Category Archives: cultural context

May 9, 2013 · 10:43 am

Missing Babies, Feral Males, “Smokin’ Hot Wives” and Female Appointments

Ultrasound of a female fetus

Ultrasound of a female fetus

A little background here before I weave together some threads of thought.

Sex Selective Abortions

First, look at issue of sex-selective abortions and female infanticide. These are major issues especially in India and China.  For multiple financial and cultural reasons, many families have a strong preference for male babies over female babies.  The growing availability and affordability of ultrasound technology makes it increasingly easy to abort unwanted female fetuses.  If an unwanted one makes it to birth, the child is often abandoned and left to die.

The result is a growing disparity between the number of males and females entering adolescence and early adulthood.  In plain English, there are not enough women to go around.  Here’s an article about the situation in 2001.  By using 2001 figures (it is worse now), we can see that the situation has now manifested itself in that shortage of marriage-age females.

Feral Males

Now, has anyone besides me noted the large number of news items recently about the growing incidences of mass rapes in India?  My quick analysis:  there are bands of feral males roaming the countryside full of anger about the shortage and taking out their anger on the women they cannot have.

Women are a civilizing force, even relatively powerless women, which is very much the case in India.  The decision to radically reduce the number of female infants is contributing to the destabilization of these societies.

We all know the teen-age brain is long on impulse and short on self-control.  This is especially the case in males whose brains do show somewhat different developmental patterns than females.  Risk-taking behavior without regard to consequences characterizes much youth culture, especially male-dominated youth culture.

I predict that things are going to get much, much worse in those societies that do not have sexual parity.  Even in the unlikely hope that incidence of sex-selective abortion stops immediately, it will be at least 30 years before all this sorts itself out.  Expect immense damage and continued destabilization there.

“Smokin’ Hot Wives”

Now, let’s talk about “Smokin’ Hot Wives” for a bit.  For the last several years, young, virile, charismatic male superstar pastors have made a big deal of their “smokin’ hot wives.”  It appears to be a way to let everyone knows how sexually potent these pastors are.  Here is a great post on the situation, written by someone who himself was guilty of that demeaning stances before recognizing how very, very destructive it is.

The  phrase objectifies women, placing all their worth only on their ability to be sexually attractive.  Personally, I call it “smokin’ hot pastor porn.”  It’s the first part of the book of Esther all over again.  The foolish King Xerxes insists his beautiful wife Vashti come out and dance for his drunken cronies.  When she rightfully refuses, he deposes her for her lack of submissiveness. He then systematically searches for as many young virgins as possible so he can routinely deflower them until he finds just the one who pleases him.

I do wonder what would happen if one of those “smokin’ hot” wives were to say to her pastor husband, “You are a fool and are an embarrassment to all around.”  Except they won’t because then they, like Vashti, will be labeled as “unsubmissive” and will face just punishment.  Trust me on this one.  I know that world.

Female Appointments

Now, let us talk about the apparently growing number of churches that are saying, “We don’t want a female pastor.”  I don’t know how strong this movement is, but understand that this is a problem at least in the North Texas Conference of The United Methodist Church.

These churches want men, preferably young, handsome and virile ones, to fill their pulpits.  These young men, especially when they’ve got their own “smokin’ hot wives” in tow, will solve the problem of depressed and declining churches.

They could very well be right.  Let’s face it:  pretty and sexy draws the crowds.  Always has, always will.  We live in a visual, consumer-driven society.  The call to well-formed characters, depth in spiritual understanding and practice, and complicated paths to discipleship that include following Jesus to the cross just do not fill worship spaces or offering plates.

Multiple sociological studies show that the young, the tall, the beautiful and handsome nearly always are hired earlier and with better pay packages than the dumpy, plump, and homely. I call this the Elephant Man syndrome: we have a very difficult time getting past the exterior.   Why? Probably because the young, tall and beautiful say, “Life is going on.  We will not die.  We will persevere.”

