David Weinberger lists several things that indicated how Joe Trippi had several "Clues" about how to use the Web with politics.
See Loose Democracy
Below , in my "Continue Reading..." secton for this post, I have copied the list DW gave, with the intention "filling in" some of the insights I believe can be culled by the Church if it is to catch on to some of the lessons of grassroots camapigns.
From a comment ( by a fellow named Hank Prohm) on David Weinberger's article, Loose Democracy on Corante:
I think all of the folks on the Internet have to ask this question:
Are we willing to let the Dean candidacy die because a "hot" candidate from the "hot" medium of the Internet is having trouble translating to the "cool" medium of the networks.
Real good point. Hank goes on to point out that Iowa may not have been a good test of "internet campaigning" (at least this was my gist), and he suggested doing some research on the siginificance of the online community by state.
These questions also cause me to reflect on how the Internet and the online community is being handled (or NOT handled, or MIS-handled) by the Church.
Diane Sawyer has an article, The "Dean Scream" -- The Version of Reality You Didn't See.. or Hear on TV
I have copied the article to the "Read More" section below. It is absolutely chilling how much damage the networks can do. I especially like the one CNN exec who said " "We've all been wrestling with this. If we had it to do over again, we'd probably pull ourselves back."
-- Princell Hair, General Manager - CNN
Nice that you "wrestle with it", and then continue to pull shit like this. It's disgraceful that Dean's chances will probably be destroyed by this.
I was not "bothered"by it BEFORE I knew about the crowd-noise-filtering micrphone. To me, it is something we see every day, and to lay this on Dean is absolutely disgraceful. Good job, media people. I'd like to see you people have to face some of your own medicine, scrutiny, and judgment. I remember a Twiglight Zone Movie segment where a bigot got placed into several historical contexts where HE was the oppressed (ie. a Jew in Nazi Germany, etc.). Maybe media people should have to live a while i nthe scrutiny of their own "slants" and "reporting", and see how they fare.
the "secrret document" I mentioned earlier, via The Ashville Global Report
‘Pax Americana’
A secret document, uncovered by the British Sunday Herald, calling for a “global Pax Americana” presents motivations radically different for US involvement in Iraq, and around the world, than the Bush administration’s oft stated concern for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.
The document, which the Herald calls a “blueprint for US global domination” reveals Bush and his cabinet had plans to attack Iraq and secure a “regime change” even before Bush had taken office in Jan. 2001.
The document is titled “Rebuilding Americas Defences” and was drawn up in Sept. of 2000 by the neo-conservative think tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC) for Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, Bush’s brother Jeb, and Cheney’s chief of staff, Lewis Libby.
When I first heard of this docuement last year, the link given was a us government site (so it wasn't such a secret, until it became a topic of conversation among bloggers, because when I tried to visit the link when I read about it, the page was no longer available.
Kandent says, in response , via Trackback, to my "Bush dodges the real question":
There has been quite a bit of misleading going on, but it is not at all clear that the Bush administration knew that there weren’t any WMDs and told the public otherwise. There are more reasonable theories that some CIA informants lied, and the Bush administration (and many other governments) wrongly believed the bad reports.
My belief is that the Bush administration was out to "manufacture" anything they could. In this case, the method was "rush in" before anything defintitive could come out becuase it was taking too long. It was widely known that the Bush administartion had plans from the beginning (at their election) to move in on Iraq. Sept. 11 simply gave them the opening they needed.
My stance on these matters is that war is a last option. Problem is, the "last option" is too often "rushed" into deployment. Secondly, you don't proceed with certain destruction, mayhem, and death on the basis of "THEORY". The opinion that Saddam was "about to" use weapons of mass destruction is a slippery, dangerous slope. In fact, what kind of world would the US be facing if other countries applied the same logic and "pre-emptively" took action against us? They certainly have evidence that we are apt to "strike" at any moment....and so their "pre-emptive" strategy is put into motion on the basis of our own tendency to do the same.
I want to go look up the articles that came out back at the start of the Iraq thing that identify the Bush administartion's "Pax Americana" type document where they outlined their goals of gaining control of Iraq and the region. In light of these types of "intentions", and their stated rationales, I WOULD INDEED dub this adminstraton's actions and deceptions SINISTER.
Interesting how Bush gives his defense to STILL NO WMDs. He keeps coming back to the "Saddam is BAD" defense. Well, we all know that. He then uses the pre-emptive strike defense, which will not fly with most people except the most hard-core military. He completely refuses to answer how the JUSTIFICATIONS he gave are totally bankrupt. He lied. They used deception to rush us into something, riding the coat tails of 9-11.
