Monday, March 1, 2010

Spiritual Elitism - - - Can the Fall be Contained?


(Pictured: The C Street House in Washington, DC)

I believe that a huge topic is at stake here and I don’t if I can put it into words. It has to do with how manageable is the Fall of Adam. Another word, which may or may not be synonymous, is sanctification. Can we, as Christians, ever escape the effects of the Fall?

Two things brought this to mind recently. The first was the comment by Alex after Feb 19 th’s posting. Alex put a link to this blog. To make a long story short is was about a family coming to the blogger’s church. The 7 year old adoptive daughter, Lydia, was accidently killed by her Christian parents. Her Christian parents were practicing a type of child-rearing techniques (including severe corporal punishment) advocated by a very conservative pastor in Tennessee. I personally know of another case that is like this one. The Tennessee pastor believes in “entire sanctification” or where Christians can contain the effects of the Fall to the point they never sin anymore. So, you can literally beat the sin out of your kids in other words.

Then that night I heard on NPR another story about the “C Street House.” I’ve heard of that place before. But, in case you haven’t, I will explain in brief.

The “C Street House” is a secret ministry set up to disciple, at a very elite level, members of congress or the Senate. The purpose was to help create godly leaders of this country. Very little is known about it except it is listed as a church for tax purposes and it is operated by the same people who set up the annual Prayer Breakfast.

This house has been in the news lately because three of these elite disciples have been behaving badly. Maybe you could call it, “Disciples Gone Wild.” One of the disciples is Mark Sanford, who was recently caught slipping off to Argentina to visit his mistress. Seven days before he was caught, another associate of the house, Mark Ensign (Senator from Nevada) was caught in an affair. Now put this in context with the fact that only a handful of men meet the standards of living in or associating with that house. These are the spiritual and power elite.

Now, I’ve read that Cal Thomas and others have defended the house in the aftermath of those scandals along the lines of not judging the entire work based on a couple of bad apples. Or, more like, Jesus is all about forgiveness.

But that’s not the criticism that I voice here. My criticism or question is, can we really manage our sin in this way? Is there really a ladder of climbing out of sin into “godliness” or spirituality?

I think that my personal fall from Evangelicalism started when the godliest men I ever knew . . . were guilty of some of the worst sins I could imagine. But it took me a while to believe it. I’ve told the story before about the most hard-core disciple I ever met (he was a Navigator staff guy) disappeared one year and returned the next year with a new wife who was half his age. None of us asked a single question about it, even though it was the elephant in the room. Then, there was my missionary boss. I had him on the highest human pedestal of spirituality. He did some bad things. Then there was myself, I’ve been capable of some bad things.

I want to think about this a little more and do another post or two. But in summary, I think the way you look at sin really determines if you are an Evangelical or not. Evangelicals believe that they can achieve spirituality. In the same breath, they can relegate the non-Christian, or even the “weak Christian” to a much lower level of worth and existence. That’s why Evangelicals don’t like non-Christians. They don’t like their music (like KD Lang) or their art, or their books (especially if they have words like shit in them). But when you see that not even a sheet of onion-skin paper couldn’t fit between you level of spirituality and that of the worst human, you are not only more grateful for the mercy of God in Christ. But you also don’t trust anyone. I don’t trust my own spirituality. I don’t trust that of any spiritual leader. Actually, the more they seek the limelight, the less I trust them.

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Earthquake and Connecting the Dots


With such a powerful earthquake (Chile) coming on the heels of such a devastating one (Haiti) and a powerful one but not so destructive one (Okinawa) I have the feeling that some TV evangelist will sooner or later start to connect the dots. I hope not. It is always a sad thing to see someone overlook the intense suffering of real people, in real places . . . people whom God loves, and only use them as pawns in propping up someone's eclectic eschatology. Pat??? Pat??? Hey, are you there?

The relief group I work with is on standby. I doubt if the call will come for Chile, but we will see.

On a different topic, I got a notification that one of my manuscripts (a novel) made it to a final round of a national writer's competition. The odds are still not in my favor. However, after 20 years of working on books, this will be the first time that I will have a manuscript read by a potential publisher. I've never gotten past a query letter before. I've entered contest for fiction before but I've never gotten past the first round (where they only read you description and not the actual manuscript). Like I've said before, I don't mind having someone read a manuscript and tell me it's crap . . . it is the inability to even get it read that can be frustrating (just ask any of the tens of thousand writer wannabes).

