A Film for a Change

It has been a few weeks since I watched this film and wanted to reflect on it then but couldn’t for many reasons which are likely just excuses. Moving on.

Vittoria De Sica’s Umberto D is part of the Criterion Collection, which includes other such powerful directors as Ingmar Bergman. The film is in Italian with subtitles and deals with the deconstruction of the pride and life of a man named Umberto D and his dog, Flike. What is striking about this film are some of the cinematographic moments, frames and lighting, as well as the narrative that unfolds. I think perhaps now in this economy, in this climate of Kingdom thinking, the movements of the film may resonate tremendously within the Western culture. I would really love to hear the reflection of others who have watched this, and what you make of the fluid moral and ethical storyline. If you need an intro to the Criterion Collection, I would still recommend “The Seventh Seal” by Bergman, but this might be a fitting intro as well.

The reason anyone should watch this is the unbelievable perspective it gives toward how industrialization and post-war economies are capable of completely annihilating human life, until it takes unlikely saviors to pull people back from total collapse.

listening: radiohead “2+2=4″

Paradox

How is it that from the teachings and example of Jesus people can establish this kind of lifestyle?

Arkansas seizes 21 children from evangelists

Father in the heavens, holy, separate, and unique is your name.
May your reign come, and your will be done here like it is where you dwell.
Give us today what we need to survive–nothing more,
and forgive us our selfish indiscretions and ignorance, as we do the same to others.
Let us not walk close to the precipice of self-involvement, and rescue us from the oppression and the oppressor.

Provocative Reading

Reading Lee Camp’s Mere Discipleship for review in an upcoming edition of the Stone-Campbell Journal, and I am finding it to be great reading. Camp has a fairly keen and direct sense about what discipleship (which is basically what some people call spiritual formation and vice versa) “is” and what it “is not” and the limiting factors upon discipleship from a Western perspective. Strange that I would find any resonance. It is an accessible book as well, this being the second edition as well as a glossary and study guide section that will help lead readers through certain difficult theological, historical, and hermeneutical struggles that might come up.

As I read this morning, this passage jumped off the page at me as it elucidated something that I had been thinking on at length a few years ago as well as some current challenges that have arisen through conversations and even more so the most recent election experience and it’s resulting thoughts and fallout. Here’s the quote in its entirety:

“Shaped by (the nationalistic mold), conformed to the ways of our self-serving world, Christians respond defensively to the notion that the church should challenge the judgments of the nation-state. Ironically, of course, it is not pacifism alone that would require Christians to question the nation-state. The just-war tradition itself requires that the Christian church challenge and weight the judgments of the authorities that call Christians to arms. Yet little to nothing is done to inclucate such moral responsibility. Instead, reflexive nationalism rears its thoughtless head: ‘if you don’t love it, leave it!’

This is the great irony of American Christianity: exalting the nation that affords us ‘freedom of religion,’ we set aside the way of Christ in order to preserve the religion we supposedly are free to practice. We kill our alleged enemies in order to ‘worship’ the God who teaches us to love our enemies.”
(140)

A stinging critique of the reciprocity that takes place when national interests and the Kingdom of God are swirled together in an unholy and uncritical mix. I wondered what your thoughts on this quote would be. By the by, it’s worth the price of the book ($18.99, Brazos Press) just to engage some of his practical illustrations, one of which precedes the second half of this quote. From your vantage point: is it paradoxical this contemporary relationship between America and Christianity? Is there even a parallel between the Biblical world’s systems of power and authority that matches the applications made by some of the New Testament to our contemporary social and cultural involvement in the West?

Who do you love?: George Thorogood’s Theological Q

Okay, so that was a pretty cheap title. I remember the slide-guitar master’s “Who do you love?” and just though it fit this post

A friend had this as the link on his Gmail profile: Church Security

My question from this is not all that complicated to ask, but I think it takes looking beyond a well-entrenched social belief system to answer. “How do we love our enemies as Jesus asked when we are so paranoid that we may come in contact with enemies?” Do we just ignore this teaching as culturally-bound and move on? “Oh Jesus never dealt with TERRORISTS. That’s totally different.” Who is your enemy? The parable of the Good Samaritan seems to say “Your neighbor is the person who used to be your enemy, and now you must love your neighbor (who used to be your enemy) as much as yourself.” When we have armed guards at worship, are we discerning enemies as neighbors and doing to them what we would want done to ourselves?

I know the “what if it was your wife/child and they were in danger, what would you do?” question is probably part of the response here, but I don’t think it’s that easy. We too easily side with protectionism, silos, and fences when the radical call of Jesus is to love those who may harm us and forgive those who will probably commit the same offense again and again. Are we forgiven any less?

Just some thoughts for a Wednesday.

