Via Christus Retreat

Posted on

This past weekend we had our annual (and final) Via Christus Retreat. It was a strange time in that the church is wrapping up soon and a number of the small group we have left will be moving all over the country within the next month or so. So naturally we spent a lot of time reflecting on such things this weekend. Our theme was “Walking by Faith” and we focused on looking back at our spiritual journey and looking forward in hope to where God is taking us next. Many of us are facing significant life changes very soon, so time for prayer and spiritual reflection on those changes helped us process.

We also had a great time together. I of course enjoyed just hanging out on the couch for most of the time. But we played board games, ate lots of yummy food, and just had a good time together. I’m still trying to recover from an emotionally intense and rather sleepless weekend though (pregnancy + camp beds = no sleep).

Read more

Human Rights and Christian Comfort

Posted on

For this month’s Synchroblog we are joining in with the Amnesty International sponsored Bloggers Unite for Human Rights. I guess the idea is to give the Christian take on the issue. My first reaction to that idea though was to recall how uncomfortable most Christian circles I have been a part of are with the concept of human rights (not to mention Amnesty International). There are those who don’t like the topic because it focuses on human needs in the here and now, not spiritual paths to heaven. It is not about whether or not people should be tortured or starved, but that dealing with such issues distracts from evangelism. Others though who may intellectually agree with the concept of human rights don’t see them as necessarily Christian concerns. They say caring about whether or not people are treated humanely and fairly isn’t a Biblical issue it is modern cultural construct. So while we should care about such things as decent human beings, we shouldn’t bring our faith into it.

Obviously I have issues with both approaches. I don’t like extremes that dichotomize the body and soul or the sacred and the secular. I don’t like faith systems that prioritize one part of faith over another (evangelism over service, doctrine over practice… or the reverse). If my faith informs how I am to live my life and I am called to love others those things don’t matter. If feeding the hungry by making sure they have access to food is part of loving them, does it matter if it can be labeled as modern humanism or not? And no matter how fantastic evangelism is, can people really say that it’s okay to let people starve?

I think too often the ideology wars stand in the way of seeing what is actually happening to real people. Fighting for human rights isn’t about politics or philosophies ultimately. We can use such things as shields to protect us from reality. Could anyone honestly stand before someone starving because of oppression and injustice and tell them “screw you, you are too worthless for me to change my _______ (politics, theology, opinion, routine) to bother to help. I’m not responsible for you, and in fact you don’t deserve help anyway, so just deal with it.”

But of course we say such things every day.

So I think Christians coming together to say they support human rights is a significant step in the right direction. To leave behind our excuses and our theology shields and not be afraid to visibly care is a needed step in our world today.

Contributers to this Synchroblog (so far) include –

Read more

Sex Thoughts

Posted on

Disclaimer – Really long post ahead that is sure to piss at least a few people off.  Enjoy.

 

I’m usually very wary about Christian books that deal with sex for two basic reasons.  Generally they so super-spiritualize sex that it becomes nearly indistinguishable from say a prayer meeting or worship service.  Secondly I find that I usually completely disagree with the typical Christian conceptions about sex.   And this is where I get in trouble.  Where I cross the lines of taboo topics for decent Christian conversation and confirm people’s worst fears about me/young people/the emerging church.  Where I either make people uncomfortable or just piss them off.  So I usually play by the rules, avoid the topic, and let everyone assume I think like a “typical evangelical woman” (whatever that is) on the subject.

 

Well it’s kinda hard to keep my mouth shut when I’m sent a book to review that I have serious issues with on this topic.  So at the risk of stirring up another hornet’s nest here, I have to say that I have issues with Michael Leahy’s new book Porn Nation (and honestly I continue to find it amusing that these anti-porn sites/books have porn related titles.  I know it’s meant to bring porn users to them, but it also brings up all sorts of real porn when one searches for them on Google or Amazon.) The book is Leahy’s story about how his sex addiction destroyed his life.  Of course it also has sections on how our culture is oversexed and some really generic ideas for spiritual healing.  In all it was a very short book that I found didn’t end up saying much at all and what it did say was based on false assumptions and dichotomies.