Saturday, February 27, 2010

K.D. Lang and Crying Over You

I was sitting in the coffee shop this morning, across the table from Ramsey. I was writing my previous posting and reading "As I Lay Dying" by Faulkner. We were sitting just beneath the Starbucks flat screen TV where their music skin is displayed.

I really wasn't paying a lot of attention to the music until I heard that familiar sound of Crying Over You. It didn't sound like Orbison. I stood up and looked . . . it was KD Lang.

Now, I'm ashamed to say, that I have not heard a lot of music from KD. The major reason (you might see this coming) is that she is not considered someone to be a fan of if you are an Evangelical. You can guess why, but, I'm certain it had something to do with her lesbian-feminists view point and gender blending.

But I sat there with my eyes closed and just listened to her wonderful voice.

It is hard to explain, but before now, I had never taken this song seriously. It was like a novelty song . . . a little over the top with emotion. The kind of song that you would sing in a whinny voice. But as I listened to KD, I felt the true emotion of loving and being hurt.

This too is part of the human condition. Has anyone gone through life without being hurt, romantically, at least once? I don't think so. I can't imagine those who are deeply in love, or even have been married for years . . . and the one they love . . . stops loving them. You can't measure that pain.

So, as I listened to KD, something struck me. I don't care about her "gender confusion," or sexual orientation . . . this woman sings with the passion that tells me that she knows what it is like to suffer a heartache. I think it was the same with Orbison (whom I think Bob Dylan said had the most beautiful voice the world has ever heard . . . or something like that).

So as I, as the liberated Evangelical, am eating up and enjoying the arts like I never have before, I can't express how much that song touched me. She sings of the human condition . . . something we all have tasted.

You can watch her here or just read the lyrics below:



I was all right for a while,
I could smile for a while
But I saw you last night,
you held my hand so tight
As you stopped to say "Hello"
Ah you wished me well, you couldn't tell

That I'd been crying over you,
crying over you
Then you said "so long"
left me standing all alone
Alone and crying, crying, crying, crying
It's hard to understand but the touch of your hand
Can start me crying

I thought that I was over you but it's true, oo so true
I love you even more than I did before
but darling what can I do
For you don't love me and I'll always be

Crying over you, crying over you
Yes, now you're gone and from this moment on
I'll be crying

I thought that I was over you but it's true, oo so true
I love you even more than I did before but darling what can I do
For you don't love me and I'll always be

Crying over you, crying over you
Yes, now you're gone and from this moment on
I'll be crying

crying, crying, crying
Yeah crying, crying, crying over you


Bible Study Break Through . . . Or Set Back?

Several months ago I initiated a small group Bible study at our church. Another guy and I co-lead it. My desire was to recreate the small group experiences that I've had a few times in my Christian life. Within these groups is where I think the true church is played out.

However, things didn't go as I had hoped. Speaking philosophically, it is part of this church's long standing culture not to speak of personal things in public. I think there are several reason for this, including the Dutch tradition of keeping a stoic face.

I had attempted to create space for personal sharing around the study of Hebrews. It was a log jam. Denise says it is simply because we (speaking of the whole group) don't have the depth of relationships to allow such sharing. But this is where I get confused. It is a catch 22. If you don't talk about your personal life, how do you create those relationships. Denise says it takes time. I've been involved with this church for 6 years now. Some of the people in the group have been around much longer. Isn't that long enough? I mean, I'm not going to live forever. I can't wait 10 years or more before I'm allowed to speak about real life.

My co-leader did not create space for sharing. I think the way he looks at Bible study (and the rest of the people probably do too) is that Bible study is for studying the Bible. If you are not talking about the Bible then it is a distraction at best.

