skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I received a phone call last night from a former professor of mine from my wild and crazy Bible college days (they really were fairly wild a crazy-but that’s a different story). I wasn’t able to get to the phone in time, but he left me a message. He said that he just wanted to check-in and see how I was doing and ask about any prayer requests that I might have that he and the alumni association could pray about. It was nice, considering my not so tight relationship with the alumni association.
Shortly after graduating from Bible college I received a nice letter from the association, which said two things: 1) Congratulations of graduating, and 2) Please send in your dues right away. Now, I’m not sure if that’s how it was supposed to work, or if all alumni associations do business this way, but I couldn’t help but notice that there was never any invitation to join. I remember being so caught off guard by the tone of the dues request (there was a definite sense of “you owe us this money”) that I even looked through past mail and asked around to see if I or anyone else had been asked to join, or if they had simply been asked to pay up. I think it wouldn’t have been such a big deal had we (me and my small merry band) ever been invited to join anything at the school. As I neared the end of my time there I met with the academic dean who commented, rightly, that we had always been a bit of a separate group. I told him, “At the risk of sounding juvenile, they started it.” You see, before being invited to join, we were told to conform, but my long haired, New Living Translation loving self couldn’t do it. (I realize there is probably more than one side to this, but it’s my blog so it’s my side).
I never did send in any dues, and after several attempts they stopped asking. I check-up on the college from time to time, but we never really hear any news from them, I don’t know if all the good dues payers hear more information than us. I have always been a little sad that I didn’t have a closer relationship with the school (though in saying that I’m not sure how a human and a school have a relationship, but I think they can), so it was nice to hear from them the other day.
The problem is, he kept talking. “We’d like to hear any prayer requests you might have, and don’t forget that we still need help finishing the new men’s dorm! You can send……” Thanks for the call, guys.
Two blogs for the price of one. Lucky you.
Evil Bastards:
We received a political mailing the other day that invited us to “look into the mind of so and so.” I didn’t read it, the cover was enough for me. Under the guises of this somewhat benign title was a picture of the candidate whose mind I was supposed to look into, except that half of his picture was gone, replaced with a skeleton. Clever. Look into his mind, ha. I get it. CLEARLY the image was NOT meant to invoke the idea of peering into this candidates thought process but was, rather, intended to portray him in an ugly, scary, evil way and hopefully plant that image in my head when I think of him. This candidate was of course not the only victim of such caricature nor was the political party behind the ad the sole perpetrator of such things. Watch the political commercials with a discerning eye (it doesn’t actually have to be THAT discerning) and you will see that the images of the opponent are always the worst ones possible and the sound bytes are always taken out of context. Even the music used is chosen for the purposes of creating either a feeling of dread or joviality. Can you imagine if the politicians we send to Washington (or Salem) really were the evil bastards like their opponents tout? (Yeah, some are). If we really were to believe everything they say, and everything we act like we believe when talking about the “other side” then we really have to admire the separatists in hills of Idaho and Utah.
Pagans:
Pagans aren’t evil bastards, they’re just pagans. But that’s not the point.
Once upon a time, a long time ago, for an extremely brief moment, I debated internally whether or not I would one day allow my child to participate in the festivities of Halloween via trick or treating and jack o’ lanterns and so on. I debated it, because at the time I was part of a very conservative, and frankly rather legalistic church where that’s ort of thing simply wasn’t done. The rationale behind this is that Halloween is or at the very least is based on a pagan holiday where demons or dead people (or sometimes both) are invoked and worshipped and Satanists really like that day. Well, there is a bit of truth to it. There are some pagan belief practices that honor October 31st as a holiday, as do bona fide Satanists. However, they do not celebrate Halloween (unless they do it with their kids after worship). Halloween, as we know it today, is entirely a kid’s holiday. I will grant that October 31st is a pagan holiday, with some similarities, but what is practiced as worship is not nor has it ever been Halloween; that some people have some peculiar beliefs about pumpkins should not stop the rest of us from carving funny faces into them.