 

I don’t deny that a sex addiction is harmful or that it has destroyed families.  As with any addiction the potential exists to cause harm to those one loves the most.  I appreciate the author’s vulnerability in telling his story and admitting how his addiction hurt others.  I also don’t deny that porn can exploit and often has connections to sex trafficking, forced prostitution, rape, and slavery.  Or that there are illegal and deviant forms of it.  Sex can be used to hurt, control, and demean.  Such injustices are always wrong wherever they occur.  But as I read the book I had the distinct feeling the author was throwing the baby out with the bathwater so to speak.  His personal pain caused him to swing to the opposite extreme of viewing all sexuality as bad and to blame the sexuality in our culture for his struggles with selfishness and addiction.   While I question his naïve historical view of sex (assuming that we are the first generation to ever be sexual), as well as tendency to lump all cultural expressions of sexuality under the porn label, it is his negative view of sexuality that I had the most problem with.

 

Early in the book as he describes his first experience with sexuality (an accidental orgasm and the thrill of seeing a topless picture of a women), the author assumes a tone of disgust and regret.  From the awkward and incomprehensible “sex ed” class taught by a priest to his own sexual experimentation, the assumption is that being a sexual being is a bad thing.  This is his message after working through his sexual addictions, but it is also the message I have heard my whole life from the church.  Even before the recent trends within evangelical Christianity to describe the sole purpose of sex as being procreation (basically for anti-homosexual reasons), sex wasn’t something to be celebrated.  In typical modern dualistic fashion, our bodies are disparaged and sexuality is seen as the basest expression of that despised flesh.  Sure some books like Intended for Pleasure hinted at that aspect of sex, but only as long as there wasn’t too much pleasure involved and sex was described as really being about spirituality.  Basically the vicissitudes of Platonism haunted the bedrooms and made an easy scapegoat of sexuality.

 

This view of sex defined the way children were raised and youth were taught.  Children were taught in the most Skinneristic of fashions to be utterly ashamed of and disgusted by their bodies through the quick reproves of parents whenever they attempted to touch their genitalia.  Youth pastors held the sacred honor of scaring teens away from sex by whatever means necessary.  A mixed bag of fear tactics, heavy guilt, and extreme suppression usually made up their arsenal.  It generally worked too (at least for appearances sake, those who “sinned” through dressing too sexily or by getting pregnant were not so subtly asked to leave).   Anyone one who expresses curiosity about sex openly was silenced and generally ridiculed.  But of course everyone knew that most of the guys and a good handful of the girls were exploring their sexuality on their own trying to ignore the conditioned guilt they felt at being a sexual being.

 

Sexual memoirs like Leahy’s just portray the continuation of this rejection of the body.   At one point in the book he describes the sad situation of girls who feel like they have to “put out” for guys or dress really sexy in order to be affirmed as a person.  I agree, that is bad and is part of the continued evils girls face as we emerge from patriarchy.  Girls should be taught to respect their bodies and themselves.  This respect includes understanding who they are as sexual beings and the best way to discover healthy sexuality.  Leahy though decides to merely lament the fact that girls these days are not innocent (once again historical naivety – were they ever!?), and proceeds to blame Brittney Spears, MySpace, and rap music for the downfall of the young.  Apparently denying and ignoring sex (along with figuring out how to shelter “children” from it) is preferred over teaching healthy ways to interact with it.

 

Of course in Christianity where sex is to be saved for marriage whole other issues arise because of a lack of healthy ways to understand sex.  Girls, taught to be ashamed of sex from birth, are generally told that although they will most likely not enjoy sex they had better give it to their husbands or else it is their fault if he strays.  Years of suppression and guilt are to be overcome in a night.  They need to please men enough to keep them from sin (affairs, porn, fantasy…), but of course stay within healthy spiritual boundaries.  Anything that indulges in the sheer physicality of sex or that encourages sexual exploration and fulfillment is taboo.  Only tasteful lacy lingerie on occasion is permitted, the lights should always be off, no games or stories or toys, no sex vacations, no experimenting with positions, no movies or fantasy play, no masturbation, and, most assuredly, no talking about any of this stuff ever.  Couple who do cross those lines face lingering guilt and wonder if they are doing something wrong by enjoying sex with their spouse.  Women become angry and ashamed if the husband tries to be intimate in those ways.  They blame his deviant sex addiction and shut their sexuality down even further.

