; the triumph of peace over angst and war; the triumph of joy over depression and death.
The Kingdom of God is here. The Kingdom of God is triumphant. I will work to see the Kingdom reign in every way I know how. I will seek for justice and peace in politics. I will work for harmony and friendship in my neighborhood. I will work for intimacy and trust in my family. I will strive for strength and encouragment in friendships. I will pray and give and live for hope and deliverance in the world.
I will not work, nor pray to inflict my worldview on "the world" around me. I will not demand rights, but I will pray and ask for them. I will not refuse rights to others simply because they offend me, but I will try with all my understanding to work for what is best for all; a world of justice and peace where the truly wicked are condemned and all rejoice at it. Even so, Lord come!

ruminations iv

2004-09-13T13:27:00.000-05:00

The mystery does not get clearer by repeating the question,
nor is it bought with going to amazing places.

Until you've kept your eyes
and your wanting still for fifty years,
you don't begin to cross over from confusion.
..................................................................................
Awe is the salve
that will heal our eyes.

And keen, constant listening.
Stay out in the open like a date palm
lifting its arms. Don't bore mouse holes
in the ground, arguing inside some
doctrinal labyrinth.
...................................

Learning to let go.
Forgetting to grasp at God.
Easing into the gentle grip of the One.

Ceasing the idol-making business;
the god-inventing fantasy.
Saying fewer words,
and listening to deeper silences.

But, still I am active
in rest.
Desire is awakened, no longer dulled
by the pressure of attainment.
Need and want are one
in contentment and wonder.

semi-random blog of note

2004-09-13T13:13:00.000-05:00

Awakeland (the blog of Seth Worley:
"ah, the blog. it really is a vicious tool used to convince people that they really are the leading characters in their own little movie. i'm pretty exhausted. this whole 'leading role' thing is getting tiresome and starting to make me sick. supporting characters were always cooler anyway, and ensemble casts were always more interesting.
let's quit with the self-righteous blogging. 'woe is me' is old and useless if all you're doing is typing it. i'm tired of all of this honesty and authenticity that only shows itself through the comforts of a website.
see you guys around."

----
just discovered this blog - a fellow coffee-lover it seems.
i really like his thougts here. i feel them myself fairly regularly these days. how do i be all that i am, yet remember that i am not the lead role?
this is the long and sometimes lonely journey of true humility:

I am what I am, nothing more, and nothing less, so help me, God.

i told you so

2004-09-10T18:10:00.000-05:00

A good friend is trying to make a difficult decision. Say, she’s trying to decide whether or not to date this new guy. You are opposed to the idea and are somewhat vocal about it. She wavers and waffles, and finally decides to give the guy a chance.

You have the privilege of being right. He’s a prig, a snot, a jerk, a player—he makes meat pie out of your dear friend’s heart, and she is sitting with you now. She has moved beyond sobbing, and is taxiing to the runway of “bash the man for all he should’ve been worth”.

It’s temptation time for you.

…

“I

told

you

so.”

…

Out it comes, and you probably didn’t even think about it. You just said it, because you had the right to. Here she is tugging at your heart because of a stupid decision you warned her against. You warned her!

“So, what’s the big deal?” you ask. The big deal is that you’re playing a part just as perverted and evil as the player/jerk/snot/prig. You are a jerk. (Don’t be offended, I’ve been this snot-faced loser myself, far too often. My idiocy has helped teach me the lesson I’m conveying.)

Here is you friend: embarrassed (she remembers what you said), miserable (her heart’s been ripped out and served on a platter), and desperate (rejection is fun, until you realize it’s real). Here she is, and you’ve got nothing better to say than “I warned you,” or “I told you so?”

Actually, could you say anything worse? Here’s the moment for compassion and encouragement, empathy and hug, and you’re exerting your power over her. “Hey, it hurts doesn’t it? Yea, if you just would’ve listened to me, everything would have been ok. I know what’s best for you. You should always listen to me, because I’m so much smarter than you. Next time, you’ll listen to me won’t you?”

No, you don’t say all those words, but you get the point across, and she answers back, “I know, I should’ve listened to you.” And now, isn’t she so lucky to have you as a friend. She feels so comforted and encouraged knowing now that you know everything, and are more than willing to hang it over her head.

Sounds pretty bad, eh? Yea, that’s because it is bad. I’m in the process of learning to swallow that insidious expression of pride and power mongering. What good does it accomplish besides making me feel good and powerful in the midst of another’s embarrassment and/or misery? God is capable of answering us with “I told you so” at every stage of our existence, every moment of our despair. Yet, He never does. He quietly restores our broken heart and let’s us choose to trust Him as He sets us on a path toward joy. Let’s be imitators of God.

2004-09-10T18:06:00.000-05:00

mr. potter...again. he's just too cute to go unpictured on a day like today. i feel lame posting pictures of my cat, but look at that silly face. how do you not post that?

on the topic of cynicism

2004-09-09T08:46:00.000-05:00

from my journal 30.8.04

My issue = cynicism

Cynicism is an enemy of sincerity, it rejects sincerity and wars against it. Sincerity requires faith and faithfulness. Cynicism has faith in nothing, and is faithful to nothing, not even itself.

A ripe cynic doubts the sincerity of his own cynicism and destroys all beauty. An inquisitive heart seeks beauty--this is the truly open mind. Cynics live only to cast doubt and destroy faith. Cynics aren't doubters, but work to develop an atmosphere that fosters unbelief and pessimism. A cynic sees no solutions, looking only for problems.

objectivism sucks (the life out of you)

2004-09-08T08:09:00.001-05:00

this is part of a letter i wrote recently

Cynics are good for a couple of things—desecrating beauty, and stumbling around looking for wisdom that they’ll never find because it’s sitting on their doorstep. Reason can disassemble beauty in a way, and you have let your mind do it. However, the beauty has not changed, you’ve simply screwed your eyes shut to have a more logical universe around you—darkness and purposelessness are most logical.

As for Objectivism, I think the best rebuttal is CS Lewis’ The Great Divorce. Self-centeredness leads to the implosion of personality. A person concerned only with expressing his or her own self has no capacity for joy (which is ecstatic, outside of self), no capacity for discerning beauty (which is always other), and no capacity for intimacy (which demands an orientation into the other).