And still, the religious right holds up Bush as a "moral example". It sickens me.
In my dotText blog, I concur wholeheartedly with Jim Wallis' observations about how the Dems are blowing it with their religious "squeemishness".
I got an email notification from Ethics Daily yesterday, announcing a new curriculum available from Acadia.
The questions it poses signify how it has become neccessary, as I was bemonaing this past weekend, to "protect" and "defend" the meaning of Baptist, a nd to provide an apologetic to combat the damaging and embarassing shambles made of the Southern Baptist name by the presently "in power". I say that in quotes becuase that's basically what this is about: POWER. It's not theology, although this is what they would have you believe. The proof of this is how they also blacklist people who agree with the theological points, but who do NOT approve of "theological witch hunts" and the "trumped up theological heresy" charges cobbled together by deceit, misrepresentation, and malice.
The questions posed by the email ad:
Do real Baptists . . .
preach authority, or practice autonomy? dictate creeds, or encourage soul competency? indoctrinate, or educate? exclude, or include? separate, or cooperate?
Being Baptist means moving forward to engage proactively and productively with our culture and throughout the world, including working for unity within the larger Christian community.
Robert comments via Trackback from here on my piece about Churches Bungling Blogging.
I am going to return to this and respond to Robert, who hasmany interesting points to make, but I am within minutes of getting a phone call interview for a job, so , as the governor of California says: "I'll be back".
Doc talks about how Dean's "rant" on Monday night has everybody talking about how "unpolitician-like" he sounded. Doc recognizes that yes, this was not a positive thing in mthe minds of many. He recognizes he's not the best looking or best sounding candidate (speech and mannerisms) , but that this is not , after all, what really helps us. (It actually hinders us from actually seeing and immersing ourselves in , what is , after all , the whole point of politics: The Conversation. But our politics today is not about conversation, sadly. It's about posturing, and sound bites. It bristles me to hear the media, from both left and right, talk about Dean's comments on his faith. Both sides seem clueless. I for one, didn't respond too positively to the "portions" I heard where Dean responded to those questions. But I also wonder how well I'd do. I would certainly say that MY FAITH has EVERYTHING to do with my decisions on what is POLITICALLY the right thing to do. I also know that I would rush to say that "Faith-based Political strategy" is certainly not well-represented these days. The ones we hear about are the ones I fear most: the right-wing Theocracy seekers. Their idea is to impose a right-wing "Biblical" theocracy. The Southern Baptist's ransacking of their own denomination and their own missionaries is the best evidence of what their "Kingdom of Righteousness" represents.
Jimmy Carter stands as the lone representative of a "moral and decent man" in the presidency that I have seen in my lifetime (since I was old enought to know know what a president was). But it seems that one also has to "play the system" and "grease the right wheels" in order to "make it through". He is, therefore as a result of his inabilty/unwillingness to do so, widely considered to have been one of the most ineffective presidents. But when I see his "post presidency" life, one that sees him working with Habitat for Humanity and working for peace in times when a mediator is needed, I become more convinced that it's just those "moral people" like that who have the smallest chances of succeeding (as the world sees "success") in politics
Jim Wallis is the best one I know to speak intelligently. Whenever he's on TV, it seems, some conservative, obnoxious pundit is put oppostite him who won't even let him finish a sentence (I'm rememebering an incident during the Gulf War).
As I listened to and watched PBS Monday night ("Citizen King"), and heard MLK's words, I was reminded of how many of his supporters gave hinm a hard time for coming out against Vietnam, and said to him "Stick to Civil Rights". To that King replied:
"I've worked too lonng and too hard to fight against segregation to end up segregating my MORAL concerns. I'm NOT going to do that"
and "Injustice ANYWHERE is a threat to justice EVERYWHERE".
King recognized that there's a problem with violence. It begets violence. It begets terrorism, and we keep fighting fire with more fire. Instead of attacking the roots of the problem, we attack the causes, and create more terrorists. 5 and 10 years from now, when some of the children of Afganistan and Iraq are older and begin forming and releasing and expressing their attitudes, what is their image of the US? We hear very little talk about that; it is not a part of our "theories" of why WE are right. Violence begets violence. And people keep on NOT GETTING IT.
People say "They only understand violence". No, we understand the same thing. WE ONLY understand violence. It's always our fallback, always rushing in to STOP all of the talk and "TAKE ACTION'. It's revealing to see that when we say "TAKE ACTION" we always mean war. Violence. ACTION. King taught otherwise. Jesus taught otherwise. Gandhi said :
"I'm not advocating 'passive' anything. Non-violent DIRECT ACTION".