 

And the resources given to help are books like Porn Nation that continue to spread the “sex is evil” lie and tack on a few pages at the end about how after years of struggle they found healing and are happily married.  Sorry, but I find that lacking.  I firmly believe that God created sex and that we are meant to enjoy it.  Yes, I think that should happen with a committed relationship – that relational connection and intimacy being part of what it takes to be fully enjoyed imho.  So I won’t deny that I am a sexual person.  Nor will I play the game of attempting to hide that away by being made to feel guilty for dressing a certain way (that “way” varying depending on who is doing the judging) or just because I am a woman.  I will not run from expressions of sexuality in culture or think they hold the power to destroy people (addictions and selfishness are problems, sexuality is not).  I will not see the physical body as something only to be shamed by, or see developing my relationship with my husband sexually as anything I should ever feel guilty about.  Yes, sex can be used to harm and destroy, but there are ways to develop a healthy sexuality that strengthens and respects people that doesn’t require the extremes of disparaging the body or suppressing sexuality.

Read more

Pentecost

Posted on

Change comes on the wind.  Or at least that’s how it happens in movies.

 

The scene is set.  A quiet little town or neighborhood existing as it always has.  The habits and rituals of daily life are center stage.  No major crises are looming and yet something appears to be missing.  People appear to be content, but one can see they are not fully alive.  They lack a certain spark, the joie de vivre so to speak that gives a passion and purpose to ordinary existence.  This is when the wind changes.  A select few may pause to notice the change marked by the creaking turning of the weather vanes, but then they go their way forgetting they noticed anything at all.  They are unaware how drastically their lives are about to be transformed or that the wind currently whipping through their hair heralds the awakening of their souls.  For with the wind comes a new voice, one that will speak into their lives and set them on an utterly new path.

 

This is where in the movies we are introduced to say Mary Poppins or Vianne in Chocolat.  Unassuming at first glance, these women blow into town and quietly get to work at changing lives.  Their ways are a bit unorthodox to be sure.  Having a spoon full of sugar to help the medicine go down or opening up a chocolaterie during Lent just aren’t the way things are done.  Yet one soon discovers that the outward quirks of these women are part of the awakening and healing process they bring to those around them.  From Mary Poppins helping a family become a true family, to Vianne helping a town restore broken relationships, it took the stirrings of something new and different to affect change.  Of course their ways were questioned and ridiculed by those who preferred the status quo, but eventually the winds of change prevailed and a happier much more alive group of people emerged.  The wind then once again changes and pushes onward to new situations in need of this special form of healing and growth.

 

The image of a mighty rushing wind is of course the Biblical imagery for the Holy Spirit.  On Pentecost change came with the wind as the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and other followers of Jesus who had been meeting in prayer.  Yet it isn’t just the Holy spirit rushing in on the wind that I find so extraordinary (although it certainly is that), it is how it was sent to dwell in and empower Christ’s followers to do the work he left them.  Change didn’t just come with the wind (or as the wind), it took the form of people sent out to transform the world.

 

Like the Hollywood stories of Mary Poppins and Vianne, change occurred often through unexpected and unorthodox methods as those who had received the Holy Spirit sought to bring hope and healing to those they encountered.  The Holy Spirit wasn’t blowing haphazardly, stirring hearts to change here and there.  Real people found themselves moved to be the harbingers of these changes.  One finds the church praying in Acts 4 that they might have boldness in spreading the message of Christ.  The scriptures tell us that they were filled with the Holy Spirit and not only were they able to testify powerfully, but that they were unified as a group and took care of each others needs.  Radical change came upon the group in ways that brought them closer and healed the hurts of those in needs among them.  Change brought about by the work of people empowered by the Spirit.

 

It is this sort of change that is needed in our world today.  Too often I hear prayers asking for God to send the Spirit to change the hearts of a community or to bring healing to a situation.  These prayers while rightfully trusting in the power of the Spirit fail to recall that the Spirit works through people to affect these changes.  We should be praying instead that we would be emboldened to change hearts and help heal.  Being filled with the spirit isn’t something that is done merely for our own good, but to empower us to serve.  Seeking to transform the world is of course something none of us can do on our own strength, but it is a vital part of the very nature of what it means to be filled with the Spirit.

