Contemporary art or thoughtless desecration?

An open Bible sits on a podium at the Gallery of Modern Art in Glasgow, Scotland. Next to the sacred text is a container of pens and a sign reading "If you feel you have been excluded from the Bible, please feel free to write yourself back into it."

The public has responded by writing slander, jokes, obscenities and more on the Bible's pages.

The exhibit is part of a larger exhibition entitled Made in God's Image. The Times (London, not New York) reports:

The exhibit, Untitled 2009, was proposed by the Metropolitan Community Church, which said that the idea was to reclaim the Bible as a sacred text. But to the horror of many Christians, including the community church, visitors have daubed its pages with comments such as "This is all sexist pish, so disregard it all." A contributor wrote on the first page of Genesis: "I am Bi, Female & Proud. I want no god who is disappointed in this."

As you may have guessed, various churches and Christian leaders have expressed disgust and outrage at the invitation to deface the Bible as art. Anthony Schrag, one of the exhibition's artists, said he wonders whether people are offended by what was written or by writing in a Bible in the first place. He also states that human rights are at the center of the show.

"If we are to open up the Bible for discussion, surely we have to invite people to speak out," he said.

I am inclined to agree with him.

The church as a whole certainly has a right to be upset by the general lack of sanctity this Bible was shown (one person wrote "The Gospel According to Luke Skywalker"), but I think they have a greater obligation to address the reasons behind the actions. It seems to me that people feel judged and unloved by Christians so often that they feel nothing left for the Bible but anger, dismissal or otherwise.

Perhaps the thing the worldwide church can do is ask itself how to be more welcome to discussion of the Bible without feeling threatened by the questions people have to ask. If they are to properly represent their Christ, they need to be willing to eat, drink and talk with prostitutes, corrupt businessmen and religious nut cases just like he did. Otherwise the church--and by extension, the Bible--cannot expect to receive the respect that Christ receives.

Shelf life

My husband and I were on our way home from the store last night when he asked if I had seen his Bible. In truth, it's a funny question, because he has a camouflage-covered Bible. Naturally, I hadn't seen it. We decided it was probably left on the back table at church and possibly taken by someone who thought it was free. (Maybe they'll read it.)

Somewhere in the conversation he mentioned toting around his old leather-bound Bible again. The small maroon Word of God was with him when he went to Iraq in 2003, so it holds a lot of sentimental value. He's managed to keep it in good condition all these years, despite leaving it on top of the car and driving off. Twice. I wasn't so sure it was a good idea. What if he lost it again? I asked. Isn't it better to keep it safe at home?

"What good is it to keep a Bible on the shelf if all it does is gather dust?" he said.

Good point.

Too many times I leave my Bible on the shelf. Or on the desk. Or in the car. Or on the table. Or at the church. But wherever I leave it, it looks the same: unopened. Unopened is no way for a Bible to be.

Though I haven't been able to find references, I've read in blogs and articles describing how many cultures treat the Bible with a reverence I rarely see. I've read that Koreans keep their Bible on a shelf above their heads as a sign of respect. I've been told that some Muslim converts won't set any items on top of their Bible. I've heard of villages that have only one Bible for everybody. That one Bible, though, is everything to them.

I've heard incredible Bible stories that have nothing to do with the text. Corrie Ten Boom, a Christian whose family was arrested for resisting the Nazis during World War II, snuck a Bible into a concentration camp by tearing the Bible apart and taping each page together in a line. She had a string around her neck and the pages fell down her back. The Gideons, businessmen dedicated to distributing the Bible, tell stories of prisoners who use pages to roll cigarettes or joints. Instead of refusing to give prisoners Bibles, they ask that they read each page before tearing it out for a smoke. More often than not, their lives are changed. Though they might not stop smoking, the prisoners will find something else to roll their cigarettes.

Knowing how precious the Bible is, why does it stay on my shelf? Why is it important to keep the pages pristine? Isn't it better that they be wrinkled, dirty and written on? Isn't it better that those pages be worn from study than beautiful from neglect?

I've decided that it's time I take my Bible off of the shelf. It's time to write notes and turn down the page corners. It's time for my Bible to be open.

After all, what good is it to keep a Bible on the shelf if all it does is gather dust?

Lakeside

Well, I've made it.  Sort of.  I'm in Lakeside, OH for the West Ohio United Methodist Church Annual Conference 2009.  (Long title.)  Lakeside is, and I'm not exaggerating, on the tip of one of Ohio's peninsulas.  If I could figure out how to save the map without chunking it into little squares, I'd show you.  :)

As part of my WOUMCAC packet reading, I learned a little bit about the heritage of Lakeside, OH.  A letter from Kevin Sibbring, President and CEO of he-doesn't-say-what, sums up the history of Lakeside this way:

During the summer of 1869, some two hundred and fifty Methodists gathered for a picnic along the shore, giving birth to Lakeside.  140 years later, we remain faithfully committed to transforming lives by providing growth and renewal opportunities - spiritually, intellectually, culturally and physically - nurturing mind, body and spirit.

That's all well and good, but it seems strange to me that a city was founded so that the Methodists  could have a place to get together.