Late-comer and a note

Well this post will be far less agitated and vitriolic than yesterday’s, and though they were real emotions I have found myself leveling out–shalom-ing if you will–over the whole thing. “Your will be done…”

Although I will say I’m tired of seeing Romans 13 popping up everywhere, outside of its context starting in 12:14, used as a way to placate angry mobs by pointing again to a sovereign God. Again, he was sovereign while Bush was in office, folks. But today is a different day…

Reading Rodney Clapp’s Tortured Wonders: Christian Spirituality for People, Not Angels and I am continuing to unearth more writers and thinkers who are beginning to see the core of community as essential to whatever we might call “Christian spirituality.” Clapp admits at the beginning that he is uncomfortable with the vagueness of the word “spirituality” and claims that people really use it to describe habits and beliefs that there are already far more loaded, concrete terms for. However, here is the gem so far (okay, 20 pages so far but still…)

“Christian spirituality is the whole person’s participation and formation in the church-Christ’s body, the Spirit’s public–which exists to entice and call the world back to its Creator, its true purpose, and its only real hope.” (18)

I would place this on par with R. Mulholland’s definition as it rounds out the necessity of the “whole person” and the “community” in the formation of Christian spirituality. He has a chapter on the “necessity of the body” in Christian spirituality, which is encouraging to me because of the history of quasi-Gnostic belief in Christian soteriology and eschatology (“Get out of this old body, off this old rock–this is Jesus’ message) that is still really heavy in contemporary churches. Clapp gives us a sense of mission again, of formation in service of mission and not an end unto itself.

And that is the key to diffusing the “psycho-spirituality” (thanks Doug) that has been a huge part of discipleship–we’re being formed to do, not formed for its own sake. We’re being formed not only to “do” in an individual sense, but to “DO/BE” in a catholic sense–a church universal sense that is radically more powerful and pervasive than government-sponsored attempts at peace, healing, reconciliation, life. Hope to offer some more insights from Clapp as I go.

I received my reading list for my next doctoral class yesterday, and I will be reviewing a book for a journal that is due in December. Blogging may suffer.

listening: “snow day” Matt Pond PA

My Resignation from Maggie’s Farm

I voted yesterday, on an absurdly warm fall day on the prairie. I have an election hangover today, after the wall-to-wall coverage, and also from the absence of political ads and news tickers constantly bombarding me from RSS feeds, etc.

It was my 2^nd presidential election vote. Likely it will be my last.

I woke up this morning and began to read the reaction from friends—people I respect, people who are intelligent and capable folks, and many of them are saying things like this:

“we need to pray EVEN HARDER today—pray for our country”
“God help us—we are an abomination”
“Prayer Warriors stand guard!”
“This is the same as the oppression in Jezebel’s time”
“We need to safeguard our Christian values”

I am baffled to hear this kind of sentiment. First of all, why is NOW the moment we need to begin to pray in desperation?

Because before Obama we loved our enemies, forgived as we have been forgiven, gave what we had to those in need, considered others better than ourselves, right? Maybe I’m with Sarah Palin—is this the real Bush doctrine?

Second, since Obama is president is it only now that we are going to become a nation in rebellion to God FOR THE FIRST TIME? Now that he is president, are we going to BEGIN alienating and ignoring the poor and marginalized? With Obama, will we now START to practice trade that forces the greater part of 3^rd world countries into abject poverty and thus creates space for political and religious extremist group to recruit them for terrorist acts, and makes desperate prostitution that allows HIV and sex slavery to be commonplace? Now that Obama is at the helm, will we REALLY become the “nation of infanticide” that aborts at will with no real thought to human life, circumstances, etc? Correct me if I’m wrong, but did the abortion issue change at all in the last 8 years under a pro-life president?

And finally, if John McCain had won would there be people dancing “undignified” like David before the ark because the time would finally have come that God returned to the White House and America repented and became a Christian nation?

We are a nation built on capitalism, which functions best when some people have a lot and some people have nothing and those with a lot are encouraged to hold on to their wealth and invest it in becoming wealthier. That’s reality. Our economy works best when we are buying things we don’t need with credit we can never repay. We’ve been doing that since well before this president and will continue to do it well after. The poor have always been central to God’s heart, but have been barely noticeable to the government of the US, regardless of the affiliation or position of the commander in chief.

I have learned a lesson the hard way, something I knew in part but now see in full: the followers of Jesus cannot place their hopes and apocalyptic leanings on the man who wins a democratic election in the United States of America. If so, we’ve revealed our true allegiances and shown Caesar to be the object of our hope.

Barack Obama will not die and rise again. No he can’t.
John McCain will not subject all other powers to God. That’s the real straight talk.