Saw this link to a post via Scripting News
It would appear that a thoughtful voter could easily write off Howard Dean as a non-entity after spending 30 minutes at his Web site. And perhaps this process can be repeated for the other candidates. Are there any Dean supporters who would care to use the comments section to note brilliant ideas from the Howard Dean campaign that I've overlooked? And would one have been more likely to discover these ideas watching Dean on TV rather than looking at his Web site?
If Dean is "just like the other candidates, then I guess he's NOT a "non-entity" either. He's right there in the mix.
And no, watching him on television is IN NO WAY going to give a voter a better idea about the Dean campaign, because, the reason his campaign is different is that one can meet others there. You cannot get a sense for the things his supporters rtalk about and why THEY like him from what Dean tidbits and soundbites are shown. That is the "Old media" wing of the campaign. This poster should know better, being a Weblogger and all. Other candidates don't even know how to talk about their "Web" campaigns. That just have someone do it for them, and have other people talk about it for them. I haven't heard ONE WORD from Bush's mouth about his "philosophy/startegy" of Online Communty. My guess is that he is "Clueless".
The previous post brought me some further reflection:
All of the "conservative" arguments I hear for the "rightness" of the Iraq offensive are tactical and calculating, all based on arguments like: "IF we didn't do that, then THEY WOULD do that", and WE would losr fewer soldiers by doing thus. All of it is based on the adavantages that we can create for US. The conservative arguments are so often totally and utterly SELFISH. We take action based on THEORIES of how this gives us an advantage, and the results we inflict are far from theory. We bomb, people die. for SURE. All based on what we THINK MIGHT happen. I find this morally reprehensible. And the conservatives say "That's war".
Saw this on WIRED news this morning. Being on WIRED, I thought there might be something OTHER than pure conservative blindness from the other side, but
I fail to see it.
The second major thrust of Left leaning forums is sheer hatred of the President. That's not unique. Conservative talk shows, columnists and forums flamed against Clinton. Clinton was a lightening rod, and anti-Clinton ranting elevated many a media career. But while conservative forums and some media stars rode the anti-Clinton wave, thoughtful and thought provoking conservative commentators were building the case against his Left leaning policies.
After 9-1-1, Republicans and conservatives led the battle against terrorists, boldly and active. The Left was unprepared. In fact, action led policy. The President's preemptive attack policy was enacted. Conservative theorists and media leaders filled in the intellectual details. The gap empowered the Left's hatred for the President and conservatives. The Florida vote count laid the groundwork for their hatred. Left wing forums are vents for their anti-war hatred, and frustration. The more extreme and more passionate their contempt, the more isolated they become. And the more their forums become an unchanging monologue.
The assumption here, and the accompanying automatic dismissal of "anti-war" as pure politics, is the moral failing of the conservative argument. The "anti-war" people I know and respect are so becuase of morality, not politics. They are so becuase they actually oppose many of the Bush administration's moves because they were not only bad for OTHER people (this is a constant glaring absence from so many conservative arguments: they assume a USA-centric morality), but they were carried out in a deceitful and manipulative manner (the former reasons being much stronger than the latter).
I've expressed it in so many ways. The Churches are largely clueless about the nature of the Web. They are SOOOO missing the boat on the "conversation". Is it REALLY the case that "two or three gathered" is NOT at all a possibility on the Web in the sense that God might be there "among them"? It's not face-to-face, but although its different and new, it certainly "channels" certain personal elements, and even introduces new, and potentially powerful and benefical elements. We are, in a large sense, without Biblical precedent on this one. There was nothing like the Web in the days of the Biblical writers. We're kind of on our own, armed only with a new vision of what can be brought by the Church, to the web, and what needs to be communicated, and what kind of communication is and can be taking place there.
I must admit, that since I knew very little about a lot of the "best sellers" out there regarding the Church, I tended to lump them all together under the category of "Super Church" and "Mega Church" and the usual "semi-Pentocostal" feel of the Contemporary Worship services and choruses on video monitors flanking huge auditoriums. I have seen a lot of this work its way into some of the large mainline denominations, and very large , media rich productions are the fruits of this work. I had heard a lot about "Purpose Driven Life" and "PUrpose Driven Church" and "A New Kind of Christian" and "Postmodern Church"...most of the latter from Weblogs I found by searching on Weblogs and Christian and Church.