 

So are we even bothering with the winds of change?  Are we the ones sitting around seemingly content yet utterly unalive when we should be the Mary Poppinses and Viannes of the world?  We have been given the Spirit, we should be empowered by the greatest wind of change ever to blow on this earth  –  why are we expecting not to have to do anything?  We should be the one’s loving boldly, sharing the good news, and taking care of the needs of the hurting.  We should be the one’s out there bringing families back together, healing broken marriages, and restoring broken friendships.   We should be the one’s overcoming oppression, setting captives free, and seeking justice.  We should truly be acting as witnesses to God’s power.

 

Our scene is set.  The wind is blowing.  May we be emboldened to act.

Read more

Mother’s Day

Posted on

I think a yearly reminder of the original intent of Mother’s Day is always a good thing. A reminder that as women and mothers we can work together for peace, justice, and equality.

Mother’s Day Proclamation – 1870
by Julia Ward Howe

Arise then…women of this day!
Arise, all women who have hearts!
Whether your baptism be of water or of tears!
Say firmly:
“We will not have questions answered by irrelevant agencies,
Our husbands will not come to us, reeking with carnage,
For caresses and applause.
Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn
All that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy and patience.
We, the women of one country,
Will be too tender of those of another country
To allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs.”

From the voice of a devastated Earth a voice goes up with
Our own. It says: “Disarm! Disarm!
The sword of murder is not the balance of justice.”
Blood does not wipe our dishonor,
Nor violence indicate possession.
As men have often forsaken the plough and the anvil
At the summons of war,
Let women now leave all that may be left of home
For a great and earnest day of counsel.
Let them meet first, as women, to bewail and commemorate the dead.
Let them solemnly take counsel with each other as to the means
Whereby the great human family can live in peace…
Each bearing after his own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar,
But of God –
In the name of womanhood and humanity, I earnestly ask
That a general congress of women without limit of nationality,
May be appointed and held at someplace deemed most convenient
And the earliest period consistent with its objects,
To promote the alliance of the different nationalities,
The amicable settlement of international questions,
The great and general interests of peace.

And this video (ht: Josh) I think makes a fantastic point about how we raise our kids determining the world they will create. What things do we tell them are important and significant in this world? Do we encourage them towards peace, justice, and equality? Or do we give such things lip service while really conveying to them that money and power are the really important things in life?

Read more

Should Christians Apologize?

Posted on

Over at the Justice and Compassion blog Pam Hogeweide posted her thoughts on the Seeds of Compassion event. While I continue to be amazed at the resistance in the Christian community to even talking about compassion with others, I was intrigued by a sub-conversation that arose in the comments to that post. One commenter in particular expressed her opposition to the idea that Christians should be apologizing for evil done in our collective past. The reasons for her opposition are summed up as follows –

1. People of other religions are jerks too. Why should Christians apologize if others are not expected to as well. She wondered why “Christians [are] the only ones groveling around and begging forgiveness for the disrespectful behavior of only some of the members of their religion?”
2. Christians really haven’t done all that much that is bad. Or at least all the good we have done outweighs the bad.
3. People shouldn’t have to apologize for stuff they were not personally involved in. She wrote, “if YOU have not partaken in toxic Christianity, then I am not sure you need to apologize for something you didn’t do. It is not YOUR fault that others calling themselves Christians have acted like jerks.” For her, “an apology implies some personal culpability.” As an example she wrote, “As a white person, it is not my fault that black people were treated unfairly a century ago. I would take that further even and say that as a white person growing up in the SOUTH, it is not my personal fault. I do not owe black people an apology. (actually, the government is still trying to weasel it out of me via affirmative action: I said I am sorry with the fact that my law school admission doesn’t count as much as if I was certain minorities, whether I wanted to or not).”