In The Fountainhead, the protagonist (Roark) is an ideal of Objectivism. He is a man who lives only to create the buildings in his mind. People hate him because he refuses to compromise. People also simply avoid him, because he is a non-person; his personality is consumed within himself, and he has no capacity for simple friendship. Rand tries to pain a picture of friendship and romance for him, but it reads shallow to me. He makes a couple of friends that are semi-ideals of Objectivism, and a romance flares with an Objectivist in the fires of being perfected. Roark and his “lover” do not love each other. Often, their feelings are more of spite or even hatred, but they love themselves within the other. They bask in their own beauty as reflected by the other. This is not intimacy.

I think it’s a very simple case to prove that we are inadequate in and of ourselves. To live a life based on self-worship is a life devoted to increasing inadequacy—what is logical about that?

The greatest human urges are left completely unfilled in an Objectivist lifestyle. Honestly, I doubt anyone has ever lived that lifestyle. Rand’s forward to The Fountainhead expresses sincere gratitude to her husband, a task that is wholly non-Objectivist. She expresses her reliance upon him as an other to help her be and write to her greatest potential. This is certainly more than loving her own reflection in her husband. She was loving that part of him that was wholly distinct, the otherness of him. Love is impossible without distinction.

the best coffee

2004-09-07T17:02:00.000-05:00

downloading a spyware buster...

i thought i'd let y'all know that i've found some great coffee.
allegro is a bulk coffee available at Whole Foods. it's fair trade, shade grown gourmet whole beans. the prices are good, too. so, you can enjoy a great cup of fresh coffee for a good price, while doing a little bit to help farmers in developing nations and save a bit of rainforest. how can you beat that?

my favorite so far is the Guatmala-Anitgua. the Mexico is nice, too, and i haven't tried their version of Kenya yet, which is my usual fave.

cheers.drinkup!

my list of influential books

2004-09-02T21:41:00.000-05:00

working on my profile a little. i still have this nagging vanity that someday my blog will be widely read. what a schmuck, eh?

anyway, thinking through my "favorite books" just became painful, so i switched to "most influential". this is still difficult, for a few reasons.

1) several of my favorite books do not make this list, which troubles me. why do i like them so much if they don't seem to have had all that much influence on my life? of course, i can answer that, now that i think about it. a lot of my favorites, tell me what i want to hear, and reaffirm what i already am and think, so the influence is small. or, they were just great stories that i took a lot of pleasure in reading.

2) my influential list is almost 100% Christian, and skewed drastically to the non-fiction works. of course, as a follower of Jesus, books by fellow pilgrims should influence me, but i like to think that i'm open minded. seeing that "secular" books have had such little influence on me is mildly troubling, and the non-fiction skew makes me feel boring.

3) finally, some of the books that make my influential list are not all that "cool", and some even rank kinda low on my own favorites hierarchy. this, too, hurts my vanity. oh, the fickle self-image of a schmuck, what shall i ever do?

but hey, i just remembered a fiction trilogy that influenced me deeply : The Song of Albion by Stephen Lawhead. this trilogy began to teach me more deeply the value of a story, and moved me far forward in the rich, earthy variety of Christianity i seek to embody these days--alongside my mystical nature (that paradox is a whole cunundrum of its own).

these are the hands that built america

2004-09-01T23:29:00.000-05:00

Jen and I watched Gangs of NewYork last night. I found the movie disturbing in many ways, but insightful in a few, as well. And of course, ending with a stellar U2 song definitely helps it. It was a good movie, but I don't think it would be correct to say that I "liked" it, if that makes sense. However, it did inspire some writing, and may inspire another post if I get around to writing it before I forget. If you want that other post, nag me with comments or something, if I fail to produce, since I know there are like millions of readers out there...

Anyway, before the writing, some random news. I got myself a copy of A Grief Observed today, so I can read it again and mark it all up, rather than trying to read my friend's copy again without marking it.

On to the writing......................................

Building America

In the end, a dollar, but whose face?
These days, we call it liberty, the aim of their guns,
but who took the bullets in that name?

I am sedated,
I am unsung.

The war machine hides behind many masks,
but most readily devours the poor.
$300 will buy your boy and oil the gears.

I am easy,
I am untried.

"For the Union", "For the Reich", industry must churn on,
and whose face wins behind a smoking barrell?
Whose glee, whose grin at the flag of victory?

I am inflated,
Iam unconcerned.

The aim of their guns, and the bullts in my face--
my $300 will not be enough.
These are the hands that built America.

july/august reading

2004-09-01T13:32:00.000-05:00

July 2004

The Telling Ursala K. LeGuin

The Brothers Karamazov Fyodor Dostoyevsky

August 2004

Heretics G.K. Chesterton

Angels & Demons Dan Brown

A Grief Observed C.S. Lewis

Prophetic Evangelism skimmed Sean Smith

I really enjoyed Dostoyevsky. It's heavy and heady reading, but he makes such astute observations. One read of such a monster of a classic cannot do it justice, but I don't know when I will ever get around to reading that tome again.

The Telling was good sci-fi. A humanistic spirituality is expressed. The plot is not particularly engrossing, but the telling is quite good. It's all about the stories we live and have lived and will live. The best spirituality is based in stories, not dogma.

Lewis is amazing. This short journal/book is refreshingly raw, yet exquisitely insightful. I will be returning to this one again, soon, before my friend needs it back. Hopefully, some good posts will come in response.

And then there's Chesterton, what a card! He makes life so palatable, and so swiftly and conclusively condemns the mushy headed pluralistic tolerance of our day. "Be a man. Make a decision! If you're just going to wallow around in opinions, stop wasting oxygen and get it over with. Otherwise, get on with the business of living." {not a real quote}