Local publication "Lakesider" states that the Lakeside Mission is "To enrich the quality of life for all people, to foster traditional Christian values and nurture relationships through opportunities for renewal and growth...spiritually, intellectually, culturally and physically...while preserving Lakeside's heritage."  (Just so you know, the ellipses were included in the mission statement--I'm not leaving anything out.)

The publication also has a letter from Sibbring welcoming the WOUMC for its annual conference.  He describes Lakeside as "a Chautauqua community dedicated to Christian values and cultural excellence."  It makes me feel like I'm not in a town, but in a corporation.

Walking around Lakeside is very, um, how shall I say this?  I feel like I arrived at the county fair early and caught the workers setting up the food vendor booths and tents.  Except there are houses and streets.  Actually, it's a little bit like Downtown Disney with houses.

But it's pretty.  The cabin I'm staying in is three or four houses away from the lakeshore.  The cabin is beautifully furnished.  It's also for sale, if anyone's interested.

I know this is a short post, but I don't know what to make of this place yet.  I guess I'll find out after attending my first laity meeting tonight at 7 p.m..  

So, in the spirit of United Methodism (or in the spirit of not being in Dayton, I can't tell which), Annual Conference, here I come!

Music Lessons: A Rehearsal

Alright, alright, this has nothing to do with church trends.  However, as this blog started out as a class assignment, it is still prone to class requirements.  As such, here is a link to the video I made for my class "group" project.  (If you're in the class, you get the joke.)  :)

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=106378134433

Enjoy.  ;)

Love in action? We'll see.

Is there something wrong with me?  

Wait, don't answer that.

This coming Sunday marks the 2009 West Ohio United Methodist Annual Conference held every year at Lakeside.  Every year clergy and laity gather on the shores of Lake Erie to discuss the purpose, plans and direction of the West Ohio United Methodist Conference.  Hundreds volunteer their time and efforts to pray for and discuss the future of the hundreds of churches in the conference.  It's quite a gathering.  Each and every pastor I've ever known who has attended has come back with the same report of the festivities: It's a snooze-fest.

You know what, though?  I'm looking forward to the snooze-fest!  Since the first horror story I ever heard, I've wanted to attend and see for myself the inner workings of the conference.  For example, rumor has it that if someone recommends a particular issue should be tabled until the next annual conference, the issue is undisputedly tabled.  Further rumor suggests that one particular woman tables a certain topic every year.  I wonder who she is and what she doesn't want to deal with.

There are other things that I'm curious about.  For example, why are there four events listed for 7:00 a.m. on Monday morning?  One event, the Internet Cafe, is not so much an event as it is an open space.  But the men's worship, women's clergy breakfast and donor's appreciation breakfast are also held at that time.  Why do the men have their own worship?  Why do donors and women clergy have to miss out on worship in order to have pancakes and eggs?  It doesn't make sense.

Also, why does last year's slideshow feature candles and kid's crafts in the 'prayer' slides, but no person actually praying?  Why is a picture of a bicycle with roses important to the conference?  How does wind surfing on Lake Erie help the homeless?  Heck, how does a picture of an antique car help men and women find transportation to their job or doctor's office?  Again, it just doesn't make sense.

To add to the nonsense is the agenda.  There are normal items on the agenda such as orientation for newcomers, a financial report presentation and the ever-important lunch hour.  But what is the "Election of Election Task Force"?  Why is the greeting of the churches halfway through the second day of the conference?  Why is there a Black College Fund report, but not a Hispanic college fund?  Or an Arab college fund?  Or a refugee college fund?  And why do we need a "Resolution to Investigate Companies Supporting the Occupation of Palestinian Territories" before Monday's closing hymn?  I'm not even going to ask why we're receiving offering twice on Wednesday.

I think what I'm most unsure about, however, is the theme of the week.  The conference is entitled "Love in Action: Leadership Development."  However, the recommendations and constitutional amendments that are being proposed/voted on have little if anything to do with leadership development.

The first recommendation suggests that pastors exemplify healthy living to their congregation in order to help make up for a lack of health care in Ohio.  It also suggests writing letters to government legislatures to get everyone covered.  Okay, so it's a good thing.  But how is that leadership development?  Why does there need to be a recommendation for special offerings on certain Sundays in the year?  I kid you not, "Rural Life Sunday" is recommended to be held sometime in May.  Look it up if you don't believe me; it's number four.

With so much frivolous representation online for everyone to see, how will this be a leadership development conference?  I'm not sure.  I'm not convinced.  And yet, I'm excited.  Is there something wrong with me?

Wait, don't answer that.

It Ain't Cheap

A small house church in China was gathered for communion when the Public Security Bureau (a policing agency) raided their service on April 30, according to ChinaAid.org.  Eighteen Christians, including 10 pastors, were arrested and forced to pay a fine of 1,000 yuan (around $150).  Only two Christians had been released by May 4, the day of the press release by ChinaAid.  This situation is par for the course in the worldwide persecuted church.  In fact, it's somewhat mild.  Nobody was tortured or killed.  

How does that relate to the church in America?  It doesn't directly, unless you believe that supporting organizations like ChinaAid or The Voice of the Martyrs is the expressed duty of the church.  

This is an illustration.  There is a cost to following Christ.  

So, if fines, jail, torture and death don't relate to us, how do we understand the cost of following Christ in America?

