have you accepted your own salvation?

Sitting in my Clinical Pastoral Education class, the Supervisor leaned towards one of the students and asked this simple question, "have you accepted your own salvation?" It was the kind of question that made a few of us sit up in our chairs and take notice due to its subtlety. If you had grown up as I had, you had heard "have you accepted Jesus Christ for your salvation?" many times. In fact, you had been coerced, rehearsed or forced to answer this question multiple times, sometimes in the same meeting. For many of us, the familiarity not only rang hollow, but brought contempt (as Willard has spoken of) for the line.

However, I had never heard this exact statement... not once. Probably just a throw away line by our supervisor to cause a student trying to control a situation and "play God" in the lives of others to reassess his issue, it struck me as terribly profound. To a person that comes from a belief system that considers personal salvation the epoch of human experience and importance, this hopefully causes a bit of dissonance. It is one thing for one to believe in the idea that he has been saved from something, but it is something else to look in the mirror of his life and see himself as no longer in control.

I am sure a few readers will disagree, thinking that "of course, we see ourselves in this light. We made a decision to accept this." However, others may realize that living this acceptance of our own salvation has more to do with issues such as control, power and self regard than it does with morality and doctrine. If I believe that I am finite, limited and unable to "save" myself apart from another (as I do- it is how I define "depravity") then an issue such as control may be the hardest part of salvation and spiritual formation. It is cuts to the heart of the narcissist in all of us.

If I am playing God in the lives of others, attempting to control them, or pushing my own sense of perfection or normalcy, then I am not living as one that accepted their own salvation.

If I am living as if God needs me to mount of defense or prove God's love, wrath, power and existence I have not accepted my own salvation from my own self and my own mind or control.

If I am trying to (as Bono eloquently put it) "help God across the street like a little old lady" which I see in so many of the Internet fights, pseudo conversations and debates over doctrine, practice and "truth," I need to be reminded of my desire to deify my own mind and its understanding.

I may need to realize that the hardest part of accepting my own salvation is accepting that I am no longer in control of anything, especially others. Sure, many of us give lip service to such a concept, but I question the ease of this for anyone with a healthy ego and sense of self, which means pretty much anyone in Christian leadership (preachers, theologians, college profs and bloggers). This has become a new question I ask myself on occasion, and it may be something I add to my repertoire when directing someone spiritually.

This whole thing has gotten me thinking about the flip side to Peter Rollins confession that he denies Christ's resurrection every time he does not:

serve at the feet of the oppressed, each day that I turn my back on the poor; I deny the resurrection of Christ when I close my ears to the cries of the downtrodden and lend my support to an unjust and corrupt system.

However there are moments when I affirm that resurrection, few and far between as they are. I affirm it when I stand up for those who are forced to live on their knees, when I

speak for those who have had their tongues torn out, when I cry for those who have no more tears left to shed.

links on Resurrection and Recession

Here are a couple of good articles I ran across today.

First of all, we have Bishop Tom Wright (N.T.) writing in the Times of London. His essay, entitled The Church Must Stop Trivializing Easter is a nice companion to the ongoing conversation Tony Jones is having at his blog on why Jesus died and why Jesus rose from the dead. Bishop Wright and Tony have different approaches, but end up saying similar things about the implications of the resurrection (which is what matters more than arguments on which theory of the atonement is blessed by any of us). Wright points out that church has missed the point of the resurrection much of the time, seeing it as the Good Ending (Jesus raising from dead and going to heaven) to a Sad story (crucifixion) instead of seeing it as the event that changes everything.

Secondly, Tom Sine gives us the best practices of some churches which are proactively dealing with the recession, financial crisis and job loss of those in their surrounding community. Last month, in a profile of Drive By Truckers, I said that the blind spot of the emerging church could be the lower middle class, or working poor (the emerging church is responding to extreme poverty and rich intellectuals well enough). Tom is asking similar questions and giving us the ways some are answering them. If you are part of a church, consider some of these suggestions or practices as you help those caught in the middle of the recession.

Link to article

the beast in the details

Sometimes America's Folk Religion is much more fascinating to me than the intellectual arguments between the respectable leaders of more defined theological beliefs and movements. If eschatology comes up I find myself speaking to other smartypants Christians about the practical implications of Moltmann's theology of hope or making light of the premillenial dispensationalism of our youth.