a minor annoyance

2004-08-29T21:07:00.000-05:00

I was reading in Relevant Magazine the other day and someone made this statement that has finally got on my nerves. All of these Christian folks who like to call themselves progressive keep talking about how silly The Passion of the Christ was. It's like they are ashamed of a stunning portrayal of Jesus's suffering. The Relevant Article said that the movie seemed to be saying that violence was somehow good.
Hello? Do we follow the same Jesus? The violence against the Messiah was terrible, as the movie shows, yet it accomplished great good; it accomplished the completion of God's wrath against, basically, His own Self, rather than against humanity. We often call it atonement. Salvation, forgiveness of sin, eternal life, renewal and redemption--it's all available through the suffering and resurrection of Jesus.
Now, was the movie all that some prominent evangelical leaders were pumping it up to be: one of the greatest evangelistic tools/opportunities in history? By no means, was it such a thing. The portrayal is accurate for what it intended to be; nothing more and nothing less than a breath-takinlgy realistic reenactment of the suffering of the Messiah. This story makes little sense to those outside of the circle of devoted; i.e. well informed, followers. The violence is not explained. However, the portrayal should have a profound effect on the follower of Jesus. Remember his sufferings is the call of the Mass/Eucharist/Communion. This is one of the foundations of the Christian faith.
Will the movie ever enter my DVD library? Not likely. My list of favorite flicks? No. It's too heavy to be viewed regularly, or for me, maybe even more than once. However, it was not a silly movie, nor was it an insignificant event in our culture. Why don't the progressives shut up and make some progress somewhere?
As I said, I'm minorly annoyed. It's a lot of silliness that sounds like embarassment at the suffering of Jesus--not a very progressive Christian sentiment in my book.

ruminations III

2004-08-22T20:55:00.000-05:00

I am a strong knifeblade word,
not some if or maybe,
dissolving in air.

Am I that word? Are you?

This is the language I want to speak. It’s the language Jesus’ spoke. Apparently, Rumi knew something of it, too. He calls it the language of the Lover, I think he is correct.

Let the lover be disgraceful, crazy,
absentminded. Someone sober
will worry about things going badly.
Let the lover be.

Yes, that’s the business Jesus was about—being. He had little tolerance for self-important sobriety. He said YES, and it was so. He said NO, and it was complete. Jesus never says if or maybe. A lover truly loves when he forgoes the convenience of maybe and if, and says Amen and Never.

There is nothing compassionate or loving in the idea of tolerance. Tolerance is dignified religion; the logic of self-preservation. Love and Hope and Faith forgo these trifles for a higher cause, the disgrace of self-sacrifice and desire.

[Jesus] looked them in the eye, one after another, angry now, furious at their hard-nosed religion. He said to the man [with a withered hand], “Hold out your hand.” He held it out—it was as good as new!

I don’t want to fiddle around with the niceties of religion. I don’t want to succumb to the seduction of ease and routine, and the self-importance of duty. I want to be disgraceful and crazy that I actually love Craig across the street, and Kerry in a wheel chair a mile down the road. It’s so grand to love humanity, and so dirty to love one’s neighbor, but what shall I accomplish with so-called love for humanity and big ideas? I will gain a friend, share and create life; I will gain the world when I love my neighbor in the drunkenness of today, tomorrow, and the possession of moments.

Why the World Hates America

2004-08-20T20:47:00.000-05:00

Church of Fools - "sermon" by Tony Campolo

This article presents some of the reasons I am opposed to the current regime in America. Now, the President of the USA should be first concerned with taking care of America above worrying about how we rank in international opinion polls. But, the world sees some serious hypocrisy in our actions. I see that hypocrisy, too, and George W Bush is not solving it. I do not see how Kerry would make things any better, though, so I'm voting third party.

my vote

2004-08-19T22:47:00.000-05:00

I’ve decided two things regarding my vote for president this year.
1) I wish Kerry was not going to win, but I am pretty sure he will. At this point, Bush is a sure win in my state of Louisiana, though, so my vote’s pretty much useless if I vote for W. If things tighten up considerably in Louisiana, I will reconsider voting Bush, but for now it wouldn’t help anything, so I’m voting elsewhere.

2) I plan to vote Libertarian. I want to be a part of the third-party movement. Most of the major social issues in America cannot be solved by the current party system of politics, because the parties are completely polarized. The solutions to our problems need some of what each party holds dear, but neither will give a little to gain a lot, because what Republicans hold dear is what Democrats hate, and vice-versa.

So, we need a third party to enter the debate. If a third party can garner 8% of the popular vote, they will get government money to run their campaign the next year. That money will advance their cause greatly, and eventually, hopefully, open the political debate of America; opening it up out of mudslinging and rhetoric and into real problem-solving.

I chose Libertarians, because the Green Party is just freaky, and I think a Libertarian federal government may be best for America. As much as a third party might help us in our quest for a better nation for future generations, the real solutions are going to come locally, where compromise can really work. And, on the local level, people can network, know one another, and really know the issues at hand. Libertarians would open up states to do what they think best, and that may be the best thing for America.

I know I won’t be a part of electing Badnarik for president this year, but I may be able to play a small part in a growing revolution against the two party system—a system George Washington sagely warned us against.

mr. potter

2004-08-16T10:46:00.000-05:00

mr. potter is my kitty

just to clarify any misconceptions. i mentioned mr. potter in my previous post on gay marriage. he's my cat. he's ridiculously cute.

Gay Marriage

2004-08-16T01:10:00.001-05:00

Louisiana is voting on a marriage amendment next month. I have made my decision regarding my vote on this issue:

I do not agree with the typical Christian response that it is “us vs. the gays”, and that allowing homosexuals to marry is promoting sin. I, honestly, think that the type of freedoms homosexuals are seeking are somewhat similar to the freedoms of conscience and religious expression that Evangelicals prize and fight for. If two adults want to sin in bed together, who am I to stop them? If an adult or two or five wants to force or manipulate a child into sin in bed, then it’s time for society to step in and lay the smack down. Consensual, adult sex is not an issue for a democracy to be playing around with, lightly.

However, I will be voting in favor of the marriage amendment—to protect marriage as it has been traditionally interpreted: one man and one woman. I will vote this way, because I believe it will be destructive to the fabric of our society to allow fully recognized homosexual marriage. Let me explain:

Marriage brings with it some economic benefits: shared insurance, minor tax breaks, and so on. If homosexual marriage is fully embraced by America, these benefits will eventually disappear. If I can marry a man, why can’t I marry two of them, or one of each? When I was in college, I worked for a company that gave benefits to “domestic partners”. I wondered why it would be impossible for me to sign my roommate up on such a plan. He most certainly was my “domestic partner”. We just chose to have a celibate partnership. (There are many heterosexual marriages that do the same, I’ve heard.)

Anyway, where does it all stop? When do I get to claim my cat as a dependent for insurance and tax purposes? Can I do it now, or do I have to have sexual relations with Mr. Potter first? I know this is crude, but I need to express the point. If sex becomes the basic level of legal relationships, our country is in some serious trouble.