Another problem I have with the “Halloween is pagan” argument is that most of those who make that argument celebrate other pagan holidays too, either out of ignorance or because over the years we have cleaned it up enough for it to be palatable to them. The prime example of this is Christmas. Now hear this: Jesus was absolutely NOT born on December 25th, or any time close to that. Jesus, in other words, is not the reason for the season, Mithras is. The followers of Mithras celebrated his birthday on December 25th (they even called it Mithmas—seriously) and when the Roman empire became Christian the church had to decide what to do with all these feisty former pagans who wanted to party so they declared that everyone would celebrate the birth of Jesus instead of Mithras. We even celebrate with fertility (phallic?) symbols in our living rooms every year! Is this not pagan?! Now there are those who don’t celebrate either Halloween or Christmas, and are not Jehovah Witness’s, and I respect that (though you need to party sometime, right?). But seriously, if we are going to sit around our phallic symbols every winter and open our celebrations of greed, can we not take our little ones out for a bit of candy?
India dressed as a little kitty, by the way. SO CUTE.
"He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose."
JIM ELLIOT, Missionary and martyr
1927 - 1956
I would like to take this opportunity to announce my candidacy for President of the United States in the 2016 elections. I realize that it is a little early to make the announcement, but I anticipate several hurdles along the way that will take some time and creativity to overcome, so I am starting now. I am running as an independent and am not a member of any political party, though I welcome the endorsements of all of them so long as they can support my platform. Let me give you an outline of what I envision the Stults administration to look like:
-> I will be nobody’s bi---! As I am not affiliated with a party and no Political Action Committee or special interest group is likely to take a risk on me I will be indebted to no one!-> Shooting people is bad! I don’t think people in our country should shoot each other, so I will put a stop to it. I think using our words is better than using our weapons with other countries, and I don’t want people from other countries to shoot us (If I have to shoot them I will, but not until we sit down and talk about it like grown ups).-> If you can afford to pay more taxes then I’m gonna make you. If you can’t afford to pay then I’ll back off.-> I like to drink clean water and breathe clean air, so that will b e a priority.-> I know you can’t afford health insurance (I can’t either!), so as president I’ll make the insurance agencies and the HMO’s stop being so greedy and start taking care of people, and if you can’t afford your medicine I’ll let you buy it from Canada!-> Speaking of Canada, let’s invade! No, scratch that.-> Did you know that most of those legislators are rich? Yeah, I’m going to take away their salaries and a lot of their perks.-> I think torture is bad.-> I hate dealing with problems! So I’m going to hire a lot of people who are good at preventing problems.-> I think kids should be smart! In my administration, we’ll implement education policies that allow teachers to teach kids the way they learn best (hint: it isn’t sitting in desks in neat rows).-> My campaign is grassroots cause I have no money! Therefore, I will influence politics in America such that the “little guy” has more of a voice and the wealthy power houses can shut the he— up.-> There are no topless pictures of me on the internet.
Well, that’s what I have so far. Eight years is going to go quicker than we think, so let’s all be ready!
Ugg! I have tried to write for a long time now, but I am having blogger’s bloc. To try and combat that I figured I would just sit at the computer and babble (or whatever the equivalent of babbling is when typing) and see what comes out.
There are two things that have been on my mind lately. The first thing is the church (not that this is anything new, “church” is always on my mind), or more specifically, the emerging church. Two observations on this: First, I am not an expert on the emerging church. Though I am trying to become more educated, reading various e-zines and blogs both for and against (I would read the books but then I would have to pay for them) and chatting with whoever will chat about such things. Still, owing in part I think to the “emerging” and therefore changing and morphing nature of the emerging church, I am no expert. The other thing I have discovered in my studies so far (this is observation number two) is that nobody else seems to be either. Ok, let me back off that a bit. There are people who seem to know their stuff, but I have rarely found anyone who is able or willing to do an even-handed treatment of the movement. I see a lot of finger pointing from the more traditional camps, almost all of which is inaccurate in substance. On the other hand, a lot from the emerging movement is doing the same thing, blaming any spokesman of the traditional church they can find for the various ills therein.
This is not unique to the emerging/not emerging groups. When I was in college we spent a lot of time making fun of the “ridiculous” theological positions of the Calvinists and arming ourselves against the liberals. When I got to seminary I found a group of Calvinists predetermined to defeat my Arminian viewpoints. The mental image I have of all this is a bunch of wannabe theologians standing with their backs to each other, pointing at the various differences, or more often the caricatures of the differences, when what they should be doing is facing each other and pointing at the similarities that bind us. It’s not as if this a new thought to anyone, it’s just been bugging me (again) lately.
