Never an Original Thought

Friday Funnies: Stupor Duck

2009-09-04T11:49:00.001-07:00

"...And I Aardvark Ratnik will rule the world. Muahahahaha."

Watching the Watchmen

2009-08-30T13:02:00.000-07:00

A friend and I recently have read The Watchmen, and here are my recent thoughts. Oh by the way, here is your SPOILER ALERT warning.

The superhero genre was created when Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster imagined a bullet-proof crime fighter from another planet. The genre took another step when Stan Lee wondered how a teenager with the proportionate strength of a spider would deal with the challenges of adolescence. With The Watchmen, Alan Moore pushes the genre even further. What happens when superheroes wrestle with a morally ambiguous world? Deal with mental illness and depression? Grow old? How does the world react to a hero who is seemingly omnipotent? What are the social, political and cultural ramifications of heroes in tights?

Following these issues to their ultimate end is what makes The Watchmen classic. The multiple plots and the endless allusions make for dense reading, but they are done well. The authors understand the conventions of the medium, and they stretch them. They create a world that is rich and textured.

That being said, the graphic novel is very dated. I can understand why the movie didn’t do well at the box office. The market in 2009 for movies about an alternative 1985 in which Richard Nixon is still president must be pretty small. In the book, the Cold War and the threat of nuclear war dominate ever page. The ever present threat of death and destruction pushes society to the point of neurosis. The Watchmen outlines the transition from the moral clarity of the early superheroes to nihilistic confusion.

This descent is probably what bothers me most. The underlying assumption of the book is that there is no purpose or meaning in life. All of the major characters accept this worldview without question. Each responds to the nihilism in his or her own way.

THE COMEDIAN

The Comedian sees justice as a sick joke masking a reality of violence and power. He embodies the joke as an American hero while at the same time he kills, rapes and destroys without thought. Winning, it has been said, is a great disinfectant, and the Comedian wants to be on the winning side.

RORSCHACH

Rorschach suggests that our world is like the random inkblots of his namesake. The only meaning is what we impose upon life. For example, when Nite Owl II expresses remorse at the death of a friend, Rorschach concocts a theory of who killed him. Rorschach hopes that Nite Owl II can take comfort from his theory and the revenge to which it inevitably leads. He himself sees conspiracies everywhere, and he embraces the meaning that he has created without any doubt. His cruelty comes from his own manufactured certitude.

DR. MANHATTAN

Dr. Manhattan is the closest thing to a supreme being in the book. Although his knowledge and power has no limits, he can’t understand humanity. For him, the world is relative without meaning. The future is pre-determined. Even his emotional responses are part of a script that he has been handed. His ability and power is merely a tool in the hands of others. He does not have the moral freedom to act on his own. For example, he cannot stop the JFK assignation, or the Comedian’s murder in Vietnam of someone in cold blood.

OZYMANDIUS

Ozymandius is the existentialist. He wishes to create meaning and shape reality to fit his new world. Like other political messiahs, the nobility of his aims excuses a million crimes. He is willing to slaughter others to usher in a new age of peace and prosperity. Although the book seems to embrace his final solution to the crisis of nuclear holocaust, doubts remain. Even his name, Ozymandius, reminds one of Percy Bysshe Shelley’s poem which suggests that ultimately the mighty do fall.

NITE OWL II AND SILK SPECTRE II

Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II are harder to classify. On the one hand, they have the closest connection to the superheroes of the past. After all, their names and history have been handed to them. On the other hand, they are products of this nihilistic world. Hence, there is a quick acceptance of the horrific compromise that they are handed at the end of the book. Both attempt to hold the chaos of the world at bay.

Like the snow globe she discovers as a girl, Silk Spectre II seeks a safe place where time moves slower. She finds solace in relationships. She seeks friendship, family ties, and lovers. As the world comes crashing around her, she needs others.

In contrast, Nite Owl II tries to strike a balance between the mechanistic and the meaningful. At the end of chapter seven, Nite Owl II’s secret identity writes eloquently about holding onto the poetry of birds while remaining committed to the scientific and the material. He is a romantic.

Nonetheless, no one in the novel stands for an objective reality. As the Comedian demonstrates, fighting for truth, justice and the American way is laughable. God is dead, yet the novel does not celebrate. There is something sorrowful and regrettable that moral clarity has no foundation or basis. In one of the last scenes of the book, a group of New Yorkers try to do the right thing by intervening when an argument gets out of control. All are slaughtered in a monstrous act of random violence. We lament their deaths and their pointless desire to help their neighbor.