However, I was observing a meeting today and the present financial crisis came up. To my surprise many in the room brought the conversation (before the actual start of meeting) around to the End Times (not something I had expected). While some were quiet, others started sharing their opinions, what they had heard from others (church or family) and how this could bring about the last days, the beast, the 1 world economy, paperless money which leads to the mark of the beast and how it may be better to move to the woods.

Wow? Where did I just step into? Backwoods Live Oak (my hometown)? Nope. A meeting of professionals at a place that has is not a faith based organization. 

America has its own folk religion and once again I am reminded what it is and how little our theological protestations will change it. This is the theology of the People. I must face it. Tim LaHaye, Hal Lindsay and DTS have won the battle for the rank and file (and yet we intellectuals fail to understand popular voting patterns and Dr. Phil).

Peter Rollins adventure in mising the point (He don't know Bruce)

may know how (not) to speak of





but he does not know how to speak of










I know he is soooo much smarter than me (and probably you), but the Irish theologian Peter Rollins is no expert on crime fighting American superheroes. In an attempt to critique American Capitalism and our fascination with heroes, he stretches an analogy past the breaking point. There are some truisms in his essay, but he overstates his case in many ways.

On its exterior his essay seems correct. However, Rollins does not understand that Bruce Wayne and his industrialism are a facade. They are not real. Sure, he must operate in such a manner to keep funding his crime fighting ways and their are conseguences. But, they matter not to him. Batman is real, while Bruce Wayne is a cover. This psychlogical reality changes everything. I think his essay would work better with Tony Clark/ Iron Man as the central figure.

Rollins missteps may because he is Irish and Batman is quintessentially American (hey, I don't really get James Joyce). It may because he is too smart for pop culture. It may be because he did not grow up reading Batman and is really critiquing a film adaptation (which is fine, but shallow- you must look at the entire mythology and many important pieces of the canon to make such broad assumptions) and it could even be that he feels a need to evaluate everything according to his worldview and makes some assumptions on the worldviews of others. This can be dangerous (but is not here).

This reminds me of my least favorite thing about my blog and the blogosphere in general. We think we know more than we know! I know politics. I know music. I know movies. I even know comic books, history, social justice and church life (pretty well). I know a bit about sports and art. I like books. I like theology. I like economics. I even like gardening, cooking, architecture and city planning (but know very little). I know little to nothing about Lost, technology, reality television, science, women, flora and fauna, business, real estate or money management (besides my adage- don't spend any). Remember that if I comment on those things.

So, when commenting on film, music or politics, I may actually have something compelling to say. When talking about sports, it is somewhere in the middle. When talking about theology, it may be insightful... but may not be. When speaking on books, I can tell you what I like. But, don't listen to me if I try to assess the subtleties of Vonnegut's prose or Volf's views of the Trinity. I may be able to tell you it is "real good." You can trust that. But, not much else. So, don't listen to Rollins on Batman.*

* I could tell you who to listen to about sports, books, film, musics, etc. But I wouldn't I don't want to hurt any feelings. I may also blog about this phenomena at a later time. It has become an obsession of mine.

read how he misses the point here.

ever felt like this?

click on cartoon to make it bigger

Garrison Keillor on the Nativity

Great quote from Garrison Keillor from a recent column on discussions on the Nativity in New York City. Read the entire thing here. Sounding a bit like Paul as he wrote on the importance of the resurrection, Keillor says this about the birth of the Saviour:

"This magical story is a cornerstone of the Christian faith and I am sorry if it's a big hurdle for the skeptical young. It is to the Church what his Kryptonian heritage was to Clark Kent -- it enables us to stop speeding locomotives and leap tall buildings at a single bound, and also to love our neighbors as ourselves. Without the Nativity, we become a sort of lecture series and coffee club, with not very good coffee and sort of aimless lectures."

Who would Jesus Shoot?

I am moralizing today (sorry if you do not like that, but remember I have no job or pulpit presently from which to expound). So, you, dear readers, are subject to such whims of fancy from a particularly bothered DJ Word..

From Cynthia Tucker comes this wonderful quote on America's misguided love affair with firearms:

"This folly will continue, fueled by a perplexing cultural ethos that worships individual gun ownership. A century from now, anthropologists will look back and wonder what in the world this was all about. They'll sift through the ruins of the historical record, in much the same way anthropologists today puzzle over cannibalism and the sacrifice of virgins in long-dead civilizations. they'll wonder how a highly advanced and sophisticated culture allowed unchecked personal gun ownership, despite the carnage."