Allow me to present a story of three pastors: Tom, Dick and Harry, if you will.  They each work for Holy Cornerstone of Worship Church (Holy COW for short).  Tom is the outreach pastor, Dick is the education pastor and Harry is the head pastor.  Holy COW has an elected council that makes decisions in the church so that no one pastor can make any power plays over the other pastors.  Everything works smoothly between the pastors.

The council, however, is another story.  On the council are three retired brothers who helped rebuild the church after the fire of 1955, the rich old widow who paid for the renovation of the sanctuary last year and the man who lost the head pastor vote to Harry.  They are all very good friends.  They all think alike.  They have discovered that if they work together, they can do what they want with the church, and the pastors will have to listen.

The council has decided that they don't like the riffraff Tom has been reaching out to.  Being riffraff, they have very little money and almost no manners, and therefore offer very little to the church.  They tell Tom to stop reaching out to the riffraff and focus his energy on drawing in people with more to offer.  If Tom refuses, he loses his job.  If he agrees, he compromises his faith in order to make the council happy.

While Tom is considering his options, the council offers the outreach position to Dick behind Tom's back.  Dick would receive a pay increase and a responsibility decrease.  There is no downside for Dick as far as the council is concerned.  If Dick refuses, the council may look for someone to replace him.  If he agrees, he betrays his coworker and friend.  The council tells Dick that if he tells Tom what's happening, they're both out of a job automatically.

Harry sees what the council is doing to Tom and Dick and tells them to find a new option.  He does not, however, exercise his authority as head pastor to force the council to make their actions known to Tom.  Instead he steps back and watches the council's actions from afar.  After all, if they're getting rid of Tom and maybe Dick, and if Harry spoke out against it, wouldn't he be the next to go?

Getting rid of the council is not an option.  The council is elected by the congregation.  Each member has benefited the church enormously through service, donations and loyalty (as listed above).  The congregation has no idea what the council is doing, nor would they listen to the truth.  After all, the council is made up of pillars of the congregational community.  How could they be expected to believe such cruelty from their leaders?

So what do Tom, Dick and Harry do?  If they do the right thing, they lose their job and their opportunity to lead others to God (no matter how misguided those others are).  If they keep their job, they betray each other.  I would go further and say that they betray God.

This is the closest thing I have seen to a cost for following Christ in America.  Each pastor has the opportunity to do the right thing, but it will cost them their job.  If they don't do the right thing, it will cost them their integrity.  If they compromise just this once, they could be coerced into compromising again.  Eventually, such compromises could cost them a real relationship with God.

Jesus told his disciples that there was a cost to following him.  He told his disciples they had to give up everything.  Jobs.  Friends.  Family.  Everything (Matt. 16:24-27).  He went so far as to say "any of you who does not give up everything cannot be my disciple" (Luke 24:25-35)(emphasis added).  It's a steep price.

In real life, Tom lost his job.  Dick didn't take Tom's position, but he didn't defend Tom, either.  Harry kept his mouth shut and signed Tom's dismissal papers.  To this day, the council remains in place, and the church remains ignorant.

It's easy to sit at your computer screen and talk about what fools or cowards Dick and Harry are.  However, it's not nearly as easy when it's your job or your family's welfare at stake.  It's not easy when you feel like your influence protects the church from the destructive influence of the council.  It's not easy when you feel like there's still good you can do in the church with or without the council.  It's not easy.

But Christians aren't called to an easy life.  We're called to consider the cost very carefully before committing to follow Christ.  Once we commit, we're committed, period.  Anything less is not and has never been following Christ.

As my mother says, being a Christian is not for the weenie-hearted.  There is a cost to following Christ, and it ain't cheap.

"Don't Waste Your Life"

I discovered this song a few weeks ago on Christian-HipHop.net.  I discovered the video today.  I'm at a loss for words, so I'll let Lecrae speak for himself.

Jesus Loves Who?

Warning: I know this is a family-friendly blog, but this is an important, relevant, adult topic.  If you feel that the upcoming subject matter is too mature for minor children reading this blog (though I doubt there are any), then at least have this discussion with them yourself.

You have been warned.

On a bookshelf in my room sit a few Bibles.  I say a few because when you're in the ministry business, you get a few different translations as a matter of habit.  For example, my husband has a camouflage Bible (dubbed the Sportsman's Bible).

One of these Bibles is different from the others.  If you look closely, you should notice that between the Key Word Bible and the Women of Faith Bible is a small travel-sized Bible with hot-pink binding.  Its title may surprise you.

That's right.

This hot-pink and neon yellow book boldly proclaims "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" for all the world to see.  As you can see, it's complete with a mustached "star" in aviation sunglasses looking out over an apparent representation of the Sunset Strip (no pun intended).

"Jesus Loves Porn Stars" is the idea of Pastors Craig Gross and Mike Foster, founders of XXXchurch.com.  X3 (as it's commonly called) is an anti-pornography ministry that reaches out to producers, actors and others in the industry with the love and word of God.  They actually attend erotica conventions and set up a table with anti-porn books, t-shirts and other merchandise.  "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" was a slogan that X3 put on bookmarks, according to this Cox News Service article.  When the pastors noticed that Bibles weren't selling as well as the other merchandise, they decided to put the slogan on the cover of a Bible.  Now, "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" is the word of God for those the people of God tend to forget.