While The Watchmen is persuasive and effective, I can’t accept this view of reality. When accepting the Nobel Prize for Literature, William Faulkner said,

“I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance. The poet's, the writer's, duty is to write about these things. It is his privilege to help man endure by lifting his heart, by reminding him of the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet's voice need not merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help him endure and prevail.”

Faulkner’s words seem to damn the entire world of The Watchmen.

Friday Funnies: Lonely in a Crowd

2009-07-31T12:26:00.001-07:00

The Marx Brothers in a scene from "A Night At the Opera".

Where the Treasure Is

2009-07-31T07:37:00.000-07:00

In the past few weeks, I have been hit over the head multiple times with a lesson of the obvious.

One source was a Havard Business School Podca st discussing the book, Discovery-Driven Growth. Rita McGrath, a co-author of the book, was discussing business agendas. She suggested that if growth (or anything else) was the priority for a business, it should be one of the first items on the agenda.

The other source was a discussion with a pastor. He said, “Throw away a church’s mission statement. The real way to know what the church believes is looking at its budget.” Where does the church put their financial resources? In a building? In a program?

Jesus said, “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Luke 12:34). For the institutional church, our treasure is money, time, and talent. Where do we set our priorities in these areas? Our agendas, budgets, and staffing are practical ways in which we establish where our heart will be. As the church plans for the upcoming year, this is certainly some good guidance.

John Calvin and the Excesses of American Patriotism

2009-07-27T05:25:00.000-07:00

Did John Calvin have an influence on the excesses of American patriotism? Damon Linker says, "yes," in a blog posting at the New Republic. Considering the Puritan background of many of the first settlers, I'm not terribly surprised that Calvinism has had an impact. Nonetheless, the line that Linker draws between Calvin and the American situation seems tenuous at best.

There were indeed Puritans who claimed that America had a special place in God's providence. Some even described America as the "new Israel" led from slavery into the promised land. There is a natural temptation for such attitudes to devolve into the suggestion of divine approval for a country's actions right or wrong. Linker suggests that we should blame Calvin for this “theological self-confidence” among Americans that borders on “over-confidence.” Sadly, I don't find anything in Calvin's teaching that suggests that he would approve of associating an earthly realm with the Kingdom of God.

Calvin, who described the heart as an idol factory, would understand someone who turns a nation or an ideology into a god. Moreover, he would call it a sin.

Friday Funnies: Classic Lucille Ball

2009-07-24T17:28:00.001-07:00

Here is the famous scene from I Love Lucy where Lucy and Ethel take a job in a candy factory. Could this be a metaphor for pastoral ministry?

Meeting the Lord in the Air

2009-07-20T07:46:00.000-07:00

According to a Voice of America report, Buzz Aldrin took communion on the moon. On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon. Soon after they landed, Aldrin took a piece of bread and a cup of wine that had been consecrated for communion. The first food eaten and the first cup poured on the moon were communion elements.

Aldrin, a Presbyterian elder, wanted to give thanks to God on behalf of all people. The meal was to be a meal of thanksgiving or Eucharist (from the Greek, “eucharistos”). Aldrin wanted to offer a response to God for God's faithfulness. I am deeply moved that Aldrin would want to respond to God in that way.

The VOA report did not delve deeply into the theology, but I was interested in how Rev. Dean Woodruff prepared for the communion service. The article took pains to suggest that this was a “personal” or “private” act. However, it wasn't. In the Presbyterian Church, Communion is a communal act. The Lord's Supper is a sign and seal of our communion with God and with each other.

Several weeks prior to the launch of the Apollo 11, the Webster Presbyterian Church in Texas celebrated communion. After the worship service, a group of elders gathered with Buzz Aldrin. (Aldrin was restricted from contact with too many people.) During that time, Aldrin was given the bread and wine for communion. A benediction was not offered so that the Lord's Supper on the moon was in fact an extension of the worship service in Webster, Texas.

Aldrin on the moon gathered with those Presbyterians in Webster, Texas and with the saints of all time and places. Over 350,000 miles away, Buzz Aldrin remained in the presence of the Lord and the bosom of the Church.

For more information...

A VOA interview with Rev. Woodruff in mp3.
A description of the communion by Aldrin from the Webster Presbyterian Church's website.
Hat tip to Presbyweb.

The Role of Numbers in the Church

2009-07-19T18:37:00.000-07:00

Every year, our church sends reports to denominational officials. We send a host of numbers. There are budgets, membership statistics, worship attendance and a host of other facts and figures. Sadly, we do next to nothing with the numbers. They just sit on a shelf gathering dust.