This article points out the increase in violent crime the past few years, especially gun related violence. The NRA has let us know that we would be foolish to think guns have anything to do with gun violence.

Of course, I am sure the increase since 2005 has nothing to do with daily images of Americans at war, dehumanization of our enemies, the approval of the destruction of those we disagree with and violent rhetoric from pundits and politicians (especially Cowboy Presidents)....

....coupled with entertainment bent on culturally conditioning us to accept any amount of blood and gore with no questions to our own sense of humanity loss. With television and film violence unparallelled in human history, whether it is the torture fantasies of 24 and The Sopranos or the gory spectacles of dismembered teenagers with large breasts and bulging biceps of sickening "entertainment" like Saw I, II and III and the films of talent waster supreme Quentin Tarantino or the bloody genius Mel Gibson, we are on the precipice inches from acceptance of snuff films and public death. Of course, I am sure first person shooter video games have had no affect upon millions of young adults and their love affair with violence.

Sure, I am sure I am just a prudish Nanny stater foolish enough to think these things are connected (well, besides the video games- I know the right wing hates those, as long as they are not War games or Left Behind killfests).

Sadly, just like divorce, dealing with poverty, plastic surgery and materialism Christian beliefs and behavior related to violence are no different from that of our non-Christian neighbors. How can we talk of a Prince of Peace when fighting for a Gun Culture, supporting the destruction of an entire race of people (Arabs) and justifying the embrace of extreme violence in entertainment because we are "'merican Christians?"

What will it take for Christians to embrace the teachings of Jesus and take our history seriously. Will it take violence against our own kind for us to see that violent culture is more damaging to a true "Culture of Life" -our Cowboy President's words- than those issues used by Dobson, The SBC and radio pundits to increase their coffers and attendance; knowing that speaking the truth on these issues would affect their bottom line and challenge their followers in a manner that would get less Amens and more people walking out because their toes are uncomfortable.

* I am sure many of us can try to justify the violence in anything we watch by stating something about the deeper meaning or that it really shows the impact of violence. While I believe this is true in many war films or westerns such as The Proposition and The Unforgiven, we cannot have it both ways with a shows like The Sopranos and 24 which no longer give viewers a lesson in morality concerning the consequences of the actions of the main characters, as they lose their humanity due to their actions (see Crimes and Misdemeanors or Matchpoint, both by Woody Allen, for such moral fables- or V for Vendetta, a violent film with a point).

When Jack Bauer kills innocent persons for the "greater good" he has lapsed into a new territory, like that of Tony Soprano when he strangles an enemy because of the opportunity in Season 1. At this point we can no longer say it is really about workplace politics. It is insulting to say such a thing.

BTW, I am not rooting for Tony Soprano to be murdered this year. I am hoping the creators have the guts to have him pay the consequences for his actions and rot in prison for the rest of his stinking life.

Mike and Bill

Kristi and I had the honor of being part of a special event on Saturday evening. One of my closest friends in the world, Mike Houghton, whom I have known for over 25 years (met when he moved to Live Oak from Miami, lived with him in college, was in my wedding, continue to screw each other up theologically and politically) was surprised by his wife and 75 friends and family for his 40th birthday in Tallahassee (oh, to be in the promised land seeing the shrine of Doak Campbell Stadium).

Making life difficult for all other spouses, Kim brought one of Mike's favorite musicians in the world, Bill Mallonee (of Vigilantes of Love fame) to surprise Mike and friends with an intimate acoustic show.

Being a longtime fan and former concert promoter, it was good to see Bill once more (since 1993 I have seen him about 20 times and hung out many more times). Life has changed for him (proving once again that true art and suffering are bedfellows) and his music is not appreciated nearly as much as it should be. Named one of the greatest living songwriters by Paste magazine and being called as good a songwriter as Bob Dylan does not pay the bills.

As I think of ways to support Bill and his art, I realize that his music, like that of U2, the 77s and Rich Mullins have been very influential on the emerging church conversation and many of the leaders of Emergent Village. Somehow, we must honor our influencers (the artists come well before the theologians) and their legacy (not just the preachers but the artists) by sharing the wealth and becoming patrons, inviting them to our events (at our dime), adopting them through our churches, asking them to write books and publications, buying their music and spreading the word (I am sure this is the tip of the iceberg).