Or is it the word of God?  You see, when the pastors went to the American Bible Society, one of the oldest Bible printers in America, they said no.  So did a slew of other publishers licensed to publish Bibles.  The American Bible Society actually wrote a letter to Gross and said that the phrase was "misleading and inappropriate," according to an ABC News story.  Gross worked for months finding a publisher who would print the books for them.  They finally got permission from Navpress and Eugene Peterson, author of "The Message," the Bible translated into contemporary language.

What does that have to do with whether or not JLPS is really the Bible?  In the first place, "The Message" is the only Bible to have an author (not counting manga Bibles, children's story Bibles, illustrated Bibles or other obvious examples of paraphrasing or dumbing-down of scripture).  Secondly, because Peterson readily admits to paraphrasing some of the translation in order to be relevant to the world today ("contextualizing"), some critics claim that it is not scripture it all.  One critic went so far as to call it "a message from hell."  (To be fair, Peterson has downplayed "The Message" immensely.  In an interview with Christianity Today ("A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction"), Peterson said that he does not think "The Message" is a good translation for the pulpit, but rather for beginners who just need a way to understand what God is saying to them.)

Which takes me back to my original point.  People were outraged and offended that someone would put "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" on a (fake) Bible.  No, not people.  Christians.  Christians were upset that a theologically correct statement would be put on a Bible that beginners would understand.

How silly is that?  Someone came up with an idea to reach out to those who didn't know God, and he got criticized for it.  Would he have been criticized if he were reaching out to drug dealers or murderers?  No, he would've been applauded.  The church loves to make a big deal out of saving those sinners.  But because he's reaching out to people the church doesn't want to deal with, he's a horrible person leading others astray.

That was back in 2006.  Three years later, "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" is still going strong (again, no pun intended).  The phrase and image are on T-shirts, skateboard decks, bumper stickers, buttons and more.  X3 is still touring the country and attending erotica conventions.  In fact, Pastor Craig has travelled to colleges around the country in order to debate with Ron Jeremy, one of the best known "stars" in the erotica industry.  

Why is radical outreach such a big deal in Evangelical circles?  Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary when the JLPS Bible was first published, said "These younger guys seem to say that older evangelicalism is just out of touch.  In a rush to be relevant I think these guys have crossed a line that I would not cross and I would not commit."

I think that's the point, though.  Someone had to cross the line in order to reach the people living on the other side.  When that happens, a Christian's response shouldn't be "How dare you."  It should be "I'll join you."

If you or someone you know suffers from sexual addiction, please visit www.xxxchurch.com for accountability software, recovery plans and more.

Skateboard photo found at http://xxxchurch.civvies.biz/xxxchurch/home.php.

Other photos attributed to me.

Beautiful: Faith in Action

A homeless couple in Washington, D.C. got married in a local church last week.

Well, that doesn't really do it justice.  Let me try again: Members of a church in Washington, D.C. organized a wedding service for a homeless couple last week.

Nope.  Still not good enough.  One more try: Members of Grace Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C. paid for flowers, rings, invitations and more to give homeless couple Dante White and Nhiahni Chestnut the wedding of their dreams on Saturday, May 2.

Sounds beautiful, doesn't it?  Marc Fisher, a columnist with the Washington Post, wrote a pre-wedding blog about the couple's nuptials:

It was church member Margaret Davis who started the ball rolling, taking the couple to Virginia to buy a ring. Then the wedding planning snowballed. Lenore Reid brought Nhiahni to shop for a gown. Dante will wear a tux, thanks to Jason Studl. The invitations are printed, elegant lilac cards in formal script. The reception will feature a three-tiered wedding cake, made by Kristin Killoran, and music by two of Washington's finest jazz professionals, Marshall Keys and Herman Burney. The newlyweds will have a honeymoon, two nights at the Key Bridge Marriott, a gift from church members and the hotel.

Isn't it romantic?

I think it's more than romantic.  I think it's beautiful.  I think it's wonderful.  I think that this is a beautiful picture of the bride of Christ (aka, the Church) caring for and loving the people God loves.

What interests me even more is that the love doesn't stop with the wedding.  According to an AFP story on Yahoo! News, the members at Grace Church are now looking for ways to help the couple get off the streets.  

Beautiful.  Just beautiful.

I think this is an amazing example of what it means to love our neighbors, to care for the poor, to give freely what has been given to us and at least a dozen other Christian commands that are spoken much but performed little.

One of my favorite passages in the Bible comes from the book of James, written by a man that tradition holds was the brother of Jesus.  James wrote to the early Christ-followers about what it means to truly have faith.  Faith cannot be real unless it is manifested in what you do, he says.  Likewise, what you do means nothing if you don't do it in faith.

"Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do," he challenges. (James 2:14-26)

I believe that Grace Episcopal Church met that challenge.  The cynic in me rolls its eyes and says this was a fluke, but the optimist in me screams that God is still alive in the American church.  

Can you imagine what would happen if more churches did what Grace did?  Can you fathom the impact the Church could have in this country if more Christians threw away their religion and became Christ-followers putting their faith into action?

I hope other churches hear about this.  More than that, I hope they take it as a personal challenge to creatively and gleefully meet the needs of the poor, impoverished, homeless, sick, hungry, hopeless and hopeful in their own backyards.  Money doesn't always meet a person's need or needs (directed to back-pew check writers who can't afford inconvenience or empathy).  Creative, selfless, unabashed love in action does.