I wonder what would happen if we used the numbers. I know many would balk at the thought. The church they argue is not a business. We can't quantify faithfulness. Attendance or the number of baptisms do not demonstrate the vitality of a congregation. I would agree.

If nothing else my degree in mathematics has shown me that numbers have hidden dangers. As an abstraction, they are useful to make comparisons or calculations, but valuable information disappears when we reduce people or objects to mere number. In The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery, the narrator mentions the subtleties lost when adults are consumed by numbers.

"When you tell [adults] that you have made a new friend, they never ask you any questions about essential matters. They never say to you, 'What does his voice sound like? What games does he love best? Does he collect butterflies?' Instead, they demand: 'How old is he? How many brothers has he? How much does he weigh? How much money does his father make?' Only from these figures do they think they have learned anything about him."

Another problem resulting from abstraction means that numbers can be manipulated for ill. Scientists have been caught using only data which confirmed their presuppositions and prejudices. Politicians and advertisers have manipulated public opinion with skewed or selective reporting. As Mark Twain once said, "there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

The Scriptures also suggest a danger of numbers which might surprise some. Numbers can lead to the sin of pride. In the ancient world, taking a census was a sign of control and power. Kings used numbers to coerce populations through taxation and conscription into the army. In the Old Testament, God gave Moses specific instructions relating to a census to curb this temptation. Each person involved in the census had to pay a "ransom" as an offering to God (Exodus 30:11-16). An offering was a costly reminder to the leader that God was really the one in charge. The consequences for failing to follow these rules were severe. For example, King David later took an illegal census, and God punished the kingdom with a plague (2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21). I could just imagine a church pastor busting with pride as he recites the number of new members added this year. Heck, I have been that pastor.

HOW THEN SHALL WE MEASURE?
Nonetheless, we shouldn't ignore numbers. We must be on guard against abstraction, manipulation and pride, but church leaders shouldn't be blind to the results of their ministry.

Perhaps, we are just looking at the wrong numbers. The percentage of members who come to worship might be a more useful statistic than simply attendance. The number of youth who are still active in church after college is much more helpful than numbering the crowd who gathers weekly. I would assume that there are even more creative ways to measure a congregation's impact on the community.

Friday Funnies: Don't Buy Stuff

2009-07-17T13:41:00.000-07:00

From Saturday Night Live in 2006. Wonderful advice for the new economy.

Hat tip to Cigars & Theology.

Queen of the Sciences

2009-07-11T15:13:00.001-07:00

A long time ago, theology was called the “queen of the sciences”. All the other sciences took their cue from the findings of theology. Those days are gone forever. In the few universities where theology is still studied, no one seems interested in the insights of the theologians. I don’t completely decry the development. Angels dancing on pinheads probably shouldn’t bother physicists, and the weight of a soul shouldn’t consume the debates of biologists. Sadly, many of the modern theological debates seem just as esoteric as their medieval counterparts. No wonder, no one seems interested.

That being said, the pursuit of knowledge could benefit from some basic theological reflection. The sciences can pursue the hows, but only theology (or perhaps her handmaiden, philosophy) can explore the whys. Modern psychology might benefit from a serious reflection on the nature of sin. Business and biology programs should take into account ethical considerations. Our epistemology, paralyzed by subjectivity, could use a little Christian humility. Our schools do not need classes on “Intelligent Design” masquerading as natural science. Instead, we need citizens willing to wrestle with the limits of knowledge and our place in the moral order. The traditional resources and insights of Christian theology are just begging to be used.

You would think that theological reflection would at least be welcome in the church. Alas, even the church is looking for insight elsewhere. Many in the church’s leadership seem more comfortable discussing psychology and business management techniques. Meanwhile the traditional resources of the church--the Scriptures, the liturgy, and the Sacraments--are under-utilized. Theology remains an orphan.

Should the church ignore the insights of the world? I cannot sit in judgment. I read family-systems theory. I am a student of Peter Drucker. I like Thomas Jefferson. Still, I should be uncomfortable. I should allow the gospel to challenge my assumptions. Perhaps the queen shouldn’t lord over the sciences. Theology after all is not God. Instead, maybe the queen at best is prophet. She calls idols by name and counsels repentance. She calls us to follow Christ.

The queen is dead. Long live the queen.

Friday Funnies: Charlie The Unicorn

2009-07-10T05:21:00.001-07:00

Shun the nonbeliever. Shun.

This is the original video of Charlie The Unicorn, and it remains the best.