During my years I have seen too many talented artists (especially musicians) suffer greatly for their art while those of little talent and great abilities to self promote reap the accolades deserved by the forerunners. I have had countless conversations with musicians spit out by the church because of their theology, language, questions, etc. only to grow bitter and jaded. As I write this blog posting, I wish I was unlimited in resources to be the patron I long to be. But I am not and most of those reading this are not. However, we can come together and pool our resources to support artists such as Bill Mallonee (and many more). We can ask those with
influence and resources to support or promote the art of people like Bill. I know I can, and will.

I will add this to my list of things I hope to do something about. Until then, check out Bill's music.
Bill's myspace site
Bill's official site
buy and download Bill's music (including most VOL)
some free music to download

more observations of my daughter

During my past few weeks of extreme work scheduling (I am not a work-aholic), including last week's 60+ hours, i have not taken the time for enjoyable activities such as blogging.

However, as I attempt to begin again, I must mention 2 more theological observations of our almost 5 year old daughter.

1. She informed me in no uncertain terms that Ariel and Jesus are of equal importance.
2. At the beginning of a lively discussion of the Holy Spirit, probably due to some songs in Sunday School, she asked me to explain what the Spirit was. However, her main question was, "Is the Spirit a movie?"

Ah, raising our kids in the age of Disney and multimedia.

Sometimes Hobos are better than theology

As I lay weeping quietly in my bed attempting to forget the Game 6 loss of my beloved Cardinals to a team that cannot get love in its own city, I was drawn to my favorite piece of bathroom literature of the past few years. I needed to read something smart, funny, trivial and having utterly no importance in the eternal (or weekly) scheme of things (the last thing I needed was the copy of Living Faith by Jacques Ellul sitting patiently on my bedstand).

I grabbed my copy of The Areas of My Expertise by the most famous commenter this site has ever had (sorry Tony, Jordon and Rudy) and headed to the retreat center. John Hodgeman, PC in the Mac commercials and frequent "expert" on The Daily Show, wrote this treatise containing very little truth on subjects as diverse as squirrels, prediction of the future, actuaries and numerous facts about hobos (including 700 Hobo names- i.e.Silas Swollentoe, Flea Stick and Markansas).

As an asthmatic, I offer you his "Diversions for the asthmatic child who cannot play in the snow"

• Inhaler whittling
• Fabrication of elaborate kites that shall never be flown
• Pill-swapping
• Bird-loathing
• Lying on the floor and staring at the ceiling
• Finding new quiet radio programs to listen to
• Hiding*

To John's list, I offer my own...

• waving at other kids out the window (slowly, so as to not exert energy)
• crying (though not sobbing, which can cause an attack)
• thinking about sleds and snow
• playing board games with imaginary friends
• asking mom why God gave you asthma
• planning your scheme to make enough money to buy a sports teams (since you will never play)

Do you have any others to offer?

*pg. 61

Theological observations of my daughter

Knowing some of my readers are kidless and do not appreciate cute kid stories, I usually don't share personal stories of the things my children say and do. I mean, aren't all children precocious, saying and doing things no one but relatives would find charming.

Anyway, I am writing this as much for my remembrance as for readership. Driving home on Saturday evening, the kids were in the back holding rocks they had received at school. Kristi asked about the rock and was told by Aedan that he was given his rock by a teacher. When asked why, he explained that he had been told "God was a rock."

Kristi attempted to explain this concept to the children. However, she was interrupted by Gillian who told us, in no uncertain terms, that "God was not a rock!"

"Why is God not a rock?" asked Kristi. Because, "God is not hard," Gillian responded... "he is not soft, God is a person."

Tony Jones is a writer, I am not

Tony Jones is a friend of mine and clearly articulates some points I have either attempted to make on this blog or make in a less clear manner on a regular basis.

However, Tony Jones is also a writer and I am not (but we all know that), so he should be articulating these points in a coherent manner, while the jury is still out on my coherence in general, let alone the coherence of my writing.

Anyway, if you don't read Tony's blog and you read mine (which would be a strange occurrence and means you are probably a very close friend), please take note of 2 recent posts.

1. Tony's recounting of his lunch with Piper. When he told me about it a few weeks ago, I was flabbergasted by the idea that one has to believe soley in the Substituionary atonement Theory to be a "Christian." Even R.C. Sproul never said that. He said it was the only truth, but one did not have to believe in this truth to be saved. While I disagree with Sproul's assessment that it is the sole truth, I like the generosity of his statement.