It's beautiful, I tell you.  Just beautiful.

The feature photo was found in a brief slideshow of the couple's wedding.  It is attributed to Nicholas Kamm of AFP.

Theology on Tap

A few weeks ago I saw a Facebook ad for a Bible study called Theology on Tap.  It advertised "Straight Talk! Hard Facts! Real Answers!" about faith, religion and what to do about it.  More than that, they hosted a speaking series Thursday nights at the Oregon Express (a neighborhood bar on Fifth St. in case you don't know).  I thought it looked interesting, so I went to check it out last week.

I should have done more research first.

Since I didn't know what to expect, I kept my eye out for "clues" or indicators about the night.  My first clue about the evening was the location.  What kind of Christian group would be bold enough to host a theological speaking series at a bar?  I was too intrigued by the idea of a bunch of brazen, forward-thinking Christians reaching out to the drunk and temporarily sober to bother to see who ToT was affiliated with.  I found out later, but I should have checked it out first.

My second clue was Joseph.  Joseph was a stocky man rifling through two green storage tubs full of lined index cards, coiled speaker wires, smaller storage tubs, yellow flyers, homemade CDs and other random things you wouldn't associate with ministry unless you were in the business.  I introduced myself and told him I would be covering that night's session for my blog this week.  I also asked if I could talk with him afterwards.  He expressed his fear of being quoted and quickly busied himself by sorting small white paper squares from small white paper rectangles.

What kind of outreach worker doesn't want to talk to people about their ministry?  If he was shy, why didn't he just tell me who I could talk with?  I wasn't sure what to make of this second clue.  Befuddled, I found a table in the back near the door.

A few minutes later, a woman came over with an information card for me to fill out.  She wore a stick-on pre-printed name tag ("Bernadette") and was holding several sheets of printed labels.  No, wait.  Not labels.  Pre-printed name tags.

Clue three: What kind of outreach group has pre-printed name tags?  And who needs a name tag in a bar?  I quickly reasoned that the name tags promoted social interaction, and that the regulars had name tags already made.  I didn't let the fact that nobody was walking around to socialize distract me from my logical (and therefore correct) conclusion.

When Bernadette walked away, I noticed that the two tables in front of me had the homemade CDs stacked on them.  The CDs were colored in assorted pastels, almost like preschool Easter egg colors.  Not realizing that Easter pastels were the new trend in outreach circles, I took a look at the titles: "De-Bunking the DaVinci Code," "Harry Potter and the Paschal Theory" and other non-entry-level theological topics.  What theological novice would think that Harry Potter and The DaVinci Code were relevant to Christianity?  It took me a while to realize that this was clue four.

Other clues slipped past my senses over the next few minutes.  Most people had pre-printed name tags.  The sound guy played "One of These Days" by FFH (which, by the way, is 11 years old).  Judging by their clothes, nobody was poor.  In fact, most everybody looked like they attended church regularly.  What kind of outreach was this?

I got my answer when Bernadette took the mic and opened the night with a prayer.  Everyone -- and I mean everyone -- crossed themselves.  Except me.  Oh!  This was a Catholic program.

Then Bernadette introduced the evening's topic: How I Came to Love the Catholic Church.  This wasn't a Catholic outreach.  This was a Catholic discipleship group.

I found out just how Catholic about 30 seconds later.  The speaker, David Bennett, a religion teacher at a Catholic school in Marion, was talking about the conversion process he went through.  Not the conversion from unbeliever to believer (though that was part of the background).  He was talking about the conversion from Protestant to Catholic.

I spent the next half hour of my life listening to Bennett speak about Protestantism and Catholicism.  Some things I didn't agree with.  Some I did.  I don't agree that the Catholic church offers a more full relationship with Jesus than other Christian churches do.  I do agree that Protestants are slightly preoccupied with making church trendy.  Though I didn't quite know how to take some of the things he said (Protestants don't have a full deck of cards to use in their faith?), I could at least tell that he sincerely wanted to have the best relationship with God as he possibly could.

Overall, I think Bennett made an amazing point that night: the worst thing you can do is believe in God and not do anything about it.  For all of my misconceptions about the evening, I think ToT was a good thing.  Not my thing, but a good thing nonetheless.  

Thirty minutes into the talk, the group took a 10 minute intermission.  I took it as an opportunity to leave early.  It's not that I thought Bennett was a bad speaker.  On the contrary, he was quite interesting.  But he wasn't speaking to me.  He was speaking to the dozens of Catholics in the audience about why he felt like he was one of them.  It was a perfectly worthwhile venture, but not one that I felt I could be part of.

I think that Theology on Tap is a good idea, but I think it would be a better idea if it was an outreach.  After all, what's the point of meeting in a bar if only the church folk show up to participate?

You can't please everybody

I read an article from US News.com this week about evangelical pastor Rick Warren's recent knack for garnering controversial attention from both political liberals and conservatives.  Warren, founding pastor of Saddleback Church, was chastised by conservatives for apparently toning down his support for Proposition 8, the now famous state bill that overturned same-sex marriage in California.  