To Boldly Go

2009-07-07T16:26:00.000-07:00

[Spoilers ahead. I know most who care about Star Trek have seen the movie, but just in case, here is your warning.]

GROWING UP TREK

Growing up in the 1970s, Star Wars was supposed to be the cultural icon of my generation of geeks. I did have the Star Wars action figures, and I can quote from the climatic scenes. “Luke, you switched off your targeting computer. Is everything all right?” Still, my heart has always been with Star Trek. I grew up on the reruns, and the show has shaped my outlook and temperament. I identify with the optimism and democracy that the series championed. I would guess that my sense of politics is still greatly influenced by this show born in the light of John F. Kennedy's New Frontier.

Let's just accept the fact that Star Trek is not high art. Plot holes and inconsistencies abound despite the best efforts of the wiki-nerds working by the internet glow deep within the mines of Janus VI. In fact, it is primarily a clunky morality play with phasers and giant Styrofoam rocks. Behind most of the shows and movies, there were messages about hard choices, human fallibility, and realpolitik. Think Reinhold Niebuhr with warp drive.

Even the bad episodes or movies had an intriguing idea behind it. Remember the fifth film, The Final Frontier? It was hailed as one of the worst of the franchise. We got T.J. Hooker-style action sequences and Uhura fan-dancing. More importantly, the crew also searches for God, and the god that they find isn't what they want or expect. Great idea. Poor execution.

Kirk and Spock are the central figures in the show. The interplay between these two characters was the heart of the original series, and a recent blog post by Mark Finn made me think about my own connection. Finn writes, “Captain Kirk, without a doubt, went into the alchemy of what I thought constituted Being A Man.” Interestingly enough, Kirk was not my model of masculinity. Spock was. Friends in high school said I was a Vulcan, and I took it as a badge of honor. For me Spock represented rationality, duty, discipline, and devotion to a higher ideal. Nonetheless, Spock is not complete without Kirk. The two need each other. As Spock wrestled with the duality, I did too.

Although the theme is present in many of the episodes and movies, a few examples might clarify. In Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Spock refuses to complete the kohlinar, the purging of all emotion leaving only pure logic. In the same movie, V'ger serves as Spock's counterpart. The probe is programmed with a simple mission “to know that all is knowable.” Without the human component of imagination, intuition, etc, V'ger cannot complete its mission. Likewise Spock needs the human Kirk with his irrational passion.

Kirk also needs Spock. In Wrath of Khan, much is made about Kirk cheating the Kobayashi Maru test, the “no-win” scenario. The test is an affront to everything that Kirk believes. Like Odysseus or the biblical Jacob, Kirk is not beneath employing trickery and deception to achieve his goals. He cannot accept his limitations, and thus he is susceptible to hubris. At the end of the movie, Spock lays down his life for the crew of the Enterprise. He tells Kirk, “I never took the Kobayashi Maru test until now. What do you think of my solution?” By allowing the needs of the many to outweigh the needs of the few, Spock redeems the lives of the crew with his own. Kirk faces his own finitude through the death of his friend.

STAR TREK REIMAGINED

All this is background for my thoughts on the new Star Trek movie by J.J. Abrams. Weeks after the release of the film, a friend greatly encouraged me to go see the film. So I finally took a look. The casting is superb. There are enough nods to the original series that even the most hardened fans will smile. There are plot holes, but no more than usual. Many have complained that J.J. Abrams took major liberties with the canon of the Star Trek universe. He did, but for some reason, it doesn't bother me.

Nonetheless, I still have concerns. If we accept a Freudian analysis, J.J. Abrams' prefers Kirk's id to Spock's super-ego. Several times, Spock learns that his logic is insufficient. Due to circumstances involving his home world, the young Vulcan grows up quickly. By the end of the movie, Spock rejects logical action in favor of pure revenge. In itself, that's not necessarily a terrible thing, but Kirk, on the other hand, gets rewarded again and again for acting like a space-age James Dean. Kirk never pays for his hubris. That bothered me. Perhaps, I am too sympathetic to Spock. Perhaps, Abrams just doesn't understand the irony at the heart of Star Trek. I assume that there will be more films. I just hope that in future movies Kirk finally gets his comeuppance.

"...'Cause when they met, it was murder!"

2009-07-06T04:45:00.000-07:00

Thirteen years of adventure, high society, and international intrigue. Happy Anniversary.

Happy Independence Day

2009-07-04T08:49:00.000-07:00

Peter Shramm is a professor of political science at Ashland University in Ohio. I heard of Shramm through my wife who is a former student at the university. Shramm was born in Hungary, and his family made the decision to leave after the Hungarian Revolution in 1956. Shramm describes a wonderful exchange with his father about the decision to leave for America.