Above, I said that the economic benefits of marriage will disappear if homosexual marriage is fully embraced. They will disappear because there will be no end to whom is married to whom, eventually. With no-fault divorces available for like $69 in the newspaper, marriage is a pretty shaky institution as it is. Throw this in the pot, and marriage will lose the supports society has built for it. Granted, those supports do not make happy and healthy marriages, but they are incentives to marry at times, and incentives to work through some difficulties. Without these supports, marriage will become less and less secure in America, and I am thoroughly convinced that weak families equal weak nation.

In summary: I am opposed to legalized gay marriage, because it may well help destroy America.

justice triumphs over mercy - Clint Paul Bellanger

2004-08-14T13:10:00.000-05:00

Pilgrim's Journal - Insight into a Wanderer's journey - Clint Paul Bellanger

My friend, Clint, has some well reasoned arguments regarding pacifism, just war, and justice in general. Check it out.

As I recently said, I lean towards pacifism. Clint says,
Would you go against your survival instinct to hold an ideal that will make you extinct?
In certain situations, yes. I believe so strongly in mercy and peace, that I would die for them. However, as much as I disagree with Clint's belief that justice is greater than mercy, I cannot accept absolute pacifism.

One scenario where I reject pacifism is in the protection of my family. I believe my obligations of love and fidelity require violent action to meet the threat or reality of violence against my wife, and other immediate family members. Honestly, this extends quite far for me. Let me put it this way, if I was a student at Columbine High School and managed to keep my wits in the midst of the savegery that took place there, those kids with guns would not have had the opportunity to end their own lives before dealing with my justice--even if that justice ended succinctly with a bullet in my chest. I will not sit by in the presence of murder, and do nothing.

Also, I see that society must act of a slightly altered moral continuum than individuals, alone. This is difficult to fully elaborate upon, and it can easily be taken too far. I do not have time to delve into this tasty conundrum, but hope to sometime in the near future.

living for a dream?

2004-08-13T00:51:00.000-05:00

There was a dream....
and it was Rome.

Powerful words that framed a heroic film--one of my favorites. I've just finished experiencing The Gladiator again. It is one of those stories that moves you. Makes you desire; search for purpose.

I come away from these stories (and film often moves most deeply with the visual and the music enriching the story)--I come away from these stories feeling humbled, I think. Feeling like I am less of a man that I thought I was, that I am not as true as I dream to be. It is difficult to live for a dream--to make a vision real through sweat and perseverance, emotions, reason, and pain...but no blood.

It must be easier to die for a dream than to live for one. The dreams I dream have no enemies with swords. I cannot take up a spear and lead men to victory against tyrrany, or oppose cruelty simply by turning my back on the oppressor in a statement of defiance--a defiance with the penalty of death.

Despite my pacifistic leanings, I do not believe I truely am one. I would take up the sword to strike down injustice if the cause was clear. But, for me, my foes are not so clear. They are out of range. I cannot defeat the pandemic of AIDS in Africa by accepting arrows into my chest, or by suffering torture. I cannot remove the boot of oppression from the sweat shop workers in developing countries by execution, or by death in a hopeless battle. I must live for my dreams. Someone already died for them.

daily Rumi

2004-08-09T08:34:00.000-05:00

Rumi said:

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,
there is a field. I'll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that grass,
the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas language, even the phrase each other
doesn't make any sense.

This put some interesting thoughts in my head. What was the sin of Adam and Eve in Genesis? They ate the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil; the fruit of distinction. Is the field Rumi refers to Eden? As I've indicated below, before reading this poem, the existence of nothing but God would be the nonexistence of space, thus everything would be full. Could God be undifferentiated, and the fall of humanity was the illusion of distinction?

If I take the Bible to be true, which I must to consider Adam and Eve at all, I cannot answer that question in the affirmative, but I do wonder if there is some kind of truth to it. Don't ask me how it could be partially true while distinction/judgment is still virtue, I cannot explain that. However, Jesus and Paul both spoke of decreasing distinction in behavior when balanced with increased knowledge and recognition of the one true reality: God.

This is a post of conjecture. Some may find it interesting, others may find it useless. I find it mildly entertaining, and the thought processes before it were kinda fun.

U2

2004-08-08T17:53:00.000-05:00

Does it annoy anyone if I type without caps?
I really like the freedom I fell when I pitch some of the constraints of written English, but I won't do it if it's going to make a bunch of people crazy. Any comments?

Anyway, this post is random, but for one point.
I really dig U2, and I listed them in my favorite music section in my profile here at blogspot. For some freaky reason, my profile will not display those two simple characters. It makes me wonder if there's some strange copyright deal U2's got going on.
Well, It's a Beautiful Day, but I'm not going to the Discotheque.

Rumi of the Day

When I see your face, the stones start spinning!
You appear; all studying wanders.
I lose my place.

Water turns pearly.
Fire dies down and doesn't destroy.

In your presence I don't want what I thought
Iwanted, those three little hanging lamps.

Inside your face the ancient manuscripts
seem like rusty mirrors.

You breath; new shapes appear,
and the music of a desire as widespread
as Spring begins to move
like a great wagon.
Drive slowly.
Some of us walking alongside
are lame!

I love the first stanza. I only wish it were more true in my life. I sometimes get so lost in study, I fail to notice the beauty of Love's moment.

the weekend

2004-08-07T20:34:00.000-05:00

my in-laws are in town, and i'm writing poetry again.
today we were in the french quarter, after a rapid trip through the D-Day Museum. maybe it was the depression of a-bombs on my head: one war fought against evil--the other ocean was a wash of racism. whatever it was, the quarter was less than stellar, once more. i often have a distracted, melancholy attitude there--like i'm in a mega-mall, and maybe i am.
there was the Satchmo festival, but i only caught about 25min of music. the last 5 were stellar, though, i must admit.
well, i'm reading Rumi, too. he's got poetry running in my veins, i think.
and, i've decided to reinstute the capital H for he and him when talking about God. for a while, i was avoiding, as much as possible, using pronouns at all for God, but it just gets too unnatural, and too many would flip or just get confused if i occasionally said she. so, the capital H helps solve the problem for me now. i'm not using He as if to say God is a man, but a person, the One Supreme Person.

more words? -- they need refinement, but i like the overall feel.
Created Being

When God existed in the inevitability of space,
Was there any room? Was anything?
Out of nothing, comes everything, but
Where was God? Anywhere?