This week it was my co-leader's turn to lead. We didn't have any sharing time but went straight to Bible study. We were studying Hebrews chapter 10. I didn't mean to cause a distraction. But when we got to the following passage:

22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water.23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. 25Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
I couldn't help myself. I raised up the questions of how do we spur one another on when we don't know one another or are allowed to talk about what is really happening in our personal lives (of the 5 couples who attend, I know that 3 or 4 are going through some serious, but private struggles right now. I only know about it because their non-Christian friends now of these struggles and they in turn have told me).

I don't think I'm having any major personal struggles right now, but I've had plenty in the past. So I brought up my past experiences of trying to fit into the church when I went through two bouts of serious depression. This opened the door and one couple started talking about their present struggles.

We talked "off topic" then for almost an hour. The Bible study is suppose to end at 8:30 but we went well beyond 9.

Now, I came out of there feeling that we had a major breakthrough. However, I've been disappointed before. I have the sense that my co-leader would see the last meeting as a total failure because we didn't stay on topic and we didn't finish the chapter. I think if our pastor had been there looking over our shoulders he would agree . . . it was NOT a good Bible study because people did too much talking.

So time will tell. It will either be a break through, or once again, I will be seen as the trouble maker and the unspiritual guy who got us "away from the Bible."

Thursday, February 25, 2010

One More Rant about Being a Phony - Peeling Back the Over-lays

When I speak of overlays, I can quickly come up with two examples. With each one, Holden would call the participants (including myself) phonies. Solomon would say that it is all smoke and mirrors and chasing after the wind.

I will use myself as the first example. I know that I already talked about this in a previous posting, but it was about my invitation to come to Haiti and help with earthquake relief. I work with a disaster relief organization and I got the call within hours of the quake. I eventually gave up my slot on the initial team to a friend, Eric, who had better skills (he has worked 20 years in trauma medicine and he had just been in Haiti a few months ago). I really thought he was a better team member than me. I had an invitation to join a second team, but I turned that one down too because it was the same week I was going to Minneapolis to see my new (and first) grandson for the very first time.

But, pulling away the over lays and speaking very candidly, it was very tempting to go on the first team. The old Evangelical Mike would have. He would have convinced himself that was what God wanted him to do. But, if I really care for the Haiti people, and only 12 people could be on the team, then Eric would be in a much better position to save a life than I would. If it had been an Arabic speaking country, then I would have gone due to my language and cultural knowledge.

But the reason that going to Haiti was so tempting, and the old Mike would have gone, is for the glory. Even in the very best of situations, being a missionary, or doing relief work is motivated in a large part by the glory. I’ve struggled with jealously too as Eric was interviewed on a national radio program and is a cover story on one of our national medical journals. I wanted to be that hero. I wanted the photos to be of me holding the sick baby.

The old Mike would have gone and then done a speaking tour of local churches. I would show my slides and talk of miracles. How God spared the life of one baby or one man (with a thin veil over the point that it was really me who had save that person). I would look over look the fact (if I really believed that God did this . . . which I don’t) that 250,000 men women and children died horrible deaths. If it came up, I would figure out somehow to blame the victims like Pat Robertson (to get God off the hook). Yeah. . . I know Holden, a pure phony.

Solomon would say that all great works of charity are chasing after the wind. That people do it for glory and when the bands stop playing, they are alone again with their miserable selves. Did you read Mother Teresa’s letters of doubt that were found after her death? Now I want to make it clear that the reason I didn’t go to Haiti wasn’t because I didn’t have the right motives. None of us have ever done a single out of pure motives. Maybe 10% is for altruistic reasons. But it doesn’t matter what the motives are . . . good can come out of bad.

Then, my next example is about church (with a small c). I recently heard two different pastors say that the solution to particular problems (one pastor was talking about the dysfunctional family and I think the other one was talking about being happy) was being very involved with a local church. But I want to remove the overlay of their motives. I’m not saying this as a cruel, cynical church hater. I've gone to church faithfully my entire life. I’m not speaking from the same mind set as Gene Edwards, whose books I used to read and sermons I use to listen to. He was a great house church proponent. I, in my searching, visited one of his house churches in Denver. He hated the organized church. But it didn’t take me long to realize that he was a self promoting, narcissistic man with his own agenda and his house churches were quickly becoming cults. But he said he would love to see every organized church in America burned to the ground. I’m not saying anything like that. All I am saying is that we are all phonies, because of the Fall. We all do things for impure motives. We don’t need to stop doing them. We can’t stop living (which I think is what Holden wanted to do . . . you know, “Throw my dead body in the river” thinking). No, I’m saying us keep going to church. Let’s keep doing humanitarian work but us do it honestly.