"But where are we going?" I asked.
"We are going to America," my father said.
"Why America?" I prodded.
"Because, son. We were born Americans, but in the wrong place," he replied.
My father said that as naturally as if I had asked him what was the color of the sky. It was so obvious to him why we should head for America. There was really no other option in his mind. What was obvious to him, unfortunately, took me nearly 20 years to learn. But then, I had to "un-learn" a lot of things along the way. How is it that this simple man who had none of the benefits or luxuries of freedom and so-called "education" understood this truth so deeply and so purely and expressed it so beautifully? It has something to do with the self-evidence, as Jefferson put it, of America’s principles. Of course, he hadn’t studied Jefferson or America’s Declaration of Independence, but he had come to know deep in his heart the meaning of tyranny. And he hungered for its opposite. The embodiment of those self-evident truths and of justice in America was an undeniable fact to souls suffering under oppression.

From the headlines we learn that tyranny and oppression are the norm still in many places. We have much to celebrate this Independence Day. Let's continue to work toward a nation that lives up to her ideals.

This July 4th read the Declaration of Independence.
Check out the National Archives exhibit on the Declaration.

Google Revisited

2009-07-04T04:48:00.000-07:00

Jeff Jarvis, the author of What Would Google Do, maintains a blog over at BuzzMachine. A few posts ago, I mentioned his book and asked what the church could learn from it. Apparently, I am not the only one. Jarvis quotes me and two other pastors about the church in the Google Age.

A big thanks to Jarvis, and a shout-out to my fellow pastors, Ron Smith and Chuck Warnock.

Friday Funnies: Who's On First?

2009-07-03T08:28:00.001-07:00

This year was the first time my son played Little League. Inspired by his excitement, I am becoming quite a baseball fan. This famous Abbot and Costello routine is one of son's favorites.

Shrinking Churches

2009-07-03T08:01:00.000-07:00

"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14)

These aren't usually the verses that one quotes when one is at a church growth conference. In fact there is a dichotomy between the growth of the early church (“..about three thousand were added to their number that day.” [Acts 2:41]) and the hard teachings of Jesus (“From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.” [John 6:66]).

Pastors often feel pressured to lead their churches into higher and higher numbers. The pressure comes from a variety of sources. Sometimes the pressure comes from parishioners or financial needs. Sometimes it comes from a culture that screams bigger is better.

Attracting a crowd is never enough. Faith and repentance are hard work. Jacques Ellul suggests that the Church will always be small. In his estimation, once the faith becomes a mass movement it devolves into an ideology. Sadly, I do see evidence of this in the wider Christian subculture. We peddle cheap grace while preaching against a few select sins.

Mark Galli, a senior managing editor for Christianity Today, surveys the current megachurch movement and finds similar concerns. He states, “Evangelicals have become the unmatched experts in church growth, but often end up with a truncated gospel.” Galli says that he isn't kidding when suggesting that we need church shrink conferences. As a pastor, I will not be suggesting any time soon that we shrink our congregation. However, church leadership must grapple with the questions he raises.

“Many pastors and lay leaders recognize that they are in a superficially successful church, and that it's time to introduce the harder edges of the gospel. But how? How do we get comfortable people to listen to a gospel that includes a lot of discomfort? How do you deepen discipleship without introducing despair? How do you insist firmly on faithfulness without becoming legalistic?

Most important, how do you manage the loss in membership? That will happen.”

Last night, I saw the movie, Romero, about Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador. I've read only a little about the Archbishop, but I have been impressed by his faithfulness in difficult circumstances. The entire country of El Salvador was his parish, and he resisted the temptation to side with one or another. Instead, he stood firmly with Christ. Without compromise, he was pastor to the military, the ruling elite, and the Marxists.

We gather a crowd and then we disciple. Some will be drawn closer. Others will stay on the periphery. Perhaps, we should imagine that the mission field is our parish, and the parish is our mission field.

Quote of the Day

2009-07-02T21:01:00.000-07:00

From The Long Loneliness by Dorothy Day...

"Do you have ecstasies and visions?"

"Visions of unpaid bills."

Grace, Brain Chemistry, and Bono

2009-07-02T07:50:00.000-07:00

Grace is hard.

I was reminded about the difficulty of grace while reading an article on NewScientist.com about evolutionary psychology.

Human beings are willing to suffer loss if it means punishing someone who has acted unfairly. As the article states...