If God was space, God is His own place,
His own dimension, His own race.
Length and width and height, then time,
Always God.

Infinity is an ever running
Continuity of circles,
But not the sphere of space,
Which is full.

The circle of eternity encloses all
Of nothing—the everything that never is.
Space is creation, could it be imagination,
An illusion of mind on empty reality,

But not empty. Without space to fill
Everything is full, complete—
Nothing more is necessary.
So was God, but

Out of non-necessity exploded depth,
And width and height of love, even
A time in which things do,
And God divided the chaos of nonbeing,

Created being.

hopelessly optimistic

2004-08-06T11:44:00.000-05:00

Here's a roughly thrown together, partial response to some objections to Proverbial Paradox. Hopefully, it has some semblance of clarity. My attention was not 100% faceted when I scribbled this down.

Discerning Good and Evil

What is evil? If only good comes from God, how do we reconcile this with many of his acts that have cause so much pain, sorrow, even death?
The first step is to realize that sorrow, pain, and death are not evil in and of themselves, nor are comfort and ease inherently good. Sorrow does much good work in lives: character development, proper grieving over loss, etc... Pain, also is a great good, it tells us something is wrong. Pain is not evil, but a warning that evil may be present in, on, or around you. Death is a result of evil, but still works good, for to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
Step two takes us to the throne of judgment. Judgment looks like evil when it comes--pain, death, war, what have you. With Elijah, God stopped the rain for 3.5 years. Apart from the knowledge of God's judgment, one would definitely say that this is evil; ie, famine, the death of the innocents, and so on. But, this was judgment, and God was working good in the people, working to free them from the bondage of destruction through worship of all things false.
Now, we still have problem, though. If judgment looks like evil, how de we perceive God and his goodness in the trials and tragedies of life?
First, I must admit that this is a mystery. Paradox is real, and the clear answer is imperceptible from this side of eternity. But, there are some truths that guide us in discerning who and what is at work in our lives. The way we feel--happy or sad-- is not on those guides. Often, we will know beforehand. All through the Bible judgment is preceded by many warnings and calls to repentance in mercy.
From there, we turn to prayer and contemplation. Are we where we are supposed to be? Are we in step with Spirit in our lives? Thisis where we examine why we are in the situation we are in. Did we follow Holy Spirit here or have we made our own way? What does Scripture have to say about your current way of life.
Our attitude must always be humility, but there are times when we must stand on God's word to us, and recognize that we are in the right place while evil is surely opposing us. Humility also allows us to recognize when we have made our own way, walked in pride, and made ourselves God's enemy--the "evil" we are experiencing is God's tough love working to straighten us and our perversions of good.

words

2004-08-06T11:40:00.000-05:00

Forgotten poems speak of everything,
a vast body addressing the known
universe and dark matter,
a black whole of unknowing;
non being carries everything.

Spoken poems remembered
embrace self-consciousness, yet
faintly whisk the moon, leaving galaxies
untouched; eternity
remains empty of words.

There is no noise, it is
all noise,
and the forgotten supercedes memory--
source of wounds and pleasures.

Memory is awake with silence;
gaps of joy
when non-being forgets to end,
and ceases not to prattle;
whittling away the mind, and
the distance that is
pleasure.

Separation is unity
ever closer but always two,
and union swallows intimacy in a forever
of forgetting.

running

2004-08-02T23:51:00.000-05:00

I've listed running in my interests, so I thought I might say something about it.
I'm a fat runner right now. I probably average about 7 miles a week. I just ran 2.25...wow.
But, I've been a decent runner before. Ran Cross-Country as a soph in HS and a sr in College.
PRs : 5k = 18:00 and 8k=approx 31:20 and 10k (I've only run one) is 35:something

I hope to break all of those in the next year or so, but I need someone or even a small team to run with. I'm thinking about joining the running club at Tulane. Might be a good thing on multiple levels.

Anyway, my biggest goal is to run (at least 2 miles) in all 50 states. It's going to be a challenge, but here's what I've got so far:
Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missourri, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Florida, California, Wisconsin.
I think that's it. Currently at 11 out of 50. Just 39 to go!

gouge it out!

2004-07-31T20:36:00.000-05:00

I just returned from Mexico and have plenty to say. Ex Nihilo's comment need's real addressing, and I hope it will soon receive it. However, the thougt below hit me hard today, and I think it deserves a reading.
Cheers:

Gouge it Out! Cut it Off!
You must be as a little child!

Jesus is serious about leading us to the Father. He doesn't pull any punches.
"It's your ignorant self-reliance, arrogant self-respect, and abhorrent self-absorption that keeps you from perceiving the reality of God and entering into the Kingdom of Righteousness. Stop playing games at being good enough, and seeing how much you can get away with, and just let your Father love you. When it hurts he'll kiss it, when you're lonely and insecure he will embrace and encourage you."

Jesus demands faith, a childish and illogical virtue. He speaks out clearly and violently against all attempts to enter God's community that rest on human effort, ingenuity, pride, or reason. All of these are virtues in the proper conext--the context of faith. Apart from faith, all of these work us into the fall of Adam and Eve; trying to be God. Most times, we opt for trying to make God like us, but in our worst moments we all grasp for the rights that are God's alone; standing in judgment over him.

This is the sume of Jesus's teaching:
"Stop trying so hard to be what you cannot be. Stop trying to make yourself God--you'll only die in the process. You just can't cut it on your own. I am the Way."

He constantly turned all human reasoning on its head. He rejected the hypotheses of social evolution and the surival instinct of natural selection in human beings. He broke the human ego and exalted it to the heavens.
"You are more than any animal. You are desperately loved. You were meant to live for so much more."

*couldn't help the Switchfoot reference

mexico

2004-07-24T12:50:00.000-05:00

I'm leaving for Mexico in 4 or so hours.
Weird.
This is the first time I've been out of the country in 6 years, and only the second time in my life, but I don't feel any anxiety at all, and really don't feel all that excited. Maybe it's because I know I'm going to be working seriously hard while I'm there, or am balanced between excitement and dread. Excitement at what can be accomplished at the orphanage we're visiting and within the team from Chi Alpha New Orleans (www.nolaxa.com). Dread at leading into the unknown. I've grown more confident as a leader in settings I am comfortable in, but still get really unsettled outside of those settings. If you're the praying type, I'd be grateful for a petition on my behalf.