I have wanted to blog on such things lately, but chose not to because I did want to act like I had some sort of inside info on such a meeting (lots of people knew), so I am glad Tony tells us what happened and gives a clearly orthodox (and historically respectful) understanding of the atonement (he also names my favorite book on the atonement). Read Here

2. Tony belongs to the same sub-grouping I do politically speaking. We are both Radically Independent Moderates. We both appreciate the free market and the government's need to limit its potential evils (all human systems are subject to this). Neither of us are single issue voters and both have voted for plenty of Republicans and Democrats, along with a few Independents (of course, he may have never voted Green with me). We also agree on the idea that the only theologically justifiable position for Christians is that of Independence (we sound like Fundies). So, read his diatribe naming the political candidates he will be voting for. It is enjoyable.

It is good for others to understand that just because you oppose a President and his policies and that President happens to be Republican, this does not mean you are a Radical Liberal (although I would be happy to call myself one if I had the guts to be one). It is good to remind others that one can be against abortion and poverty, against war and the sexualization of culture, pro-capitalism and pro-environment, anti-greedy corporations and anti-government largeness. It is never as simple as those that like to label each other try to make it.

perspective in a rough week

Although I call this blog "Cheaper than Therapy" I have never seen it as a place for working out my issues or using it as a confessional (although I have plenty of issues). That has never been my style. I am much better at holding things close to the vest and barely letting my family and closest friends in to my misanthropic melancholy.

As I spend this week barely rising my head above the self imposed mire I find myself in (and the self-loathing and pity that go along with it), I am reminded that however deep my problems seem to be today that, hopefully, "this to will pass." I am also reminded of the 2 options Christians such as myself have to react to issues that come against us (even when they are self imposed).

One option I have been guilty of on many occasions is that of looking outside myself for all responsibility, blame and resolution. I can choose to react as some (but thankfully not all) of the Republican Congressional leadership, members of the RR like Charles Colson and the Right Wing Noise Machine (see Limbaugh and Hannity) have to the Tom Foley scandal (or like Foley himself each time something else is released). I can choose to blame the messenger, find a way to play it to my advantage or conveniently forget the facts as I blame everyone else. Yes, I can (and have) react this way.

However, I have another option that all to often I choose to ignore. As I watch the reaction of the Amish Community to this terrible tragedy that has befallen their community, I am reminded of Paul's admonishment in Philippians 2:1-11 to have the same attitude as that of Christ Jesus.

I long to react to my circumstances in the manner of the Amish. I hope I can learn from this example in the news and find it in my heart to forgive those who trespass against me in such a timely manner. I hope I can become a person of such trust in Christ in all circumstances.
_______________________________________

Rod Dreher, the Crunchy Con has been following this story and commenting on the wonderful witness of the Amish. Let no one ever make jokes at the expense of these people ever again out of ignorance, fear of the outsider or sheer stupidity.
_______________________________________

I am reminded of the movie The Village by this incident. In a violent sinful world, violence and sin will visit everyone, not just those living by the sword, but also those living in peace. Sometimes the innocent reap what others sow.

Moltmann on the Left Wing of the Reformation (anabaptists)

more from that conversation between Volf and Moltmann, this time on the Left Wing of the Reformation being the future of the reformation (I like it because I am most likely on this wing).

Volf: In your book The Passion for Life: A Messianic Lifestyle [Fortress, 1978] you say that the future of the Reformation lies in its left wing. Could you elaborate on that?

Moltmann: The fundamental concept of the Reformation was that of the mature church. Luther first said that a community of believers possessed the right to judge church teaching. In his early years, Luther viewed such a visible community as the true church. In 1525, however, he suddenly gave up this idea and began to follow Melanchthon in supporting the idea of a state church. Luther’s original conception was realized by the Anabaptists and the so-called "enthusiasts" (Schwärmer), as he mockingly characterized them. The future of the Reformation, in my opinion, lies in this left wing, in the visible, voluntary assembly of believers. The priesthood of all believers, the promise of the Reformation, can be realized only in the freely assembled community.
Second, the left wing of the Reformation also contains those Anabaptist churches which rejected all forms of violence. The first Christian conscientious objectors were from Mennonite and southern German Anabaptist churches. For this stand they were persecuted and executed both by Catholics and by Protestants. Today we call these churches historic peace churches. In an age of atom and hydrogen bombs -- an age when the destruction of the whole world is possible -- we are finally accepting the view that the church must take a clear stand for peace. Therefore, we must alter our judgment of Mennonites and other Anabaptists. I believe that the church should no longer bind itself with the state in such a way that it sanctions military service and weapons. Rather, the church must clearly represent the message of the Sermon on the Mount. Therefore, the future of the Reformation belongs not to the state church -- that is, to the union between throne and altar -- but to the left wing of the Reformation, which lived out a radical discipleship.