"Our sense of fairness and our willingness to inflict damage on one another combine to encourage contributions to the common good and deter people from cheating. Researchers call this altruistic punishment."

Moreover, there is a physiological response. The striatum, a region of our brains which respond to "rewarding behavior", "lights up" when we engage in altruistic punishment. Apparently our sense of justice is deep. That is a good thing. As the Scriptures teach in Leviticus 19:15, "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly."

The only problem is that our sense of justice is limited. Someone who casually watches the evening news and condemns a man for a perceived injustice may reach a different conclusion while on a jury in a courtroom. Our understanding of justice is also perverted by sin. We often take pleasure in the fall of the mighty. Schadenfreude apparently stimulates the same part of the brain as altruistic punishment. Moreover, we often have a poor estimation of our own sinfulness. We see ourselves much better than we really are, or more rarely, much worse.

We believe firmly that everyone should be rewarded for good, punished for bad. The lead singer of U2, Bono, has a helpful way of describing this desire for fairness. In the book, Bono in Conversation by Michka Assayas, he describes the cycle of reward and punishment as "Karma."

"At the center of all religions is the idea of Karma. You know, what you put out comes back to you: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or in physics-in physical laws-every action is met by an equal or an opposite one,"

"Karma", as Bono describes it, is rooted not only in religion and according to the New Scientist article, also nature. Grace works outside of "Karma." Grace suggests that we get better than we deserve.

Bono explains,

"And yet, along comes this idea called Grace to upend all that. . . . Love interrupts, if you like, the consequences of your actions, which in my case is very good news indeed, because I've done a lot of stupid stuff."

Grace is good news, but we resist the good news because it goes against what we believe to be true. Grace is unearned. We rarely extend it to others, and we cheapen our own response to it.

Friday Funnies: Calvin and Hobbes on the Economy

2009-03-20T09:02:00.001-07:00

Except for Peanuts by Charles Schultz, Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson must be my favorite comic strip. Somewhere, I came across this link which seemed more helpful than all the current coverage on CNBC.

Theodicy, Again

2009-03-20T08:46:00.000-07:00

In the midst of Lent, it is probably helpful to think again about the problem of pain. The question has surfaced again because of circumstances. I have watched people I care about suffer with disease, death and economic uncertainty. As a pastor, I have also received questions which deserve answers. My response here is not new, but you did not come here for originality.

It is clear that some people in life seem to have more than their share of garbage. Personally, I don't understand why this happens. I know the reasons that are given. The one that I carry with me is that the life itself is tragic. God's good creation is corrupted or flawed. Even the story of Adam and Eve speaks more to fact that evil and sin are present in the world rather than a coherent explanation of how or why.

That being said, I can stand strongly on the fact that evil is not part of God's original plan. Evil, suffering and sorrow are not God's intention for the world. God's demand for justice is real, and ultimately evil will fail. Being chosen or favored by God doesn't mean that we are exempt from suffering. We cannot escape the corruption of this world. In fact, those who faithfully follow God might experience more intense suffering since we know that this world is really messed up. Our eyes are open to the actuality of evil. Our hope remains because we know that in the end God will triumph. The glimpses of that victory here and now help sustain us in the meantime.

This is one of the themes of the Old Testament. The people of Israel with whom God made covenant were to be witnesses of what God intended. In spite of suffering (and even through it) the people of Israel remain a light to the nations to demonstrate that the cynics are wrong.

Beyond this point, my understanding is firmly rooted in my Christian faith. For me, I just can't escape it. We believe that Jesus' own suffering brings redemption. Jesus plays the tragic game of the world, and he gets killed for it. His resurrection from the dead is a victory over the game, and he demonstrates the absurdity of the game. God reveals in Jesus Christ that we have been playing by the wrong set of rules. Instead of a tragedy, life is really a comedy. We are defined not by death and destruction. Instead, our identity is rooted in the depth of God's love and grace. As followers of Christ, we share in the joy of deliverance.

However, deliverance from evil is not an escape. Our faith is not an opiate to deaden the pain. Like the chosen of Israel, we continue to witness to God's love. In the midst of suffering, it is our calling to stand with those who are hurting most. We offer love, forgiveness, and hospitality to those affected by evil. By caring for others, we serve in a cosmic resistance movement. We respond directly to the lies of the world.

I realize that this analysis doesn't answer the question why, but it might suggest where do we go from here.

What Would Google Do?