Oh, and if you're reading this and are not a close friend--like, you just happened upon this blog or something, would you indulge my vanity and leave me a comment sometime? I'm curious to see if anyone's at all interested in what I have to say, that is, beyond those people who are interested in me as a person they are in relationship with.

Auf Wiedersehen.
...yea, practicing spanish has brought back to mind my high school german. ironic, eh?

Proverbial Paradox

2004-07-23T22:49:00.000-05:00

Take an adventure into Matt’s journal:
Most of this below is taken straight from my journal as I wrote it, as it came to me. You’ll see why that is important as you read.

Proverbial Paradox

I need to find myself somewhere between Proverbs 19:3 and 20:24

People ruin their lives by their own stupidity,

So why does God always get the blame?

The very steps we take are from God;

Otherwise how would we know where we’re going?

Of course, I tend towards 19:3 and personal responsibility. It is obviously a paradox, but that’s not what makes it difficult for me. Here’s my kicker: evil in life must be owned up to—it’s our own fault, the effects of sin on the world, or the work of rebellious angel types—good in life is directly from God on all counts.

Wait! All of a sudden it makes sense! God is the direct source of all good. He is goodness, and all that flows from him is pure goodness. He is holy, there’s no shadow in him, no shades of good even. When God shows up, he’s always dressed in his very best, he owns no casual clothes, dispenses no casual, semi-goodness. Evil, on the other hand, is always the result of a God-created free moral agent—a being actively or passively corrupting and perverting goodness. If there were only God there would only be good. He cannot pervert or corrupt himself, and so James was right; “God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt any man, but each one is tempted when he is drawn away and enticed by his own [perverted and corrupted] desires.”

When evil comes in life, it is not God, and cannot be. When good comes in life, no matter how well we think we may have deserved it, it is always directly from God, and can be from none other. We can cultivate a receptive existence—one that is properly oriented through grace to be in the way of goodness. But, we cannot claim credit for its creation. Apart from God, there is no good. Jesus said that himself. Wow!

So, wisdom teaches the right orientation, teaches us to fear God; see him rightly, as the only source of all goodness. Wisdom also teaches us the proper respect for and response to evil: hate it and own up to your culpability in it. Why is there oppression in the world? Because I shop at Wal-Mart. In wisdom we learn to properly discern good and evil. Then we learn to walk in the way of Good, that is God. Jesus embodied it—the Word made flesh. For me and my body, we will serve the Lord!

A God-loyal person will see right through the wicked
And undo the evil they’ve planned.

If you stop your ears to the cries of the poor,
Your cries will go unheard, unanswered.

Proverbs 21:12-13

delight

2004-07-21T20:10:00.000-05:00

The heart is meant for delight. Paradise is our home of origin, the climate our species was designed for. Sure, we have adapted to life in the darkness of the world we have marred for ourselves. But, we were made for something different altogether.

And yet, our natural instincts, deeply buried as they are, still come to the surface at the most surprising of times, and we embark on a quest to create paradise again. (Our best creations come in art, literature, and music.) Unfortunately, the paradise we are capable of creating (outside of fantasy) is not suitable to human life. It is a singular creation, suffocating all others. In other words, the paradise of my creation is perfectly suited to the fullest actualization of my ego, my singular/unique ego. All others are suppressed in the actualization of my ego. They exist for the service of my desires alone.

So, life is full of suffering, which works one of two ways within us. It works to break us down, and in our brokenness we resort to reason and self-will (hopelessness), or we cast aside our purposes for the paradise of our design, and grab hold of hope. This is faith, and this is right.

Faith is right because of a peculiar truth: the God of hope has promised paradise, and promised to prepare a place for us, or maybe, prepare us for a place. This paradise is alive and fosters the fullest life, as it is modeled after its creator; infinite, unbound, all-embracing, creative and everlasting. Heaven is paradise in God’s heart and through his hands. Hell is paradise according to the fickle dictates of mortal humanity in all its weakness, isolation and suppression.

For more on the topic of humanity created for paradise see: The Journey of Desire by Tim Eldredge. And for more on the illogical nature of hope, as well as faith and love, see GK Chesterton in his work, Heretics.

Saying “I Love You”

2004-07-13T18:00:00.000-05:00

Why do I reject the political rhetoric/culture war of right-wing, conservative Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christians?

I reject this because I want to tell hurting individuals caught in the trap sin, “I love you.” I want to say this with actions and with words, and be believed. Once a person believes that you love and respect them, reciprocal love and respect is often earned. Then, and only then, will words of truth and morality be heard and taken to heart. Otherwise, those words are viewed as attack, and the reaction is similar to that of a cornered animal; it’s the flight or fight instinct.

The rhetorician has already destroyed trust with offensive words, fighting words. He can say, “I love you,” but he is not believed because of fear and anger.

Seeking to Avoid Persecution in America

2004-07-13T17:59:00.000-05:00

People are afraid of suppression.
Christians are joining together to enforce their political rights and are vying for political power in society. Through this we will restore America to Christendom and secure our freedom of religious practice and propagation, as well as our moral supremacy through legislation.
Of course, angry rhetoric against the majority is the surest way to ensure suppression leading to persecution. The American Church is stirring up fear and wrath in those who do not believe according to orthodox morality and dogma. They are afraid of these religious powers—afraid the angry “religious right” is aiming to suppress and persecute them.
Armed conflict is on the horizon; Civil War. America’s Church will take up the sword, and she will die by it. She is not interested in turning any cheeks or going down passively. The “religious right” believe they are the majority, and that this conflict will be solved through legislation. They are wrong. If they continue to wage this war, violent persecution and assured defeat is in store.
The surest way to preserve our liberty is to win the hearts of the people. We can do this through compromise, which is no option, as we would die in the process. Or, we can do this through compassion like Jesus. We can feed the hungry, care for the widow and the orphan, and defend the innocent.
In this manner, our actions will be heard, and people will be willing to leave Jesus in our hands. Currently, everyone wants to claim Jesus for their own; wants to “save Jesus from the Christians.” If the American Church would follow Jesus’ teachings in active love, Americans would be more willing to let the Christians keep him.
Persecution would still be a possibility. The gospel life is subversive to the American way of greedy consumer capitalism, and the power-lust of a corrupt political machine. However, “peace makers who sow in peace will raise a harvest of righteousness.”

justice is real

2004-07-10T17:32:00.000-05:00

God is just.