You may recall that Warren was President Obama's choice to give the inaugural prayer.  You may also recall the criticism that sprang up before, during and after the invocation.  Warren was asked how he handled this controversy in an April 6 interview with Larry King.  The CNN.com transcript of the interview recorded Warren's reply:

Yes, you know, Larry, there was a story within a story that never got told. In the first place, I am not an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. I never have been, never will be... The week before the -- the vote, somebody in my church said, Pastor Rick, what -- what do you think about this?... And I sent a note to my own members that said, I actually believe that marriage is -- really should be defined, that that definition should be -- say between a man and a woman.  And then all of a sudden out of it, they made me, you know, something that I really wasn't...I wrote to all my gay friends -- the leaders that I knew -- and actually apologized to them.  And then all of a sudden out of it, they made me, you know, something that I really wasn't... All of the criticism came from people that didn't know me.

The USNews.com article went on to describe the different reasons that political and religious parties were either happy or unhappy with Warren's remarks.  

I must say that I think most of the criticism I've read--both conservative and liberal--is founded on a you're-suppose-to-think-like-us mentality.  Many liberal critics have pointed out his stance on traditional marriage as proof of an anti-gay agenda.  Many conservatives have objected that he focuses on social issues, such as worldwide poverty and curing AIDS/HIV, more than on morality issues, such as abortion and homosexuality.  It seems that no matter what Warren does, somebody is unhappy with him.

The idea that church leaders are being subjected to such strong public opinions is somewhat disturbing to me.  Aside from the theological implications that a spiritual relationship with God can be democratic in nature (anyone want to take a vote on whether God will let us win the lottery today?), I believe a leader who changes a stance or belief based on what others think is not truly a leader.  (I believe the democratic process based on electing representatives to help determine the common good  is different from asking a spiritual leader to change their position based on popular opinion.)  

It reminds me of the apostle Paul's letter to the Christians in Galatia.  There were some teachers who came after Paul and taught that the Christians had to follow Jewish laws in addition to Christ's teachings (love God, love people).  Paul had just finished teaching them that they didn't have to follow the laws anymore because they had a relationship with God directly through Christ.  The church was being torn in two different directions.  Paul opens his letter by defending his motives as a leader.

"Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God?  Or am I trying to please men?  If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ." -Gal. 1:10.

Paul goes on to tell the Galatians how foolish it is to change their beliefs based on popular teachings (or today, opinion).  He explains how he stood up to leaders who were swayed by public scrutiny, even the apostle Peter (Gal. 2:11-21), and he finishes by decrying the motives of said leaders (Gal. 4:17).

Granted, Paul was speaking to followers about leaders, not leaders about leadership, but I think that the same principle applies.  You don't change what you believe because popular opinion changes.

That said, I don't think Warren is changing his stance because of popular opinion.  I don't think he's changed his stance on anything.  I think that Warren's remarks during his interview imply that he isn't concerned with what people think so much as he is concerned that people know who he is and where he's coming from.

I don't know enough to know whether or not he's a good leader, but from what I've learned he seems to be a man of integrity.  Perhaps, when dealing with an opinionated public, that's the best we can hope for in our leaders.

Rick Warren's website is http://www.rickwarren.com

The screenshot of Warren's interview was found at http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid77824.asp

Warren's interview with Larry King can be seen at http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/04/07/lkl.rick.warren.cnn?iref=videosearch

Once Saved Always Saved?

I used to publish articles on Helium.com, a free Web site that works like a blog, discussion forum and citizen journalism site all at once.  My favorite article is the first one I ever wrote.  The article was titled "Once Saved, Always Saved?" and tackles the question of salvation.  It has received the highest ratings of any of my articles at Helium, and even after two years it is still voted the best of 22 articles.  It's too long to post here (even by my standards), but I'm proud of it, and I want to make it available to you.  So here is the link.  If you want to read it, feel free and leave comments here.  If not, I understand.  My blogs are long enough as it is.  :)

http://www.helium.com/items/263471-once-saved-always-saved

Injustice

I heard about a situation last week that made me very angry. A church leader was not happy about something, so the leader took it out on people who were not even involved. I won't go into anymore than that for sake of anonymity (not mine, but those involved), but please understand that this was the end result. I don't believe it was the church leader's desire or intention to involve the innocent, and I don't want anyone to get that idea. But the fact remains that people who were not involved in the situation ended up bearing the brunt of this leader's displeasure.

So I got mad. I wrote an angry Facebook note and pondered Todd Agnew lyrics for the rest of the night. I also looked up artwork of Jesus clearing out the temple.

I really like this painting of the cleansing the temple. Other paintings had whips cracking, people running and tables flying. But this simple oil painting shows something the others didn't: Jesus with his fist raised.

Right after Jesus triumphantly entered Jerusalem--the week before he died--Jesus took time to "cleanse the temple." That's a nice churchy-way of saying that he kicked some major butt. He overturned tables and chased out the businessmen who had turned the holy temple of God into a profitable free-for-all. (Basically, they sold animals for sacrifice at exorbitant prices, but that gets into a long discussion about the immorality of the money changers who took advantage of the people's desire to worship, and that's not what this is about.) Needless to say, people ran away in fear and terror. After all, it's not everyday a homeless man drives business owners out of the church. But I digress. After driving out the guilty, Jesus went back to teaching and healing. He wasn't mad at anyone anymore; those people were gone. The story always reminds me that Jesus only ever got angry at people who led others astray.