2009-03-16T19:37:00.000-07:00

Jeff Jarvis takes great satisfaction that the title of his new book on Google mocks the “What Would Jesus Do?” merchandising of a decade ago. Although the joke is rather old for someone who desires to be on the cutting edge of the internet age, Jarvis has some fascinating observations of the new paradigm that Google has created. He then applies his observations to a variety of businesses, industries, and organizations. Here Jarvis asks, “What Would Google Do?”, in what is surely the most interesting part of the book. Considering that Jarvis reveals himself be a liberal Presbyterian on his blog, I was a little surprised he gave almost no analysis to applying Google's principles to faith communities. One paragraph apparently was enough.

Thinking out loud, I wondered what a more thorough application would look like. This is dangerous territory. “The Church's one foundation is Jesus Christ, her Lord” and not “Ten Things Google Has Found to be True.” The canon of Scripture is not “open source”, and the gospel is not a commodity. Nonetheless, there may be some value in the thought experiment.

So what would the First Presbyterian Church of Google look like?

DECIDE WHAT BUSINESS YOU'RE IN

I'm not addressing all of Jarvis' observations, and I am not even taking them in order. I start with this one because it seems to be valuable beginning point. As Jarvis says, “It's time for your identity crisis.”

For many congregations, they are already in the midst of an identity crisis. Who is the church? What is our purpose? What is God calling us to be? These are the essential questions. Churches who get this wrong will probably not last long. The answer will vary from congregation to congregation, but Scripture offers some clear guidance.

The Church is the people of God in Jesus Christ. The Church is not a building or a vendor of spiritual goods. Instead, she exists to declare the praises of God. As the Apostle Peter writes:

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. (1 Peter 2:9-10)

Worship sets us apart, but worship is fulfilled in mission. Acts of compassion and mercy help us live out our role as a royal priesthood. Our love of neighbor demonstrates to the world the love of God.

What is our business? The church exists to worship and serve, but we also need training. Our business then is to make disciples, equipping them for worship and service.

BE A PLATFORM

Google, Facebook, Flickr and others in the new economy do not make money through products. Instead, they create a platform encouraging others to use information to create content and make connections with others. By comparison, Jarvis describes “Home Depot as a platform for contractors.” There are exciting possibilities in thinking of the church as a platform for disciples.

Rather than simply producing content for religious consumers, the church leadership should be encouraging an environment where disciples can practice and explore their faith. We should view classes, committee work, and projects as opportunities for interaction with the saints. Although facts about the faith are vitally important, we should also cultivate practices of the faith such as prayer, Scripture study, and accountability. We begin to realize that everyone has a ministry. The church should be doing everything to help others realize and fulfill that ministry.

FREE IS A BUSINESS MODEL

Google makes its money from advertisers. Its main service, the search engine, is free to everyone. A church is not supposed to make a profit, and we certainly are not interested in advertisers. Still, many churches have a mentality in which they hoard the blessings which they have received. For example, a church building that remains empty most of the week is a waste of resources. Sermons, curriculum, writings and even music (within copyright restrictions) should be made available to the widest audience. If the congregation is doing something right, it should be shared with everyone to further the Kingdom of God. Mission trips and service opportunities should be made available to the general public. With the proper guidance, these actually can become entry points into the life of faith.

LIFE IS BETA

This speaks more to culture rather than policies and procedures, but a Church who expects mistakes fosters a spirit of forgiveness and humility. There is willingness to try new things, to ask tough questions, and to realize that we never achieve perfection. Conflicts within the church can become creative especially if the congregation is allowed to find solutions. The Church leadership has an opportunity to evaluate everything that the church does based upon God's calling. Everyone realizes that all the ministries, because of their imperfections, are not ends in themselves.

YOUR WORST CUSTOMER IS YOUR BEST FRIEND

The Church should be willing to listen and respond to the misfits and the critics. Questions asked in faith deserve a fair hearing. Even when people may disagree with a decision of the leadership, communication should be so open and honest that no one can question the fairness of the decision. I often find that the person on the outside has much to teach me. Rather than giving up on the person on the margins, we sometimes gain him or her as a great ally.

Then sometimes we don't. Unfortunately, you won't convince everyone. Still, there remains a benefit. Defending your principles often leads to focusing, once again, on what is most important.

25 Random Things

2009-02-09T20:38:00.000-08:00

I was challenged to write 25 random thrngs, facts, habits or goals about me. Here is my attempt.