What a statement! Look around. How can things be just, or fair in a world of such inequity? Social, racial, economic inequality is rampant all around the globe. As far as we think we've come, we are still quite "un-civilized", "backward", and even "barbaric" as a species. However, we have grown wise and sophisticated in our means of oppression and war. Of course, all of this just adds to our inequities, rather than alleviate them.

Then, there are interpersonal inequities to face. Nature and nurture have betrayed us into unequal people. My DNA predisposes me to an alcoholic life, yours may have made you too short, or too round, and now you face ridicule and belittling, whether aloud or only in the minds of others, all of your days. Or, a man's father beat him, a woman's uncle sexually abused her for years. Emotional scarring creates serious disadvantages in a person longing to mature into a balanced adult with full opportunities.

Finally, there is just plain, fluke accident. My friend has only one working limb due to an auto accident. The other three are senseless. Or, there is my cousin whose brain was permanently damaged--her short term memory is tragic, and her personality was truly altered--in another auto accident, weather induced. Where is justice? Where is fairness? Damaged people--mentally, emotionally, physically or behaviorally--are not equally suited for success in life. They do not have the same opportunities.

Ayn Rand and the Bible have taught me the answer to this question. Mrs. Rand claims, in The Fountainhead, that a person's worth or meaning is found in his work. What a man ought to do is find his true passion and work at it with all he has for his own pleasure. In this, he will find himself.

Ok, I say, but what of those who are born into a situation where they are not allowed to pursue their passion, or never receive an education wherewith they can determine their passion? Are they forever doomed to idiocy and a meaningless life? Or, what do we say about the girl in the newspaper this week, born with muscular dystrophy and terrible scoliosis? If her passion was ever anything physically demanding, she is useless. Or, what of my friend who desires so strongly to be a high school counselor, but got himself a felony record as a kid? He will never be allowed to work in his field of passion. Is he useless?

Absolutely not, and here's why: It is not our deeds that define us. It is our being. "God's blessing makes life rich, nothing we do can improve on God." We are incapable of making meaning for ourselves. Or meaning is defined by our Maker, and that meaning is being. Being. In relationship, we are and are becoming. This is our purpose, and all of us are capable here. We exist. We are. Thank God.

Be. This is a command all cripples, neurotics, mentally retarded, and emotionally scared can obey. This is the great leveler. What are you? What are you becoming? This is our definition. Here is justice. We are made to be, not to perform.

King Arthur

2004-07-09T14:07:00.000-05:00

Jen and I went to see King Arthur as part of our anniversary night, Wednesday. We were not impressed. It had its good parts, but they were mostly stolen from two other, better movies: Gladiator and Braveheart. I did enjoy Bors' character, and Alecto was well played. Also, Tristan, who looks very similar to the crazy Irish guy in Braveheart, definitely added to the screen. Great screen presence, he added a unique feel to the scenes he was in.

What they messed up:

Arthur: You never get to know the guy, hence you never get to love and cheer for him. He's supposedy "Roman", but they neither show, nor tell you anything about his experiences in Rome. His knights follow him against their own best wishes--he must be a great and beloved leader, even Merlin says he's a "true leader". Nothing is ever done to show his greatness as a leader, it's just assumed, I guess. "It's King Arthur, he's a great leader." Yea, but you're telling me a story, tell the whole thing.

Merlin: His presence is small, and almost insignificant. He's supposedy a "dark magician" but sure doesn't do much about it. Plus, he doesn't increase Arthur's rule or power, but just kinda begs Arthur to help him. Kinda weak, if you ask me.

Guenivere: She's a great model. Her poses are excellent. But, there is no love story. I'm a fairly normal guy, romance is not my favorite story, and I can feel too much of it at times, but this movie had none! The romance has been part of the legend's allure for centuries, and they turned it into a sexual transaction for allegience to the "Woads". I thought the whole thing was way lame. And, the goofy warrior suit they bound her up in for the battle was ridiculous. It hurt me to see it, and I don't even have breasts.

I could make some other complaints, but they're more biases than actual cinema critiques. In summation, there are a couple cool scences, but they've already been done better in better epic movies, and a couple of intriguing supporting characters. But, the legend itself and the main characters, Arthur, Guenivere, Lancelot and Merlin were all pretty weak, or at least hardly presented as well-rounded, believable heroes. I was never moved emotively at any level, as far as I can remember. There were a couple good chuckles, though.

Save your money. I wish I would have gone to see Troy instead. It's got to be better than this one.

the banana republic

2004-07-04T21:43:00.000-05:00

a confession: of sorts.

I have come to a decision. I am a Banana Republic shopper. I have appreciated the urban chic style of this clothier for many years, but stuck with my cheaper grunge throw back type style, wich was more easily supplied at Target and the clearance rack at AE.

Well, I'm moving forward. There is much to dislike about BR, but I find more than enough to like exceptionally. Some of the styles do wander to the wrong side of metrosexual, but many are very comfortable, clean, and fun. I tend to very much dislike "dressing up", but if I fill my wardrobe with BR stuff, I won't have much to worry about, because it's all comfortable, and all quite presentable in most settings.

I'm rambling...

Ok, so GAP (BR and Old Navy's [I don't much like ON] parent company) has gotten in a good bit of trouble regarding sweatshops, but so has Target (the supplier of a major portion of my current wardrobe), and Wal-Mart is the worst. But, here's what's cool. GAP recently signed an agreement with UNITE (a textiles, etc.. workers' union) in which they promised to begin taking an active role in making sure workers are treated fairly in the factories they buy from. No results of this agreement are yet available, but it's a good first step. I'll have to make my voice heard to the BR/GAP folks to help make sure they do their deal.