Moltmann on Baptism

In an interview I found online while reaquainting myself with Moltmann- and not wanting to dig through my closet for his books I have not read since grad school (seminary is getting smaller and smaller in my rearview mirror), comes this quote from an interview Mirslov Volf had with Jurgen Moltmann. As a Baptist, with Reformed tendencies* I enjoyed what he had to say.

Volf: You are a Reformed theologian. Yet you unhesitatingly identify believerÂ?s baptism as the correct model of baptism. How did you come to this conviction?

Moltmann: I am neither the first nor the only Reformed theologian to have difficulties with infant baptism. Karl BarthÂ?s reservations about it are well known. I do not think that infant baptism is well supported either by the New Testament or by theological considerations, although it has become tradition here. But this tradition is gradually losing its sway. In the big cities of Germany, the number of infant baptisms in Lutheran churches is declining by more than 50 per cent. A great number of children growing up in these cities are not baptized. Thus our church is being forced to change over to believerÂ?s baptism, even though it does not accept the theological and biblical grounds for it. I have arrived at my position both on biblical and on theological grounds, and because of the movement from the established state church to communities of faith, a movement that is now in full swing.

From http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1689

* Even though I have reformed (yes, Calvinist and Lutheran) tendencies, I am no longer wedded to a closed belief system (any closed theological system actually) which interprets everything in Scripture and elsewhere for me instead of allowing me to find what I think Scripture is saying through study apart from what somebody just as wedded to a 16th Century modern view rebelling against his own upbringing and all its baggage as I am to my postmodern western baggage.

Whew. It feels good to get that off my chest.

Implications of a Theology and Politic of Hope

As I think of the practical implications of a theology and politic based upon hope and love, instead of fear and loathing, it comes to mind that I must encourage leadership in this area. In fact, everyone should encourage leadership in this area, whether political or spiritual.

A few of these implications (and this is a work in progress) in my own life are as follows;

• only attend a church where the preaching is based upon love and hope
• only attend a church where the leadership moves the church in the direction of love and hope
• give my financial resources to non-profits and NGOs whose aims are Love and Hope, not fear and loathing (this has huge financial implications- imagine if we demanded hope from Focus on the Family and other such organizations?)
• volunteer for organizations that have solutions for today's problems based upon hope and love (I guess that means I cannot volunteer for the major political parties)
• only vote for candidates that have a message based upon Hope and Love (and strategies for this to play out in the future of our nation/ state/ community)*
• encourage dialogue based upon a Spirit of Hope and Love with those I disagree with
• when the emperor has no clothes (be the emperor a pastor, politician or community leader), I should humbly ask why the he has no clothes and point it out to others. I should then offer to dress the emperor (be prophetic and solutions based)
• I should look at myself to see where I am living in fear and hatred and allow others to help me live a life of love and hope

Well there are a few. Do you have more?

* this is a major problem I see with the present state of the political/ campaign machine. The positive candidates are spit out, while negativity brings in the votes (whether it is a cynical anti-gay marriage amendment which is meant to bring out the church folks or scare tactics such as morphing a candidates face into that of a terrorist). This happened in both recent elections- in 2000 we ridded ourselves of a positive candidate with a hopeful message (McCain) and had a close election between 2 similar candidates (children of privilege, coffers filled with money from same corporations) who brought no hope for the future, just fear of what would happen if the other guy was elected (Bush was slightly more positive and "won").

In 2004, the cycle was repeated. Many positive Democrats were spit to the side, while the Bizarro World JFK (Kerry) spread fear at the same time Bush's surrogates reminded us that wolves were at the door ready to strike if we elected Bizarro World JFK (bizarro world because he shared superficial traits with JFK, but was actually the anti-JFK).

Historically we have had politicians with a positive orientation of America's future. They have inspired us when they could have frightened us (whether the cautious Eisenhower or "morning in America" Reagan on the right or JFK, FDR and Clinton on the Center/Left- of course the politician that had the most hopeful direction for America's future was Robert Kennedy, whom, like others, I believe would have changed the course of American history for the better had he not been murdered).