1. I used to be an infrequent coffee drinker, but in the past two months, I crave the stuff.
2. My only regret about managing a McDonalds restaurant is that I never attended Hamburger University.
3. My all-time favorite television show is "The Twilight Zone."
4. I'm a slow but deliberate reader.
5. I never liked reading fiction until I read the "Chronicles of Narnia" at the age of 11.
6. Making up for lost time, I now love reading children's literature.
7. The greatest influences on my writing style have been C.S. Lewis, David Brooks, and E.B. White.
8. In high school, I would buy sociology and anthropology textbooks from book sales and read them.
9. I attended the prom as a junior, but stayed home my senior year.
10. One summer in high school I worked as a radio announcer.
11. I have lost over 100 lbs in less than a year.
12. I have moved seventeen times in my life.
13. Every place that I have lived has its own charm. You just have to be open to it.
14. In life, I am definitely more the tortoise than the hare.
15. Cats like my lap.
16. My favorite record growing up was an off-broadway recording of "You're a Good Man Charlie Brown".
17. I wish I could have attended the 1964 World's Fair.
18. I have always loved to travel.
19. Some day, I'd like to visit Alaska.
20. My favorite topping on pizza is the cheese.
21. Our greatest strengths are also our greatest temptations.
22. I once considered becoming an officer in the Salvation Army.
23. I am thankful for the music of Rich Mullins.
24. I can't multitask very well.
25. As a kid, there was a simple solution for any food that I didn't like--ketchup.

Newsletter: Christmas Decorations

2008-12-01T23:26:00.000-08:00

Now is the time to put out the Christmas decorations. You probably won’t have to drag all of them out of the attic or storage shed. If your family is like many families, you have a few decorations already on display. In fact, those strays have been up all year. You might have an orphan Rudolf on that shelf, Frosty the Snowman on a dresser, or a tree ornament that resembles the star of Bethlehem hanging on a string. In that initial sweep of the house in January, perhaps something was left behind. When you finally discover it, that little Santa figurine has celebrated Valentines Day, St. Patrick’s Day and Easter. Why deprive it of the fireworks on the fourth of July? Perhaps, some of the decorations remain because we choose to leave them. They were given by a dear friend, or they inspire such wonderful memories.

It’s not a bad idea to keep reminders of Christmas around. On that day we celebrate God’s love that was revealed in Jesus Christ. God came to dwell among us and redeem us from sin and death. Nonetheless, life becomes unbearable if we relegate hope to a corner of the calendar. When we encounter hurt or loneliness, we shouldn’t have to wait till Christmas to hear again the words of the prophet: “Comfort, comfort, my people…”

The people of Israel were oppressed, dominated by powers greater than their own. They cherished the reminders of the coming of the Messiah, and we celebrate with the shepherds the joy of his advent.

The Lord has come, yet we eagerly await his second advent. In these days, our experiences of loss and sorrow are overwhelming. We know all too well that the victory that was won is not finished.

This Christmas surround yourselves with reminders of God’s love. Listen again to the words of Scripture. Hear the praises of God’s people. Eat the bread, and drink the cup. Act in compassion and mercy.

Merry Christmas.

Newsletter: Fear God, Honor the Emperor

2008-11-01T23:22:00.000-07:00

“…fear God, honor the emperor” (1 Peter 2:17)

The headlines are screaming. We watch the devaluing of retirement funds. We hear about our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. We read about Russians marching in Georgia, Iran seeking nuclear weapons, and terrorism still threatening.

As of this writing, I don’t know who will be the next president of the United States. The job is a thankless one, and true leaders are rare. While wrestling with the tempest, even good intentions can lead to unintended consequences. The person who will serve in the Oval Office needs wisdom and humility. The next president needs our prayers. Regardless of party, pray for our political leaders. Be charitable.

Nonetheless, in these difficult times, we need to remember that our hope and faith does not lie in political leaders, military might, or stock markets. Uncertainty should not lead us to despair. We have a Savior who has defeated all the powers of this world including death. Some think our faith is merely “whistling in the dark,” but the faith which has sustained the Church is not a naïve opiate which dulls the pain. As the problems of this world swirl around us, we can face the next day because we know that Christ’s victory is assured.

At the end of November we will celebrate Thanksgiving. In darkest days of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln himself declared a “day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.” With casualties mounting and property destroyed, Lincoln’s declaration seems ironic or even sick. Nonetheless, our hope in God, not our current circumstances, leads us to live lives of gratitude.

Our faith in Christ is a clarion call to action. As Jesus Christ declared, “Store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matthew 6:20). We carry the good news of God into the world. We live it out in our relationships, teach it to our children, and share it with the hurting. We work for justice and peace precisely because the world is too important to leave to the politicians. Instead of shrugging at the weight of the world, let us joyfully serve--loving both God and our neighbor.