Of course others on the thread attempted to engage with her often to no avail, but her perspective haunted me. While she didn’t cross into MD territory and say that we need to be jerks for Jesus, the utter lack of ability to expression compassion for the other surprised me. Her first objection, revealed more of a sense of entitlement than love. Sure I can admit that other religions have done evil as well, but I will not refuse responsibility for my own religion until I feel like other people have taken responsibility for theirs. If I always waited for others to seek forgiveness before I forgave, would I really be extending forgiveness or just gloating in their groveling? I though similarly about her second objection. I don’t think evil is graded on a sliding scale. No amount of good negates the need to take responsibility and apologize for wrong actions. The call for an apology (or the act thereof) is not intended to silence or ignore good done. I’m not a fan of “yes, but” apologies (from my toddler or from adults). Trying to evade responsibility and escape needed amends by attempting to paint oneself in a better light cheapens the apology. There is a time and place for lauding accomplishments, just not as a means of avoiding an apology.

But it is the third excuse that really bothered me. Even if it is true that someone is entirely innocent of wrongdoing, the group they have chosen to associate with is not – and that is how those who have been hurt by that group (or just outsiders in general) will view that individual. Either that individual can act arrogantly and deny responsibility or they can accept what full membership in that group entails – both the good and the bad. Christianity’s main themes are those of mercy and forgiveness. We are willing to accept the “unfairness” or original sin, but are too prideful to accept the unfair baggage our religion carries. It just doesn’t make sense, especially not to the outside world curious about who we are.

That said, I find it hard to believe that any individual Christian can ever truthfully claim to not have partaken in wrongdoing or toxic Christianity. (just like no white person can ever truthfully claim to not have participated in racial injustice in some form or another). Beyond the fact that just the act of denying responsibility for Christianity’s evils appears as self-centered toxic Christianity to many, most Christians today are living the benefits of Christendom – benefits that came at the expense of others. American Christians are living with the wealth and resources of “Christian” operations like Manifest Destiny and attempts to “Christianize and civilize” other nations (mostly as an excuse to rape their land of it’s resources). The denominations and doctrines we bicker about exist because they were the ones willing to slaughter and torture dissenting viewpoints. Ministries and churches are built (and get rich) on messages of hatred – give money to help Israel kill those Palestinians, or to make sure our students don’t know gay people exist, or to support the IRA, or even fund corrupt dictators and conflict diamond schemes in Africa. It’s hard to be an American Christian and not be connected to some group involved in such things. So even if you have never Bible-bashed, manipulated someone to say a prayer, or burned someone at the stake most Christians are receiving the benefits of toxic Christianity. There is no out of sight out of mind excuse than can work. The connection to wrongdoing is there and if we have compassion at all for those we have hurt, we will take responsibility to apologize if not make amends.

In a way this is about getting over “me-centered” Christianity. One’s faith isn’t just an individual thing, disconnected from history or the rest of the world. We are part of a community of believers and (like it or not) we need to be willing to fully be a part of that community. Recognizing the faults present there is a necessary first step to helping make things better and to understanding why others view us the way they do. Sure it can be uncomfortable when someone lays the blame of say the Crusades or hurtful statements by Dobson, Robertson, or Driscoll fully on you. But it seems more in line with the way of Christ to admit such things are wrong and apologize for them instead of getting angry and attempting to defend yourself or them. Of course, I haven’t always done a good job at this, but it is a habit I am attempting to develop. I’ve discovered that choosing to identify with a community can be a struggle, but it also is vital to growing a deeper and more holistic faith that focuses on loving God and others and not just myself.

Read more

Religion Fit for Public Consumption

Posted on

I was reading about the history of Christianity in America the other day and I came across an interesting phrase. The author was addressing the ongoing need in our nation for there to exist “a religion fit for public consumption.” Such a religion of course serves not only to unify people but to create decent and compliant citizens. In essence it exists as both the opiate of the masses and the backbone of the country. It is something the Founding Fathers saw as a necessary element in creating a society even if they imagined themselves above participating.

I was struck at how tied to such a religion we Americans tend to be. This is a religion that dovetails with our lives as they already are. It shores up our economic systems, promotes civic duty and pride, and never attempts to challenge the status quo. It meets basic spiritual needs, helps create healthy social networks, and helps promote moral systems. Such a religion is safe, fit for public consumption, FDA Approved so to speak.