Back to the two pastors points about “getting involved in the church.” Maybe a little motive-deconstruction is due.

Denise accuses me of passing judgement on other peoples’s motives and that I should not do that because there is no way for me to know. I agree in part. Yet, I as a fellow-fallen-human, do have some credibility for passing judgement. The reason is that I think we are all made of the same stuff and I often am deconstructing my own motives.

So for the pastors who tell people that the answer to their problems is to be move involved in the local church is the same motive (in a large part) as the owner of a Walmart telling people in the community that the answer to their economic problems is to shop at Walmart, or the president of a particular University tells people that the answer to their life-goal, or education problems is to come to their college. The reason? If everyone left the local church, that pastor would no longer have a career or a reputation. A successful church also reflects very personally on the pastor’s own self-esteem. Now every single pastor wraps this call to come to church in obscure scriptures trying to turn it into a new command, “Thou shalt get in involved with the local church programs or God will be really disappointed in you.” I think they call that spiritual manipulation.

If you really boil it down, I think that the motive why most people go to church is for penitence. We go to; a.) please our co-church goers (making them think we are decent people), b.) to make ourselves think that we are more pleasing God. A secondary motive is to socialize with our friends and to be part of a social network in the same spirit as someone belonging to the Kiwanis or Rotary clubs. These are not evil motives. But they are honest motives. Wouldn’t it be great to go to church because the community there encourages us and we support each other there? I know that does happen, rarely, in some churches. It would be fine to go and to learn more about scripture, but not in the context of a “service” that suppose to please God as an act of penitence. And who came up with the idea that if you are not “learning” something new every Sunday that you are not in touch with God. When you first become a Christian, there is lots to learn. But when you’ve been a Christian for decades, I think it is crazy to expect to hear a lecture Sunday after Sunday and you suppose to take home something new each time.

I missed church completely last Sunday, which the once or twice I will do so this year. I had planned on going to the Presbyterian Church’s early service. However, Denise has a cold and coughed a good part of the night, keeping me awake. Then she got up at 6 AM to go to work. I finally fell asleep after she left for work and I did not wake up until 9:30 when Ramsey was yelling at me, “Aren’t you going to church?”

So I did the real Sabbath thing of resting. I sat in the hot tub and read. Then I went out for coffee. It was a wonderful restful day and far more Biblical than how I spend most Sundays. However, despite my deep views about church etc., I felt very guilty being home. “Going to church” has been embedded into my brain from my Bible-belt youth.

I know this is getting long but I have not posted in a while. There is one more example where I would like to peel back the overylays and deconstruct some motives when it comes to church.

When I was involved with the Navigators as an under graduate there was a gradual moving away from the local church (for a while). The reason was, we realized that we were doing a lot more learning and encouraging each other in our Navigator group than what was happening at the local church.

A few Navigator staff people in our area started to discourage people from getting involved with the local church because the local church seem to only be a distraction (asking people to give to pave the parking lot, come several nights a week to sing in the choir and etc.).

But then one day a team came out from Nav headquarters and met with the regional staff. The order from headquarters is for all staff to get very involved with the local church (becoming elders, deacons and etc.). I could share with you pages of spiritual “reasons” given by those staff. But (and I remember this conversation well) the true, honest reason whispered to me . . . it was money. The headquarters were fearful that if they alienated local churches (and there were some pastors writing negative things about the Navigators at the time because they were pulling back from the local church) that a lot, and hell of a lot, of money would dry up. The Navs figured that a huge proportion of their donor income came from churches (either directly or from members). The Navs then, in response, created a department just for connecting with the local church. They gave spiritual reasons for those connections “God has always worked through the local church and we want to be part of what God is doing.” But the real reason was $$$$$$.