Here are the problems for female clergy:   First, when they are young and especially attractive, they very much get sexualized. Huge forces combine against taking them seriously as leaders. Second, these are their prime child bearing years.  Few female clergy are going to get away with what some high-powered women in industry get away with:  having babies and showing back up at work the next week without missing a step. Some of these high-powered ones even hire surrogates to bear their children for them.

Many older women, no longer facing the problems of being sexualized or needing to bear children while they can, have developed immense reservoirs of wisdom and the understanding of spiritual things.  But we have little value in a system that says, “only the young [and pretty/virile] may apply.  Frankly, older men do not face the same demeaning pressures.

This is our reality.  This becomes our cross to carry. And this becomes the church’s loss to bear.  So the church continues to move forward with surface spirituality that cracks when real life pressures hit.

Why can’t we do this in real partnership?  Male AND female?  Young AND old?  Beautiful AND plain?   Charismatic AND quiet? And, yes I will dare to mention this:  Heterosexual AND homosexual?  But all with formed characters, impeccable moral lives and unwavering love of God and neighbor?

Should we do this, we might indeed show the world that the church is a place where the kingdom of heaven is lived out.

But we don’t and we won’t.  And God’s heart breaks.

Addendum:  In Barry Weber’s comment below, he pointed me to a TED talk.  I thought it was so important that I have linked it here.

 

25 Comments

Filed under adolescence, character, clergy, cultural context, homosexuality, kingdom of heaven

Tagged as , , , , ,

March 12, 2013 · 5:24 pm

On the Art of Communication: Generation Gap or Just Plain Rudeness?

The TelephoneNick Belton, a young “guru” on the digital age, offered a recent rant about excess text messages, especially ones that say things like “thank you.” Belton hates wasting even one extra minute on any communication medium that does not serve his immediate purpose. He finds phone calls and voice mail particularly offensive, saying:

My father learned this lesson last year after leaving me a dozen voice mail messages, none of which I listened to. Exasperated, he called my sister to complain that I never returned his calls. “Why are you leaving him voice mails?” my sister asked. “No one listens to voice mail anymore. Just text him.”

No one listens to voice mail? Really? Hmmm.  Later in the column, this young man indicates he communicates with his mother by Twitter.

OK, lets talk about twitter:  140 characters per tweet.  I have a twitter account–should you wish to become one my many followers (note: sarcasm present) feel free. Twitter name, the unoriginal: christythomas.

Last fall, I participated in an “in-depth” conversation about a critical issue using a tweetchat medium–140 character limit.

The sentence above contains precisely 140 characters.  It took me ten minutes to edit it to that exact length, an interesting waste of time.

The “in-depth conversation” offered surface cliches and unsupported statements, no nuance or explanation. It was difficult to follow as people had to respond to previous statements with the @symbol to accurately reference tweets several lines and thought-leaps away.

More, because, of course, they found their own thoughts so profound, they also needed to hashtag (#) them to other places so their followers would not miss a word.

To say I found this tweetchat unsatisfactory would be an understatement.

Now, the oh-so-put-upon Belton’s quote above about his father’s many phone calls contains 303 characters.  Twice the space offered to criticize his dad as he spends communicating with his mother.

This is progress?

I am no Luddite and enjoy the electronic world.  I was one of the first users of personal computers, expensive as they were.

My typing has always been both fast and riddled with mistakes. To quickly fix errors in my documents without the laborious process of painting with liquid paper and erasing carbon copies seemed utterly miraculous to me.

I also think email and texting can be better ways to communicate than the telephone.  The act of writing our thoughts means we can rewrite as necessary. We can also reply when most convenient. No need to jump when the phone rings and be at the mercy of the schedule of others.

All helps bring more gracious and thoughtful discourse.

Email, at its best, serves as a way to embrace again the art of letter writing.  Through emails, we may keep a journal of our lives and loves, just as handwritten letters did for generations.

After my mother died in 2010, I discovered a treasure trove of copies of letters she had written to her family over a period of 60 years.  I saw riches and nuances I would have never known without them. She poured out her soul in the written word.  Conversations long-forgotten suddenly came alive again.