I always like this story. I really enjoy it when Jesus kicks butt. (Who doesn't?) I especially like it when the story quotes the prophet Jeremiah in the Old Testament. Apparently, it was foretold that the savior of the world would throw the smack down on the unjust. Well, maybe not those words exactly. ("Has this house (the temple) which bears my name become a den of robbers to you? But I have been watching! decalres the Lord." -Jer. 7:11)

Sometimes, though, I can't help but wonder why God doesn't simply kick people's butts anymore. Every now and again I get into a theological debate with myself regarding the nature of God and the definition of justice. It usually doesn't end well. There's always that annoyingly unanswerable question leftover: Why. Why did this happen? Why are unjust church leaders still leading? Why did the innocent have to suffer? Why not just kick some butt and get it over with?

Underneath those unanswerable questions lies a larger church question. How do we as the church handle injustice? What does the church do with injustice inside its walls? What about outside of them? How should the church respond?

I don't have the answer to that. There are many injustices in the world, and I couldn't possibly name even half of them here. I do believe this principle, though: the church IS called to respond. As God's representatives in this world, we ought to actively be fighting against injustice, and not just political hot-topic injustice, either. We ought to seek out social, economic, racial and discriminatroy justice (among others) and find a way to right it. After all, Jesus isn't physically here. We're his hands. We're his feet. We're his body. We're his raised fist.

I just pray I'm patient enough to let him get the first hit.

All scriptural references are from the New International Version (NIV) unless otherwise stated.

The image "The Expulsion of the Money Changers from the Temple" by Giotto di Bondone was found at www.biblical-art.com

Reasons Why

If you haven't heard, last week President Obama named gay-rights activist Harry Knox to the Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.  Days later, House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence called on President Obama to remove Knox from the council.  Why?

"Appointing a man who has publicly attacked the pope and other religious leaders for their support of traditional marriage is deeply offensive to millions of Americans in the faith-based community he is appointed to serve," said Pence in a statement.

The remarks that Pence is referring to seem to relate to his role as a gay-rights activist.  He said the Knights of Columbus "were foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression," referring to the knights' support of a California state amendment that overturned same-sex marriages.  He spoke out against the pope's statement that condoms increase the spread of AIDS.  Knox also challenged President Obama's decision to have conservative Pastor Rick Warren give the inaugural invocation because of Warren's stance on marriage.  This is pretty regular stuff for a gay-rights activist.

What I don't understand is why Pence would call for the removal of a man who was acting in accordance with his beliefs as an activist.  As a congressman who applies his beliefs to such political hot-topics as gay marriage and abortion, why would he be so against another person who is doing the same?

On his Web site Pence describes himself as "'a Christian, a conservative and a Republican,' in that order."  His voting record shows that since September Pence has voted the party line in all but three cases, according to the Washington Post's voting database.  He has only missed 4 percent of over 5,000 votes.  It seems to me that the man is a fairly regular party member.  This makes me think that perhaps the comments he made regarding Knox have more to do with his stance as a Christian Republican and less to do with what Knox said.

Which makes me wonder, how many Christians--republican or otherwise--say or believe something simply because they are expected to?  Easter was this week, and I have never seen parking lots so full at churches.  How many of those attending were simply paying up on fire insurance?  

There's a movie I love called "Saved."  It's a high school drama, but it's set in a private Christian school.  The two main characters are former best friends.  One gets pregnant, the other gets critical.  As the movie progresses, the critical one becomes increasingly harsh, even attempting an exorcism on her pregnant friend.  She eventually begins to question herself; not her faith, but her actions.  Why was she doing what she was doing?

I feel that this is a question that is not asked often enough in churches.  So often there is a large emphasis on the action itself but relatively little emphasis on internal motivation past "because God said so."  Perhaps if we Christians knew why we did what we did, we could have a more open dialogue about why others don't.  Otherwise, we're doomed to condemn others who don't agree with us.  There are enough finger pointers in the world.  Let's not get mixed up with them.

My Inspiration, part 2

Alright, then, where did I leave off?  Oh, yes.  At the age of twelve (or was it thirteen?) I had unknowingly been inspired to get involved in church ministries and leadership.

The next few years were a mess of high school, teenage love and personal discovery.  I read the Bible straight through by the time I was 14 and had my first mega-church experience by 15.  When I was 16 I joined my youth group's leadership team.  I graduated when I was 17 and started working at my church's day care center on my 18th birthday.  I did a college internship at 19 and spent a year away from my home, my family and my God.  I moved back home when I was 20, and I met the love of my life.  Six months later, we married and moved to Ohio.  That's when all the fun started.

A pastor friend of ours had invited us to volunteer in his small inner-city church, and we had agreed.  My husband and I arrived in Ohio on a rainy Sunday morning.  We had a red Jetta, a compact Mazda truck and asmall trailer packed full of all our worldly possessions.  (Okay, so the trailer was an old pickup bed with a plywood floor.)  Neither one of us had cell phones; it was a miracle we stayed together over the three-state drive!  To me and my husband, it seemed that God's favor was shining on us.  Rather, it seemed to until we realized we had no job, no home and no prospect of either in the near future.  Unsure of our fate and questioning our better judgement, we went with our friend to a house-church service that night.