Until Christians in our nation realize that following Jesus is not contingent on our political leaders. Christianity does not disappear and faith is not diminished absent a governing party that “supports” our ideals (the whole “love your enemies” thing seems difficult in a time of war, no?).

Just ask Christians in Eastern Europe, China, etc.

I’m officially resigning from Maggie’s farm. Consider this my 4-year notice.

 

spiritual formation in exile

There has been enough written on the state of Christianity/religion/etc. that I don’t feel I need to spend time working through it. However, when Walter Brueggemann talks about the church today being “in exile” and having lost the “good old days” I can’t help but concur. He talks about the need to shift into mourning those days and looking towards living with destabilization in the present.

So, those of you who read this blog know where I might be headed from there: how do you do spiritual formation or discipleship in the exilic context of American Christianity? I thought I might offer a few examples:

1.       S.F. becomes less about internalized “habits” and more about community-oriented lifestyle. I am convinced that for spiritual formation to be a Biblically and socially valid expression of our transformation in Christ it must create a community of people who act and live a certain way, rather than just isolated individuals in churches or communities. Post-Exile for Israel was about getting everyone back “home” again (cp. the miracles of Jesus in Mark often end with the mandate for the person healed to “go home”) whatever that might mean. Today’s SF must lead to communities developing new habits and disciplines (both individual and corporate) that ultimately serve to get the nation “home”, which would mean seeing the Kingdom come “here as it is in Heaven.” (Mt. 6)

 

2.       Exile leads to a break from the mandate to be culturally entrenched and relevant. Don’t get me wrong, there must be cultural participation in order for the full effect of the Kingdom to be revealed. But by and large, practicing the disciplines of spiritual formation in exile gives us the freedom to “speak over and against” as well as “within” the culture at large. Perhaps abstaining from certain cultural practices can become a form of spiritual discipline? If we were to be honest, spiritual disciplines have at their core the need to a) change a person’s values and priorities as well as b) speak of the God to whom loyalty and allegiance is truly owed. We therefore can choose, for example, to not vote in the upcoming presidential election if we enunciate the fact that it is because of our state of exile and loyalty to an alternative Kingdom even within this country. Or, we could embody the “negotiation” principle that took place even within the post-exilic Israelites and see our way clear to vote for the purpose of putting the empire on notice that the Kingdom is “already” in influence within its borders. Again, the communal aspect is important here because to act alone on this particular issue may only lead to self-congratulation which is the hallmark of modernist, me-centered spiritual formation.

3.       S.F. in exile will lead us deeper into the character and likeness of the “leader of the Jubilee”, Jesus Christ. I constantly resonate with Robert Mulholland that spiritual formation is pointed towards “others” at all times. Just as the character and action of the “logos” was pointed toward others, spiritual formation in exile will alert us to the practices and habits we are undertaking that are not only inconsistent with Christ but also leading us into a deeper state of indebtedness to the state and its operations as a modern-day Babylon. In turn, it will lead to greater dependence on the world’s true King and less reliance on the services, benefits, and entitlements of our contemporary society. Jesus was entitled to turn His charge around in front of Pilate, and refused to do so. Paul used his entitlement as a Roman citizen to avoid prison, but only for a while and eventually the plea to Caesar ended up placing him deeper into the counter-imperial movement (cp. Philippians, just about any verse)

These are incomplete thoughts, but I found Brueggemann’s insight to be worth relaying. Also, I found myself reflecting on the conflict in John 6 over Jesus’ statements on bread and body. Given that John’s audience would have been dealing with Pharisaical persecution as well as Roman persecution, the moment when Jesus compares himself to the account of the manna in Exodus is profound. I believe He is announcing the equivalency of His movement with the movement of the Israelites from Egypt, and consequently the movement of Judah out of Babylonian exile. So, in a sense, the community of the exile in Christ must be centered at all times on the meal of Jesus and the open table that it represents, taking the nod from the legal passages in Exodus-Deuteronomy about welcoming the foreigners and aliens to the community and giving them legal activities to show their adopted citizenship.

Involved post. I go to see what Bailey is doing in the living room and switch the iPod to the Avett Brothers. Thanks Tom Joad. “If I get murdered in the city/don’t go avenging my name”

the song remains the same….

at the risk of sounding self-involved, I’ve been too busy lately to think straight. in the last week I’ve been in or through 7 different states (including Illinois) slept in 3 different beds (either by myself or with my wife, scoffers!) and dealt with teaching, attending a wedding, and a family funeral.

I spent time with new friends, old friends, and family. I tried to listen as much as possible, which is the key to any growth. I tried to maintain my energy level and intensity in conversations and exchanges, even with people who are way beyond the borders of my intelligence and experience.