What would the world’s great literature and religion be without those who took time to write their thoughts?  How much we owe both to them and to the labors of those whose lives were dedicated to carefully and accurately make copies of such things!

Real communication takes time, energy, thoughtfulness and willingness to enter into the world of another.  It is also fraught with problems, open to misinterpretation, and makes the writer vulnerable to attack.

Mostly, it builds bridges when we are willing to take the time to listen. However, if even a “thank you” text is a source of irritation, I do wonder where we are headed next.

PS: FYI:  There are 3804 characters in this column!

6 Comments

Filed under communication, cultural context

Tagged as , , , , , ,

February 21, 2013 · 11:04 am

On Adolescence and Underwear

It is very easy for someone who works exclusively in a church environment to become culturally isolated from the “real world,” so I make it a point to read extensively outside my field. I want to learn what others are thinking and how they experience life.

So, I perused a recent article in The Atlantic written by a middle-school teacher extremely concerned about the ways the girls in her classroom dressed for school.

She writes, “I hate having to defend my right not to see a girl’s underwear. . . I hate having to worry that being able to see a girl’s underwear will so addle the boys’ brains that they will be unable to concentrate in science class.”

Now, this makes perfect sense to me.  Learning to dress appropriately, showing respect both for self and others, should be part of the maturing process.

It was the comments on this article that opened my eyes to differing views. Radically differing views. Apparently, a fair number of people in this world think this teacher is way off base. Coming down strongly on the side of freedom of expression and support of individual choice, they see few or no problems for either the girls or boys when dressing provocatively in those extremely turbulent years of early adolescence.

Keep in mind that I reared three sons, no daughters. While I insisted they dress decently, there were minimal protests and I have no first-hand knowledge of the art of purchasing clothing for girls. I’ve heard of but never witnessed emotional meltdowns when a tween or young teen is told she must wear more modest clothes–and thereby possibly threatening her very survival in the eyes of her peers.

I also remember my own tense teen years as I sought my independence, but was nowhere near ready mentally or emotionally for it.  The transition from child to adult is extremely tough for both youth and parents, with never-ending and utterly exhausting battles around every corner.

With that in mind, I was still dismayed that multiple commentators could see no problems with such revealing clothing in a school setting.

I don’t get this. Academics have become an increasingly difficult setting for boys. Their bodies scream, “I need to move around and expel some of my excess energy” while the opportunities for needed movement shrink. Instead, pressure to sit still and learn quietly increase.

Additionally, during these years both boys and girls face hormonal storms that threaten to remove any possibility of rational response from their immature minds.

Why then, is it apparently OK to flash underwear for the world to see? Both boys and girls are guilty here.

We’re talking school, folks. Not the beach, not parties, not hanging out time. School. That place where heroes–that is how I define ANYONE who teaches for a living, and especially those who teach pre-teens and younger adolescents–perform superhuman feats hourly by pounding some essential knowledge into those hormone-addled brains.

Why, in the name of all that is decent and reasonable, would parents do ANYTHING to make that task more difficult?

I understand the concerns expressed. Commentators fear females are going to be blamed as provocateurs when sexually assaulted. Additionally, few would wish that we become like those who keep girls and women cloistered lest the just the sight of them incite the helpless male to irresistible lust.

I still ask: is it possible to agree on a general school-day dress code, without having to go to uniforms (which do have much to say for them) that honors both the need for personal expression and the need for respect, both for self and others?

Or, am I just too caught in a world that teaches at its core that all humans have a responsibility to treat others the way they want to be treated themselves that I am hopelessly out of touch with the “real world.”

10 Comments

Filed under accountability, adolescence, compromise, cultural context, education

Tagged as , , , ,

November 14, 2012 · 1:17 pm

Judicial Council Decisions: The Emperor Has No Clothes

The United Methodist Church cannot be re-formed. It’s over for us with our current structure.