Here is the other thing on my mind these days: Mary (I made that name up, it’s not her real name). “Mary” is a client that we discharged last week. She had been previously court committed to mental health treatment, but the commitment was dropped and she chose to leave our facility and return to the drug infested, nasty little home she was in before, living with her mom who is not much higher functioning than Mary is herself. I have spent the better part of my time for the last few weeks trying to secure the girl services, make sure she is taking her medications, make sure she isn’t using drugs or prostituting herself, and a myriad of other things that fully functioning individuals don’t really think about, the just do it as a matter of course. I am frustrated that it is so hard for Mary to get services, I am frustrated that the people that are supposed to help her are saying they don’t have the time or resources to do the job (like I do?!). I am frustrated that we live in a society that buys $4.00 lattes but lets its mentally ill waste away, pleasantly out of sight.
I am frustrated that the church is wasting its energy calling each other names instead of stepping up to the plate and taking care of the vulnerable, the disenfranchised, and the outcast. I am frustrated that it feels like all I can do is be frustrated.
Blah. I haven’t blogged for a long time-too busy worrying about losing the house. We’re still not out of the woods (actually, we keep going farther in) but I feel like blogging anyhow.
So my lack of finances has gotten me thinking about finances and economics in general, which got me thinking about politics, which made me think about these Obama and McCain guys. I’m really not sure who I’m going to vote for yet, though the addition of Palin to the Republican ticket has certainly nudged me more in one direction (to the left). To be honest, I don’t really like a whole lot of what either of them have to say, and what I do like I don’t trust them on; that is to say, promises are easy to make, harder to carry out. And what I really, really don’t appreciate is how I feel like I am in jr. high again whenever I listen to them debate or see one of the commercials. How am I supposed to feel good about two guys running for president of the United States that get caught up playing the stupid “gotcha” games that the rest of us (well, most of us) got over after eighth grade?
I came to the conclusion long ago that the man himself, that is, who the actual president is, isn’t going to make a whole lot of difference in the political landscape. What I am voting for when I vote for president isn’t really based on which candidate I like better, but on which sphere of influence I find most valuable. For example, McCain will most likely fill his cabinet with conservative thinkers and appoint conservative judges and listen to the conservative groups that helped him get elected. Obama will do the same with his liberals. So my vote isn’t for a man, it is for an ideology, and once again I do not line up with either one. Rather, I find myself wanting to pick and choose from each, as well as eliminating several tenants from either side.
Abortion, for example: I fall in line with conservatives. On the environment I am more of a Democrat. I think guns should be controlled, but I also think that faith-based charity groups should be supported in every way possible, including through public funds. I don’t think cutting taxes for the sake of cutting taxes is good, but neither do I think that money will solve the ills of the various groups that keep asking for more. I support the idea that everyone ought to be able to see a doctor when they need to without worrying about the cost, but I don’t think that as a society we can afford to foot the bill for that. And as far as gay marriage, well, why did we ever give government the right to have any voice in marriage to begin with?
So here is the point I am at now, and I know this is nothing new but I think it bears repeating, at least to myself: the government will never be able to solve moral problems. That’s the church’s job. We will never, for example, stop abortions by making them illegal. But the church could do a better job of teaching about the sacredness of life and supporting pregnant mothers and encouraging adoption. This is one of many areas where the church has given up its voice to the government, asking the politicians to do the work of the saints and then bemoaned them for their involvement. I guess what it comes down to is that I am separating the issues into two categories: that of moral imperatives and that of political preferences (or, if you are feeling more dogmatic, political imperatives). I realize this break down is not perfect, but I think it more or less works. Those things which my convictions, my faith, my belief that Christ came and will come again tells me are right or wrong, these are moral imperatives. If by way of happenstance or luck the government supports these convictions, great. But the energy I put into these issues is best channeled through the church. The category of political preferences, those things which I feel are best for me and for you and for the country but that stop short of being morally binding holds the issues that most influence my vote. Again, this is a hard line to draw and there will be some cross-over, but it’s where my thinking is at right now.
I guess that’s all I’ve got for now.