Anyway, I like their clothes. And I found a BR outlet in Mississippi where the prices are great.
cool

jesus is different

2004-07-04T21:32:00.000-05:00

I’ve been doing a good bit of research into the religious panorama of humanity recently, and have been struck by one recurring idea especially; namely, the multi-faceted uniqueness of Jesus the Messiah, and the religion of his followers. Let me briefly elaborate some of the points I have come across when examining the Eastern Monistic/Pantheistic belief systems:

The first difference is immediate and obvious. I’ve already stated it—difference. Jesus teaches truth and lies, good and evil, and he teaches them in juxtaposition, judging and differentiating between opposing ideals, actions, forces. The Tao, the Middle Way, Dharma, all are founded upon undifferentiation. Primarily, a Buddhist, Hindu or Taoist seeks “salvation” through recognizing the Oneness, the undifferentiated source of all being, which is truly non-being. Jesus points his followers to a Source that is other than the universe and all its manifestations, a Source that is a personality differentiated from other personalities, yet not diminished (a point of importance for another time), a Source that creates, upholds, and judges differences. The Father is the One who is Three, and has created the innumerable things that are truly unique and have existence in and of themselves, not merely different faces of the One Reality. Many of the following differences flow from this one; the truth that difference is real.

In a universe where evil is real and evokes judgment, Jesus brings a message of forgiveness. In fact, according to the accounts of his teachings from his followers, he enacted forgiveness for humanity. This is a profound difference when looking to the East. In a universe of karma there is no forgiveness. All “evil” is repayed through karma in the ridiculous (as in, hopeless) cycle of samsara (death and re-birth). In the karmic universe forgiveness is impossible because there is no one who can forgive. The Oneness is not wronged by “sin”, and interpersonal offenses are inconsequential—karma will repeat no matter the response of the offended. And, the offended is better off forgetting than forgiving, as forgiving requires judgment, which is differentiation and sets one back in the quest for union with the non-being of nirvana. Jesus, however, teaches that “sin” offends and grieves the One Person. This is bad news from the perspective of judgment, which is more piquant than karma. This is the best news of all from the perspective of forgiveness. If a person, even the Ultimate Person, is offended, forgiveness is available. It is the best news because not only is forgiveness a real possibility, but a real offer through the mystery of Atonement.

Another very interesting dynamic of Jesus’ uniqueness is the development of real democracy and free-market. Of course, some of his teachings lend themselves quite well to socialism and like-minded philosophies, but the point here is the development of the individual’s value which created the seedbed for democratic trees. In the teachings of Jesus, each individual is highly valuable, a son or daughter of the Ultimate Person. This Fatherhood is not simply by nature of Creator/creation, but an intimate affection, and real relationship. For Jesus, the rich, the poor, the disfigured and handicapped, alongside the beautiful and strong are of infinite worth, deserving of supreme love. The Hindu world-view fosters the caste system, where one’s position is determined by karma and unchangeable—in fact, more bad karma is incurred through reaching for a better life. Buddha taught us to forsake desire as the cause of suffering. No people without strong, even passionate desire would ever develop a democracy or a free-market. This is a fairly simple treatment of this idea, but I will leave it at that. Of course, not all that comes with democracy or free-market is perfect, but that is another discussion altogether.

Let this be the final point for the time being. Jesus encouraged great desire. Buddha, Lao-Tze, and the Hindu Saddhus preach that desire is the greatest, first, even only real evil. This plays out in another way. A Monist believes he is everything, he is ultimate being, his destiny is to be reunited in non-being with Ultimate Reality. He is encourage to do nothing. In all his omni-existance, he is to live without desire. Desire is the source of all action. Yes, he is taught to practice compassion, but that, if he follows it, will lead him to desire. Every moving of the human innards is desire, a wish for change, a longing for immortality, the hope for the eternal moment of love requited… The Monist is great in his all-being, but does nothing. The Christian, however, is little. She is full of sin and desperate for salvation—desperate because she cannot attain it for herself. She is smaller than Jesus and his Father. She is smaller than angels, she is smaller than the world. Yet, she is to do, and will do great things. She will ardently pursue a thing and attain it. She will be moved with compassion and tear down the Berlin Wall, end widow burning in India, eradicate slavery from the globe. She will do this in the throws of desire. Yes, she will suffer, but she will relieve the suffering of others in so doing. This is the message of Jesus: “Desire passionately and cast yourself at the mercy of a forgiving God. You will be forgiven all and loved dearly. You will live on and so will your deeds of desire, the joy you wreaked on the world!”

I end for now. At another time, I may pick this up and go further. Hopefully, I will return to cast Jesus’ differences with the other monotheistic (and polytheistic, for they nearly all believe in one supreme deity) religions.

Rock on!
Desire in an open universe.

visit my friends

2004-06-27T22:26:00.000-05:00

PilgrimsJournal.org
Satisfied with Silence
eightstar

here's some info about me:
i've begun to keep a books read list. here's how it looks:

May 2004

The Fountainhead Ayn Rand
Reaching Out Henri Nouwen
Mudhouse Sabbath Laura Winner
Wittgenstein’s Poker Edmunds & Eidinow
The da Vinci Code Dan Brown

June 2004

Wisdom of the Saddhu Sundar Singh
Seeing is Believing Gregory Boyd
Read.Think.Pray.Live. Tony Jones

Currently reading:

Heretics GK Chesterton
Philosophical Investigations Wittgenstein

getting started

2004-06-26T20:53:00.000-05:00

Let’s do it this way:

I’ve got a mound of words already in queue for this uber-cool, ultra-trendy invention that I am finally getting on board with, but I’ll start a bit on the traditional side.

First posts generally tell about why the blogger’s blogging away for the invisible masses, and tend to give some general biographical notes. I’ll follow the crowd for the sake of time and clarity. My word mound will require more sincere thought and time than is currently available, and a mildly boring, yet clear-stated intro may serve us well.

I like words. I think. I don’t think it’s just that I like to think, it’s more like my brain is hardwired for analysis. I’m the kid who always asks “why?” I’m the arrogant idiot who is never satisfied with the status quo, knows why and wants to tell everybody, and always has multiple solutions in various stages of development. I’ve just recently ripened to 24 and my wife is commenting on the creases—soon to be wrinkles—at work on my forehead. I think they were predetermined by my dna.

So, I get a kick out of slapping keys for the sake of thoughts. And, I tend to think I have something to say, if only on occasion.

Oh, I got a bonsai today. I think I’m going to name it, but don’t yet know what. If I can, I’ll post a picture. That’ll be cool.

enter the picture

“Dinner’s ready.”

Cheers.