The Judicial Council’s decision to revoke the involuntary retirement of Bishop Earl Bledsoe over issues of violation of procedural minutia found in the Book of Discipline (not over the question of his effectiveness, which was not being ruled upon) has forever made this clear. It is over.

It’s easy to get frustrated with the Judicial Council for the rulings of the last few months. Their work has thoroughly reversed decisions made by General and Jurisdictional Conferences.

However, I think that would be a mistake. They’ve done the United Methodist Church a huge favor. Because the members of the Council were faithful to the letter of the law, which is exactly what they are supposed to do, we now know for sure that this emperor has no clothes.

They have revealed an important truth and truth does very much set us free.

Many gifted, intelligent, godly people slogged through interminable meetings seeking to follow the rules and still lead us into substantive and necessary change. We easily see those as wasted hours in light of the aftermath of the Judicial Council decisions.

Again, I say, let us receive the favor here. There is simply no sense in trying to do that kind of thing anymore. It can’t work. Period.

We are going to have to engender our own revolution/reformation or die slowly of strangulation by methods that no longer support the heart of Methodism. No one in their right mind wants to die this way. But we are now at the crossroads and must choose: strangulation or revolution?

I wish we didn’t have to do this. Revolutions hurt, and leave scarred landscapes and burnt-out buildings. People die. Pain becomes our middle name. Sad tears accompany nearly every decision. Passionate arguments punctuate every discussion.

But the structure has cracked and the un-repairable foundation now sits exposed. John Wesley was an autocratic organizational genius who could do to the clergy under his command and the churches of his movement things that are now not just unworkable, but also unthinkable.

And our own efforts at tinkering with the denomination we inherited? Well, we’ve danced around it, modified it, adapted it and culturally-contexted it. Time to stop. It’s over.

What do we have left? We have the most powerful theology of grace that has ever infused the human race. We have words about God that tell us that God is ever before us, wooing the world into repentance, relationship and wholeness. We have an understanding about our redemption and forgiveness that forever sets us free. And we actually do believe that we can, in cooperation with the Spirit of God, be perfected in love.

That’s what we have.

All the rest of it, our pensions and health insurance concerns, our episcopacy and our itinerancy, our megachurches and our itsy-bitsy rural congregations, our connection, our conferences, our metrics and our vestments, are just window dressing.

We have grace.

The question we now ask: Can grace-infused theology hold us together in the revolution that is now necessary? Can we plant ourselves firmly on opposite sides of huge issues, pray, argue and fight our way through this, and see a healthy and actually united Methodist church born yet once more? Can we free ourselves from the death strangle of our current methods and still be Methodists?

If we can’t, or we won’t, then we need to die anyway. We deserve no better than to slowly lose oxygen as we wander forever lost through the dead-end maze known as the Book of Discipline. If we can and if we will, then we will unleash the Spirit of God yet once more.

It’s time.

13 Comments

Filed under accommodation, clergy, cultural context, death, faithfulness, forgiveness, grace, metrics, pain, reconciliation, repentance

Tagged as , , , , , ,

October 31, 2012 · 2:27 pm

Hurricane Sandy and The Search for Meaning

The word “normal” will be a long time returning to those in the path of Superstorm Sandy last week.  Lives were lost, many made homeless, power is slow to be restored in multiple areas, schools disorganized, mud and debris cover formerly lovely neighborhoods.  Hardest hit, as always, are the poor and the disabled.  Cold weather has moved in with more storms, increasing the misery and danger.  It’s just awful.

Right after the storm, the blogosphere exploded with “Blame God for Hurricane Sandy” articles and posts.  I don’t suppose this should be shocking: it all fits with the “Divine Butler-god” that I’ve written about before. As long as we get what we want (good weather for weekends, sports events and campouts) then God has been nice and obedient and fits well within our god-definitions. But the moment things go wrong and suffering results, we quickly decide God is capricious and evil.

Recently, I have been rereading Viktor Frankl’s, Man’s Search for Meaning.

Frankl, a psychiatrist, was one of the few who survived Nazi Germany’s unimaginably horrific concentration camps. He described how many, both prisoners and guards, became nearly totally dehumanized by camp conditions and culture. Those sub-human ones lost all capacity for caring about anything but themselves, and freely inflicted horrors on others.