If you don’t know me, you will think I’m being harsh at the Navigators. I am not . . . at least not selectively. I, like Holden or maybe Solomon, am saying that this type of fake motives is the norm for all of us and no Christian or Christian group is exempt. This is how we function in life, including our Christian endeavors. I’m not saying that those who have imperfect motives are the bad guys and I’m a good guy. Good heavens no! I’m saying we are all bad guys (due to the Fall) but we are all completely forgiven. I’m also not saying, like Holden, that it is all worthless and that everyone is a sonofabitch. No. I’m just saying that we should attempt to live more honestly. Let’s go to church Sunday morning but us be honest about why we are going. Let’s go to earthquake areas but don’t pretend that it is all spiritual.

I had a good friend who died last year. His son, who is about 19, has left the church. His mom said that her son said that he left the church because he just “wanted to know the truth and he was tired of being lied to.” She rolled her eyes when she told me. But I have deep respect for him. I know exactly what he is saying. He has seen beneath the overlays. He knows that much of what we do is pretend. The real God loves truth. That’s why I believe that we keep on pretending that people will continue leaving and getting hurt.

Friday, February 19, 2010

More Strange Words from Solomon

Ecclesiastes Chap1

18 Much learning earns you much trouble.
The more you know, the more you hurt.

(I understand completely what he means by that. I didn't at one time, but I sure do now.)

Ecclesiastes Chap 2

17 I hate life. As far as I can see, what happens on earth is a bad business. It's smoke—and spitting into the wind.

Ecclesiastes Chap 3

16-18 I took another good look at what's going on: The very place of judgment— corrupt! The place of righteousness—corrupt! I said to myself, "God will judge righteous and wicked." There's a right time for every thing, every deed—and there's no getting around it. I said to myself regarding the human race, "God's testing the lot of us, showing us up as nothing but animals."

19-22 Humans and animals come to the same end—humans die, animals die. We all breathe the same air. So there's really no advantage in being human. None. Everything's smoke. We all end up in the same place—we all came from dust, we all end up as dust. Nobody knows for sure that the human spirit rises to heaven or that the animal spirit sinks into the earth. So I made up my mind that there's nothing better for us men and women than to have a good time in whatever we do—that's our lot. Who knows if there's anything else to life?

(How do you explain this passage in a sermon?)

More on Solomon and Holden

I remember this old set of encyclopedias that we had when I was a kid. My favorite part were these two-page maps with clear plastic over-lays. On one over-lay would be the cities of that country in the1800s and the next over-lay would be fifty years later and etc.

I see that we do the same thing when we approach life. I believe that we have the raw motives of what we do, and those motives are not that attractive within the Christian ( or even secular) paradigm so we create these more glamorous over-lays narratives that pretend to give us a more noble purpose.

This is the way in which I see Holden and Solomon as being on the same page. They each peel back the over-lays and look at life in a raw light. The major difference, of course, is that Holden reaches a point of despair. He has no hope unless it is some mythical grasping of the golden ring or the catcher, whoever he may be, will grab him as he races through the rye field towards the edge of the cliff. Solomon on the other hand, sitting in the bar or coffee shop, would sake his head continuously with Holden in agreement. “You’re right Mr. Caulfied. Life sucks. It is all pretend. Bad things happen to good people and vice-versa. Fame, money, looks . . . everything is worthless. But Holden, the hope is, God is there and that does make a difference. How it makes a difference, even I’m not sure and I’m the smartest man who has ever lived . . . that’s why I have a Starbucks Gold Card.”

I have a friend, Dave, who is Jewish and in the publishing business (journals) in NYC. He always says to me (and we’ve worked together on several projects) that all human behavior can be boiled down to money.

I don’t fully agree with him. In my opinion, all human behavior can be boiled down to 1) biological desires and 2) psychological desires . . . the main psychological desire being to have personal value.

So, let’s take an oblivious example, Tiger Woods. The biological desire influencing the mistakes he made are clear. However, when you talk about sexual addition, it goes beyond biological desires into the desire to feel value.

BTW: I think Tiger did an excellent speech today. I have no idea if he is sincere but he said the exact things he should have. I would say that I have a much better feeling about his sincerity than that of Ted Haggard.

But before I leave this topic, and I know I’ve talked about this topic ad nauseam, but I want to take this further of how Holden and Solomon would look at our lives today.