However, we have had even more politicians with dour outlook who spent their time scaring us or spreading a message based upon fear for the future (Johnson, Truman- to an extent and Carter on the Left and Nixon and both Bushes on the right-of course VP Cheney is the most negative major politician I have ever seen).

(I know a number of you will have issue with my characterizations of these politicians, but it may be based more on political loyalty than anything else)

While we must look deeply at their policies and stances on a multitude of issues, we must decide that even when all things are not equal, we will vote for hope, love and faith in the future and vote against fear, hatred and a dismal outlook upon the world.

Hope versus Fear in an Election Year

As a Christian who believes in, as Moltmann stated, a Theology of Hope, I am distressed by the current state of preaching/ theology and political discourse in our nation, all of which focus on theologies and politics of fear (and loathing).

(Of course, if we had a more nuanced discourse, sound bites would be gone, Limbaugh and Hannity would be out of business and the church would need to focus on the Biblical madate to feed the poor or stand with and bring good news the oppressed instead of fighting liberals, gays, darwinists, secularists and every other thing that keeps them from spreading Good News)

Now that we are in an election cycle, we will start seeing the Left and the Right capitalizing on our natural fears to manipulate us to doing their bidding (thereby giving them their desired power).

Sadly, in the church we will see the same thing. Whether it is from the Dobson/ Perkins clones scaring us about Gay Agendas, the end of the world and Wars on Christmas or from others turning these living caricatures into Hitler-lites, they both desire the same thing; to manipulate us to do their bidding (thereby giving them their desired power- money and numbers). This behavior (predominate on the right because they control the airwaves and pulpits of influence) smacks of a theology or politics based upon fear and hatred instead of hope and love.

It is my prayer that Americans and Christians will not fall victim to this manipulation, that we will see the pathetic little men behind the curtain peddling their bicycles and telling us to focus upon the image on the screen and not their small-mindedness and feel sorry for them- as Dorothy did. It is my prayer that we, who call ourselves Christians, will see ourselves shaped by the theologies of hope which are natural manifestations of a proper understanding of the resurrection of Christ and the Second Coming. It is also my prayer that we will reach out across the partisan lines which separate us, whether theological or political, to build communities of hope- thereby advancing God's Kingdom on Earth.

One part I will promise to play during this cycle is to pray for these Wizards, be they political, theological or the media. I will pray for Totos to pull the curtain back and Dorothys to love them into facing their own fears.
___________________________________
One of my 3 favorite Totos (along with Colbert and Stewart):

A funny thing happened in this post- I was only going to simply tell you how much I loved Keith Olbermann (one of the only brave journalists on television today, speaking truth to power- the central historic role of journalism) and encourage you to watch this video and read the transcript of a recent episode (it is only a couple of minutes long) in which he takes the present administration to task for its use of fear to manipulate the electorate, thereby accomplishing exactly what the terrorists want.

Please watch it, no matter your perspective. It will give insight into what I so often rail against.
link

trying to be less than a true American

While reading my WAG newsletter (from David Blatstone, an editor at Sojourner and Business writer), I came across this statistic.

Data Point: Use Your Vacation Days!
39: Average number of vacation days received by each employed adult in France
12: Average number of vacation days received by each employed adult in USA
45: % of French adults who take at least one three- to four-week vacation a year
31: % of USA adults who said that in 2005 they did not use all their vacation days
421 million: Estimated total of vacation days unused by USA workers in 2005

*Source: Expedia.com 5th annual “Vacation Deprivation” survey

While we are much more efficient than the French, taking no Sabbaths, no extended Sabbaths or no time for family takes a terrible toll on the psyche of American workers.

We are coming to the end of the fiscal year at the non-profit I work at. Presently I have 2 weeks and 3 days unused. I need a break. Although I am heading to Live Oak for my reunion this weekend, I will take no days off. So, I will be heading to Minneapolis in mid-June for an Emergent Meeting, which should be a time for relaxation.

Hopefully in late June, Kristi and I will travel to Virginia, drop the kids at her parent's home and head to NYC for 4-5 days (with a day in Amish Country or Cape May thrown in). I say this to make sure it happens and I do not take the maximum 2 weeks into the new fiscal year in July. Hold me accountable to not be a typical American.