So it is no wonder that religious movements that challenge the civic system are derided or labeled heretical. Instead of appropriately keeping the system running, these religious movements counter-culturally offer revolutionary challenges. They don’t support life as it already is, but offer alternatives that question the basic assumptions and values of such ways. Their leaders ask hard questions and make uncomfortable statements. These religions are less about something the public consumes and more about leading lives of transformative justice, love, and mercy. You know the sort of stuff the Bible refers to as “true religion.”

These aren’t religions that form the backbone of a nation. Anything that retains the right to question the nations will never get it’s stamp of approval. A religion that actually affects the lives of its followers in radical ways is not “a religion fit for public consumption.” It never will be. So why do I still see more churches caring about being fit for public consumption than about following true religion? How have we been so deceived into idolatry?

Read more

Thoughts on Emergent Gatherings

Posted on

I assume most emerging folks have heard by now that the Glorietta Emergent Gathering as it has been will no longer be occurring (more info here). It’s apparently grown too organized, too structured, too different than what it once was. Given those changes the organizers are shutting it down to make room for other sorts of gatherings/events. While I understand the rationale behind the decision, I find it a bit sad. Granted I was never part of the early days of the Gathering. As hard as I tried to make it in earlier years, I was only able to attend the past two Gatherings. So apparently all I saw was the more structured, on-ramp for the newbies sort of event. And I guess I was one of those newbies trying to find my place and my voice in this conversation. I got to hear the reminisces of the “good old days” and the complaints about how things have changed, but I also seriously appreciated what I experienced. And personally I’m going to miss that.

We are being encouraged instead to seek out local events or to put them on ourselves as alternatives to the Gathering. On one hard this is a great idea. Finding others in one’s area to meet with and provide encouragement to through things like cohorts is a wonderful thing. And having put on a few local emerging conferences, I know the value of those events as well. Those are times for like-minded people bound by geography to find each other. I’ve had fun at these events and have been blessed by the people I encounter there. Sometimes these things develop into ongoing community, sometimes they don’t. As we’ve discovered with the Chicago cohort, we have an email list of over 300 contacts, but rarely see more than a dozen at any given gathering. Often people show up once or twice, attend the big events with the big name speakers, ask to be part of the network, affirm that they aren’t crazy for asking these questions, and then never plug into community. It meets a need, often a very vital need in their faith journey, but lacks a certain something for those of us committed to the emergent community for the long haul.

While I have met some wonderful people though the local events, cohorts, and conferences, I still find that most of my emerging interactions occur online. My community is scattered across the states (and the world). There are members of this community who I have only met at the big trans-regional events like the Gathering. So while I still love the idea of and will continue to help organize regional events (yes I am think of a Texas Emerging Women gathering soon), I’m going to miss the opportunity to connect with the larger emergent family. And while the idea of a National EV Conference is appealing, I doubt it will be as open-source, fun, and inexpensive as the Gathering. I doubt we will see whole families there or have the chance to cook meals together. So I’m going to miss the family reunion/pilgrimage that was the Gathering. And I’m curious how it’s absence will affect the nature of the conversation – will it truly spark more grass-roots conversations or will everything just default towards more and more structure? In other words, how can the spirit of the Gathering be maintained without the Gathering itself actually existing?

Read more

Self Help and the Bible

Posted on

I have a really hard time with self-help books. I am always finding them to be either too specific or too generic. Either the book gives you a blueprint for the exact 12 things you need to do to improve whatever in your life or it gives no practical advice whatsoever. I generally find the overly specific suggestions laughable. I’m okay with lists of possible ways one can say encourage creativity in your kids – I have the freedom then to adapt what I find useful to my circumstances. But I’m not a fan of the formulaic step-by-step scripts for ensuring a compliant child or showing your husband you appreciate him. How cheezy is it to assume that all people are exactly the same and that saying a certain sequence of words will have the same effect on every child or husband? Maybe it’s my inner non-conformist emerging, but I don’t do scripts like that.

But I also equally dislike overly generic self-help books. These books present ideas that sound great – of course I want to “be a better friend” or “love my child unconditionally” – but they are lacking in specific advice for how exactly to do that. I’m sick of books that latch onto one phrase and repeat it incessantly without ever fleshing it out. I find this a lot in devotional books. They can be all about drawing closer to God, but I think they assume that if they just convince me that I need to draw closer to God (by endless repetition of that phrase) then it will magically happen. Did they ever stop to think that I would never have picked up the book if I wasn’t already looking for ways I could make that happen? That’s why I don’t “do” devotional books, I find them generally pointless. I’m Goldilocks searching for the just right balance motivational concepts and practical advice and so far it’s been hard to find.