But a few became bigger in soul, not smaller. They retained their power to choose how they would respond to a system that tortured and dehumanized them.

Ultimately, Frankl realized, they no longer asked, “What do I expect from life?” Instead, they began to ask, “What does life expect from me?”

In a culture like ours, drowning in consumer choices and never-ending enticements for more, be they pleasures, riches, gadgets, time, luxury, protection, or comfort, we tend to stick with the “What do I expect from life” question.

We are inevitably deeply disappointed.

We will never have enough because that mindset keeps us in the bottomless abyss of needing more. In our disappointment, many blame “god” for falling down on the job, seeing ourselves as helpless victims of this capricious, evil “god.”

When we ask, “What does life expect of me?” and particularly when we are able to word it this way, “What does God expect from me?” our perspective may change.

First, we begin to realize we have no right to insist God order the universe for our comfort or protection.

Second, we begin to see ourselves as participants in the outcomes, rather than victims of the circumstances. As a participant, my choices, limited as they might be, still matter hugely. I may use my choices to respond courageously and with a generous, well-formed character, even in suffering.

I ache for the people that have been harmed, made homeless, and suffered much loss in the wake of these storms. Everyone involved has been traumatized. Lives will not ever be the same.

Some have already become less human. They have looted abandoned homes and businesses, disregarded the needs of others, and concentrated only on themselves.

But others, deep in their trauma, ask, “What DOES God (or life) expect of me here?” These people are emerging as true, and usually unrecognized, heroes.  Even as they seek their own survival, they are helping others as it is possible.  Eventually, some will look at the death and devastation and see hope and resurrection.  Ultimately, perhaps, they will need less and give more, freer, lighter, and unafraid.

This storm happened. Storms always have, and they always will as long as the physical universe is in existence. I wish they didn’t. I’d like all of us to be comfortable and safe.  However, I believe we can find real meaning in this and every other storm that comes our way only if we choose participation in the healing and the learning process that comes from it.

11 Comments

Filed under character, cultural context, homelessness, resurrection

Tagged as , , , ,

September 25, 2012 · 2:31 pm

One-Sided Conversations

I suspect many who fly frequently share one secret fear: that the use of cellphones will be permitted after take-off.  Picture the scenario: stuck in a middle seat between two people who are carrying on conversations on either side of you. Both use loud voices because of ambient noise. The phone calls consume the entire flight time, other than take off and landing.

Are you nuts yet?

All of us have been exposed—and probably exposed others—to the discomfort of overhearing phone calls in public places. Occasionally people respond with rage to such infringements on their hearing space.

Once this past summer on a packed evening train coming out of London, a woman spoke at length on her phone in an otherwise silent car (Londoners are pretty darn polite people.) I admit it: after about ten minutes, I wanted to yank the phone from her hand, stomp it senseless and toss it out the window.  Too many “simply splendid, ducky’s” for my peace of mind.

Research suggests that being forced to listen to one-sided conversations is far more irritating than overhearing two people talking.  When both sides of the dialogue are present, the brain can tune out the voices nearly completely.  But disconnected one-sided words bring significantly more mental disruption to the unwilling eavesdropper.

Now, should we stop speaking into our mobile phones in public? Well, yes. We should. Or if absolutely necessary, our words should be EXTREMELY BRIEF.  But that’s not the real point.

I was considering these one-sided conversations—and the irritation with them—when I was pondering the difficulties in reading and understanding the Bible.

The writers were not in conversation with us.  They are part of of an exchange with a completely different group of people. We can’t hear or read the other side of the exchange.  What makes perfect sense in the original context comes to us as fragments of dialogue where the other parties words are unintelligible, invisible.  And we all hear and see these fragments differently.  The interpretations that seem so right to some seem impossibly wrong to others.