I watched my wife drive away yesterday, to board a plan to Pittsburgh for her grandmother’s funeral. I realized that I would be a single dad for about 4 days and both relished and got a bit nervous over the thought. I agreed to fill in for my good friend, Phil the Presbyterian, and lead his Wed. night service while he’s gone.

I finished Berry’s “That Distant Land” and have moved on to try and finish Brueggemann’s preaching book (see former posts) before reading Cormac McCarthy’s “All the Pretty Horses”.

And then last night I watched debate #2. And then I watched the spin on FOX, NBC, ABC, and a bit on PBS. What I was most fascinated by was Tavis Smiley. He asked his panel a question last night, namely that both candidates seem terrified to say the word “poverty”. They all agreed and said it was because the working/truly poor are not the base candidates want to reach.

It was at this point I realized that the world may never change. If the poor are no longer a part of the social and political equation we are pretty close to becoming a stench in the nostrils of God. Our leaders or potential leaders can’t begin to even SAY the word poverty much less deal with and connect with those who are in the midst of it. In all of my activity this week, including the debate, what I’ve realized is that even though social justice is a far more visible and important conversation piece, the silos and ghettos that separate have’s and have not’s are still in tact.

My prayer is that somehow, somewhere, the scales may fall from our eyes and the truth might blaze out triumphantly in all of our effort and work–the poor are among us, and we are accountable through the Gospel for what happens to them. We are accountable as a nation and as a subculture that follows Christ. Accountable. Do we really remember what that means?

What if the entire country boycotted the election, by the way? Is it scarier to think of a failed democratic process or that someone would be put in power by the electoral college regardless of whether we voted or not?

Thinking out loud–your thoughts?

reading this morning

this week has been a scattered mess, with Wednesday dedicated to cleaning out our church basement after a “not entirely unexpected” sump pump failure. I made what seems to be a half-way decent attempt to save the 3 month old nursery carpet, but we shall see. the scattering has taken me out of my normal rhythm of reflection, but today I returned and utilized a book I found in our church’s “library”. the book is John Baillie’s A Diary of Private Prayer. Dr. Baillie (1949) gathered insights on prayer from several different sources, but the reading from today struck me and so I thought I would share it with you.

…let me not, when this morning prayer is said, think of my worship ended and spend the day in forgetfulness of Thee. Rather from these moments of quietness let light go forth, and joy, and power, that will remain with me through all the hours of the day;
Keeping me chaste in thought;
Keepiming me temperate and truthful in speech;
Keeping me faithful and diligent in my work;
Keeping me humble in my estimation of myself;
Keeping me honourable and generous in my dealings with others;
Keeping me loyal to every hallowed memory of the past;
Keeing me mindful of my eternal destiny as a child of Thine. (p. 9)

As I have not been terribly ‘community-disposed’ this week due to some challenges, I think this was a refreshing prayer because of the potential for transformation in a community that would live this prayer out in interaction with each other and with the issues of contemporary culture and society. Again, this is a place where spiritual formation does not have to be a hyper-individualized, Western modernist psycho-spiritual (thanks Doug) pep rally. It can indeed be the catalyst for the Kingdom to come, “here as it is where You are.”

listening: Norah Jones
reading: “That Distant Land” (still), Wendell Berry

Peoples is peoples

Reading from my old friend, Wendell Berry, these days. The collection of short stories, chronologically ordered around his other novels, called That Distant Land, is as good as anything else I’ve read of his and I’m only halfway through.

I (as well as others) have commented on Berry’s use of community as a main theme. Every story centers around a geographical place in time, spacing itself from the greater world while at the same time being influenced by the greater world outside of Port William, Hargrove, etc. The first crisis moment of Hannah Coulter is actually a good example of this.

However, what is sometimes ignored is the next level of micro-story, which are the people and personalities themselves. Yes, community is central but Berry is careful to make sure his people are not just drones, mindlessly wandering into the single file line of community. In the pendulum swing that I’ve been on, and even advocated, I’m afraid we’ve adopted a community-only stance (which is similar to Old Testament thought) instead of an individuals-in-community stance (which seems to be the ethics/ecclesiology of the New Testament) in our thinking and talking about the church.

I’m thinking specifically about the fact that Christ called individuals in His role and activity as the Savior of the world. Is it possible that revolution does not begin with getting community right, but becoming an individual disposed to community living out the values of discipleship? Or, in Berry terms, is someone like Nathan Coulter who he is because he lives in Port William or does Port William take its cue from its residents?

Living in a rural community, I have to say it’s the individuals that give the community its life and character, and only in percentages is it the community itself that creates the individuals. Could it be that the revolution and renovation of the church in America today is not going to come through the abandonment of appealing to individual minds and hearts, but through that appeal and to the greater world waiting?

listening: Ray Lamontagne, “Hold you in my arms”