I had never seen such a thing in my life.  Nearly two dozen people had gathered in a parsonage to light candles, sing worship songs and share their praises, prayers and struggles with each other.  Even now, the closest thing I can compare it to is the church described in Acts 2.  It was a living, breathing, beautiful thing.  Though we were new, my husband and I felt comfortable.  We felt welcome.  We felt like we belonged.

After the music and the devotion, there was a time of open prayer.  The people who had gathered shared their hearts with each other, not just their words.  Moved by the warm reception we had received, my husband and I shared our no-job-or-place-to-live-or-stay story.  We received the group's prayers and finished the night's activities.  Soon after the final prayer was spoken, I was approached by one of the women.  She and her husband had heard our story.  They invited us to stay the night at their house.  We were strangers to them, and they opened their home to us based on the fact that we were trying to follow God.  I am still amazed at their kindness.  We continued to worship with that group for months.

A couple weeks later, we found a place to stay and we each had jobs.  However, we were out of money, and we wouldn't receive our first paychecks for at least three weeks.  Not knowing what to do, we brought our need before the house church.  Again, we received prayer and finished the night not knowing the answer.  One of the members even spoke with my husband afterwards, wishing us well.

When we got home that night my husband pulled a small rectangular paper from his pocket.  "Hey, that guy I spoke to gave me this check, but I don't know what it's for," he told me.  He unfolded the paper, and we both gasped.  The check was for $300.  Apparently, the man had an account set aside from his regular funds.  Not a savings account, exactly.  I was told it was a "God account."  That money lasted exactly until my first paycheck.

Since moving to Ohio, I have seen the inner-workings of small inner city churches.  Over the past five years, I have seen the passion of pastors, the wisdom of district leaders and the foolishness of their replacements.  I have witnessed a successful church merger and a struggling church renewal.  I've had a neighbor who was homeless and a neighbor who won the lottery, and both were more genuine than some of the leaders I've encountered.

I've seen the lost, the confused and the hungry both on the streets and in the church.  Though I've done what I know how to do, sometimes I feel like it's not enough.  Too often the individual Christ followers and Christ seekers are lost in the trenches of American Christian heirarchy.  This is what I want to address.  This is what I want to change.

It seems to me that the best thing I can do is be a clear voice in the madness of doctrine and dogma.  As a preacher's wife and non-profit secretary, I see what happens behind the scenes.  I believe that I can use my perspective to address issues and events in the American church.  I do not assume to have all (or even any) answers.  That would be very arrogant of me.  I simply hope to bring attention to the good, the bad and the godly.

I would like to ask my readers to keep me on my toes.  If at any point I fail to uphold the purpose of this blog, please let me know.  I would hate to act or speak in a way that is contrary to my passion.  Have a wonderful upcoming Easter weekend, and I will begin regular posting soon.

My Inspiration, part 1

Hello!  My name is Meagan, and I want to change the world.  Specifically, I want to impact the way Christians in America look at their faith.  More than that, I want to challenge and inspire Christians to take their faith more seriously.  Radically ambitious, somewhat arrogant, and fairly unpleasant, I know.  But it's my passion, and I'd like to share it with you.

Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.  Perhaps an explanation (or exploration) of what motivates me is in order.

My story begins with a good old-fashioned Baptist business meeting.  I was twelve or thirteen, and immensely curious why so many people (myself included)  would show up for such a boring night.  I soon found out.

The pastor was up for a raise, and two hundred people had gathered to determine his fate.  Pre-meeting murmurs filled the sanctuary with discourse.  The pastor stood before the church, mentioned the three microphones available for open commentary, and left the sanctuary.

As quickly as the pastor had left, a bearded man made his way towards the center mic.  Immediately he began attacking the idea of giving his spiritual leader a raise.  A few voices sounded their agreement.  In fact, he continued, the church was paying him too much already.  More voices spoke, louder than before.  Encouraged, the bearded man made his final point: Why should a man who works only 52 days a year get a penny more of his hard-earned money?

Now, I was young and not yet versed in the social etiquette of Baptist business, but I was livid.  Something in my soul knew that those man's words were not fair.  But I was just a kid, and I didn't know how to process my feelings into action.  So I sat in my pew fuming, screaming in my head "You're wrong!  Take it back!"

A white-haired man then stood to speak.  He was older, a deacon, a man even I knew commanded respect.  As he approached the mic nearest me, the crowd quieted.  My spirit quivered.  His steady voice spoke gently, but firmly.

"A pastor," he said, "does not work 52 days a year.  In fact, the least amount of work happens on Sundays.  The time, energy and love our pastor puts into comforting those who are sick and ministering to those who are broken is more than any of us could imagine.  It's easily 50 hours or more a week.  The question is not whether he deserves the raise.  The question is whether we can afford to repay him just some of the kindness he has shown to our congregation and to our community."

My soul rejoiced that night.  Somebody wiser than I had expressed the words I could not say.  (Oh, yeah, and the pastor got the raise.)  I didn't know it then, but that night sparked in me a desire to be involved  in ministries and leadership that has, thus far, lasted more than a dozen years.  (Heck, I even married a youth pastor!)  However, as this first blog is already twice as long as it should be, I'll leave off here for now.  I'll explain (explore) more in part two.