A couple of people from my church were recently asking about the developments of various denominations.  As we discussed the varieties of Christian beliefs, we talked about the revolutionary nature of Gutenberg’s movable type printing press.  Because of that invention, the Bible, not to mention other important works of literature, very suddenly became far, far more widely available.

Up until that time, books were either hand-copied or laboriously printed from blocks with the letters carved out.  Books and literacy were rare and the few books available extraordinarily expensive. An extensive library might have two hundred books.  I have more than that waiting for me on my e-reader right now.

Wider availability of books led to wider literacy. Wider literacy led to more widely shared knowledge and the breakup of intellectual monopolies.  The church and other formerly authoritative institutions began to splinter.

Readers formed differing opinions on the interpretations of sacred texts.  What Gutenberg began has now only increased dramatically in intensity and speed with electronic dissemination of information.  We know more.  We question more.

This is bad if only one interpretation has validity. But what if we are simply learning that God is far bigger than a book? What if the nature of God and God’s mercy is so wide that multiple interpretations are not only possible, but also mandatory?

What if we form our religious communities less around “This is what I believe and you’d better believe exactly the same or you will suffer eternal torment” and more around, “As I read the Scriptures, here is what I learn and experience.  Tell me what you learn and experience.  Let’s see if we can fill out each other’s understandings and know God better.”

Just my hopeful thoughts in a world of religious riots and hate speech.

Leave a Comment

Filed under cultural context

Tagged as , , ,

July 13, 2012 · 1:53 pm

Silence, Sandusky and Subordination

The Freeh Report

Because of the release of the Freeh Report, multiple news organizations have offered more information recently on the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal at Penn State.  Former FBI Director Louis Freeh, hired by Penn State to investigate, published a scathing report about the extent of the cover-up by university officials.  Freeh concluded that those officials showed a callous disregard for the vulnerable youth because of their need to protect the football program at all costs.

According to the report (page 21) in November of 2000, this happened: “Janitor observes assault by Sandusky, but does not report the assault for fear that ‘they’ll get rid of all of us.’  Another janitor concluded that the university will close ranks to protect the football program.”  Page 65 of the report gives the sad details of the Janitors’ observations.

In the recommendations section, Freeh writes, “One of the most challenging tasks confronting the University community—and possibly the most important step in ensuring that other recommended reforms are effectively sustained, and that public confidence in the University and its leadership is restored—is an open, honest, and thorough examination of the culture that underlies the failure of Penn State’s most powerful leaders to respond appropriately to Sandusky’s crime (p. 128).”

Yes, Freeh is right about that:  there can be no sustained change without first a careful examination of the culture in which we exist.  Our culture determines our values, and our values, those things which are most important to us, drive our decisions.

Highest Values Exposed

At Penn State, the apparent highest value appears to have been football—anything that supported the football program would be labeled  “good,” and anything that distracted from it, would therefore be labeled, “bad.”  Now, I doubt this directive was actually written down anyplace.  The written directives were bound to be things like quality education for young people, protecting them, etc.  But the real center was football.  The unwritten culture generally takes precedence over the written code where decisions are concerned.

A number of years ago, working off some of Peter Senge’s fine work on mental models in The Fifth Discipline, I did some consulting work helping groups and organization discern their actual operating metaphor or model.  This is not the one written in policy manuals, or the ideals coming from carefully crafted mission or vision statements, but the real, gritty, daily, down and dirty model that drove their decisions, but was rarely talked about.

These discussions were almost always revealing, and were also often fairly painful.  Often I would see organizations that claimed to put a high value on cross department teamwork actually rewarding only intra-department achievements.  They ended up pushing a deadly kind of competitiveness and information hoarding rather than cooperation and information dissemination.

The Fears of Subordinates

Going back to the Penn State situation, those in highly subordinate roles, and those who were most likely to see Sandusky’s despicable acts, were also those whose personal cultures valued silence—because to do anything else threatened their livelihood and the survival of their families.  It’s easy to point the finger at those silent, subordinate ones and say, “Why didn’t you speak out?”  But they knew, yes, they knew that football was God, King, and Sovereign, and speaking out against such power could only lead to their destruction.