So as I was reflecting on some of the disappointing books in this genre recently, I began to think about how this relates to some of my issues with the Bible. Often the way the Bible was presented to me fell into one of these extremes. Either it was taught in sweeping generalities (if you just believe/trust/pray everything will work out). Or it was interpreted with the addition of long lists of how exactly one should live (here are the words you can never say, the movies you can never watch, the ideas you can never question in order to be a good Christian or a Christian at all). I got sick of these interpretations. The Bible felt trivialized, it was just another bad self-help book that didn’t deliver. It felt wrong to read a single verse about the early church praying in Acts and then be told just to pray more (or be given the formula for prayer). It didn’t work for me.

It took years before I realized why this self-help spiritualization of scripture bothered me. As with most self-help books it didn’t come across as genuine or authentic. I wanted something that made sense within the context of real life, not just a mantra I could chant. So it helped once I started reading whole passages at a time from the Bible and paying attention to the historical context of the whole thing. Verses no longer mere devotional ideas, but part of a bigger picture. The church in Acts didn’t just pray, they prayed for specific things and “therefore” certain things occured in their communities. It was all authentic and meaningful within certain contexts and in relation to individual lives. To me that’s much more meaningful than slogans or lists of rules. Ideas, plus guidelines, plus examples make sense to me. That’s the type of “just right” advice I can follow and learn from. But maybe that’s just me.

Read more

Book Review – My Beautiful Idol

Posted on

So I recently joined the group of Ooze Select bloggers which basically means I get to read cool books and review them here. Works for me. The first selection I was sent was Peter Gall’s My Beautiful Idol. Before I go any further though I do have a confession to make. While the book was just recently released by Zondervan, an earlier version titled Gall came out a few years ago. My confession is that I was sent that version to review then and I never read the book. So my apologies. But I must say that my failure to read then was completely my loss since I greatly enjoyed My Beautiful Idol.

My Beautiful Idol falls into the genre of spiritual memoir and is being compared to the styles of Anne Lamott and Don Miller. I love Lamott and refuse to read Miller, so my response to those comparisons is “kinda.” What I can say is that this is a very different sort of memoir – it goes places one really doesn’t expect in these sorts of books. Namely Peter has no qualms about being brutally honest and blunt as he recounts the period of spiritual searching and awakening he went through during the 1990’s. He is not afraid to tear down the cliches and idols of the Christian culture nor to just outright question the conventional wisdom one finds in the church. This is a culture I am familiar with and so I resonated with much of what he was describing. I was also amused to recognize so many of the artifacts of the 90’s “contemporary Christian subculture” in his descriptions – from the bad music and “bible studies” to the ubiquitous presence of Mountain Dew.

I had two main issues with the book though. The first is entirely personal and situational, but I have come to the conclusion that books or movies that include scenes of mothers or babies dying in childbirth should come with a warning label. This is like the third time I’ve been blindsided by such a book this pregnancy, and while I am not usually an overly emotional person, those sorts of things really really get to hormonal pregnant women. So a little warning would have been nice. (and no this isn’t a huge part of the book, just one event in a spiritual journey…)

My other issue is more spiritual/theological. The book endeavors to expose the idols we create of our own spirituality and ability to serve God. It explores how we can trust too much or take too much pride in our good works. Often we elevate such things above the realities they entail and spiritualized them into pithy nothingness. I loved the way Peter revealed those ideas through his story, but I was left with too much bitter pessimism. Because so much in Christianity is fake and idolized, he seemed to go too far in rejecting the value of any pursuit of good works. There was very little balance or acceptance of the paradoxes of Christian life. The sarcasm, wit, and gritty reality sometimes overpowered any whisper of hearing where God actually was working. I know the memoir just represents a period of his life, and I’m not looking for a sugary happy ending or anything, just more of a “where do we go from here” wrap-up.

My issues aside, My Beautiful Idol is a good read. Engaging and challenging if one is willing to be pushed outside the box of typical Christian spiritual assumptions.

Read more