Universities, which are supposed to be places of free inquiry, are as hard on their heretics and uncomfortable truth-tellers as the church, which is famously known as the only army on earth that shoots its own wounded.

What would it take to create a more open, truth-telling atmosphere?  What would it take to relieve the kind of fear that leads to silence in the face of huge injustice?  Have things really changed since Jesus spoke out against the prevailing religious authorities, offering a new way of servanthood rather than oppressive power, and ended up on the cross?

Culture and the Episcopacy

I am thinking about this a great deal with Jurisdictional Conferences of The United Methodist Church taking place next week to elect new Bishops from the ranks of Elders who have offered their names for holy consideration.   Will these new as well as those returning Bishops be able to create an atmosphere of open questions, challenges and differing opinions without being threatened personally?

Really what I am asking is this:  how many in the subordinate ranks of church life stay silent, just as the Penn State Janitors did, for the sake of their families?  How many do not say the hard things in order to keep positions?  Those are often two highly competing forces—and families are important and don’t appreciate being placed on sacrificial altars for the sake of principles.

What really is the prevailing culture of The United Methodist Church?  Are we really about our mission, that of making disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world?  Frankly, that is slow, painstaking, and not terribly rewarding work, although it can be immensely satisfying.  Or . . . are we about security, pleasing the higher-ups, building monuments to human talent and creativity?  Or is it something totally different?  But just like Penn State, until we know, we can’t make the necessary moves toward a more healthy, vital direction.

Leave a Comment

Filed under competition, cultural context, family, injustice, Justice

Tagged as , , ,

December 1, 2011 · 11:55 am

On Closing Churches

I just heard yesterday about a church plant needing to close, 22 months after its founding. It was such sad news. I know the pastor, a man of considerable talent who had poured everything he had into the project.

It also reinforces for me just how very, very difficult the work of the church is, especially as our culture moves more and more into fragmented niches leaving behind any common ethos, particularly an ethos that supports the gathering together for worship as a common good.

Recently, Intelligence Squared from Slate Magazine sponsored a debate over this motion: “The World Would Be Better Off Without Religion.”

The atheists won the debate. Now, they were not debating the existence or non-existence of God.  They were debating the value of religion for the larger good.

The anti-religion folks had no trouble listing many of the nasty things done in the name of religion, as well as expounding on some of the very strange things found in the Bible and the propensity for racial and ethnic cleansing that we read about through much of the books of history there.

Those against the motion had no trouble listing the far nastier things done just by evil people, and also speaking of the huge, huge amounts of social good done in the name of religion.  But they did not prevail.

Unfortunately, I understand why. Religion is a powerfully divisive force when it offers no room for uncertainty or disagreement. More, worship of God who is essentially partisan and mean and more than willing that most of creation should suffer everlasting torment does lead to some pretty horrific outcomes.

However, worship of God, a God whose nature encompasses justice, love, and mercy, can and should lead to our own actions of justice, love and mercy.

But it so often doesn’t.  I had learned that one of the reasons behind the closure of the church plant was some bitter conflict among some of the people involved.  There were only a few involved in the conflict, but the impact was huge.

And so, in the name of Jesus–for I’m sure all parties were sure they were speaking in the name of Jesus, the whole notion of justice, love and mercy has been lost.

I remember once, years ago, when I had been the recipient of a particularly hurtful incident, done in the name of Jesus of course, one of my sons asked me, “Mom, how can you stay a Christian after this?”

My answer: “I’m not a Christian because of other Christians or what they do.  I am one because I have decided to follow Jesus–no matter what.”

Furthermore, I’m more than sure that there are people out there who have experienced profound hurt from me, all done in the name of Jesus.

The only thing that can hold people together in worship and in church is a mutual commitment to live together as those who constantly practice the discipline of giving forgiveness in the same way we want to receive it–which is freely and generously.

This is our glue.  This is our gospel.  And without it, we might as well all close.

2 Comments

Filed under Bible, cultural context, Uncategorized, worship