Having met Brian McLaren, engaged in disuccions with him, and read one of his books, I have recognized how many areas there are where our interests and concerns intersect. Much of that comes, I think, in the "Emergent" views I have been developing all along (before I knew of the "Emergence" theories and studies), by virtue of my being so immersed in the communicative power of the Web. I found out that much of what I felt about how the Church need to recognize the urgency of helping the People of God to "tell the story" was echoed in "The Cluetrain Manifesto". The "conversation" is alrteady happening, the Cluetrain authors affirm. So it is with the "People of God" and The Church. The movements keep on happening; and the Church , in many contexts and flavors, misses out because they are not into "opening the channels that host such conversation".
My recent book reading has been in the subject of Eemergence, beginning with StevenJouhnson's book by that name, and continuing in Brabasi's Linked. The idea that great things emerge/evolve from the first simple organisms interacting, noticing one another, and coalescing to form increasingly sentient, more complex life forms, has me applying this view of "life process" to the Church. It seems this is a paradigm of Pentecost.....that God came down and vistied a people who were engaeged in the work of discernment of the "Next Step"; what form to take as a people, and what work to take up.
I also think of my first exposures to what's being dubbed "The Emergent Church" and people who are discussing "postmodern thought" and how the Church can respond to this. I met Brian McLaren a little over a week ago at Old Saint George, and was feeling "dejaVU" taking me back to how I felt in my early college days when I was reading about "authentic Christianity" that sought to find renewed meaning in the Church by learning to speak authentically and be more forthcoming about our spiritual journey and dsicover new expressions for celebration and worship.
My "role"; my "calling" in this context is to help the Church to utilize and understand the Web, and other "future" iterations of online communications that may well take us "beyond the Web" (at least as we now know it; "Web" is such a wonderful mythological framework thatit may well follow future online technologies as a identifying label......but , we may be looking at some things we might call "Post-Web"
This is a phrase that reminds me of Dr. King. It also carries with it the basis for my "oppostion" and my attempts to articulate that oppostion, to voices which attempt to dilute the truths which I feel called. But along with the "apologetic" I seek to confront whatI see as distortion and "blasphemous" (giving God a bad name), there is the task of articulating those truths which I feel compelled to defend. So it's not a matter of constantly fighting and pointing out wrong, but seeking to describe what I feel is the truth I protect.
Sometimes, over a period of time, there seems to be more reaction than pro-action. I've heard people say, regarding the frequent stories about SBC vs CBF that the CBF folks should "move on"; that theyhave "lost" and should suck it up and move on. There is something out of place in thatkind of suggestion. Move on to WHAT? This is the nature of Church we are talking about. We're not talking about a SPORTS team having lost, or a lost job, or even the death of a loved one. If the nature of the fellowship to which we are called , in which we should "live and move and have our being" is being attacked, at what point do we "surrender" and say "OK, you have YOUR group here, and you OWN the denomination and do not accept us as a part of it unless we "keep quiet" and accept your authority, then we'll just START again.
My "reply" or "response" and often my "critique" of the SBC (and also the same tendencies in other Christian groups) is a lament to "what we miss" when certain movements are culturally "dismissed" or "pushed out of significance" from our heritage. People like Clarence Jordan and Marin Luther King are de-emphasized , and such "exclusions" are justified (and sometimes even instigated) due to some expose on the "doctrinal purity" of their alleged theology. I say "alleged" because such "exposes" are often rift with things taken out of context, points miscontrued, and elaborate, ridiculous "implications" drawn from these exposes. Clarence jordan would certyainly not pass any litmus test applied to him via the likes of Al Mohler, Paige Patterson, et al. Jordan simply confronts too many cherished "biblical truths" for him to be considered "biblical".
There is a good question that presents itself when I am doing a lot of "combative" blogging about the things I perceive as going dreadfully wrong with the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 25 years. That is: Is it proper or even healthy for me to "expend so much energy" in confronting what I consider to be "injustice", "blasphemy" and "heresy", as well as making me feel downright ashamed of the name "Southern Baptist", and causes me to immediately qualify my having gotten an MDiv from "Southern Baptist Theological Seminary" by quickly adding ("but that Seminary was very different in 1981 than it is today").
Earlier today I mentioned a misgiving I had about the dominance of the conflict theme in the story of Koinonia told by the video "Briars in the Cotton Patch", that it did not give enough coverage to the REASONS behind WHY they chose to endure the opposition. It was the things that happened among them, and what they were CALLED TO DO, and DID, like provide better housing and farming (Clarence Jordan had majored in Agriculture at the University of Georgia before his Seminary days, with the intention of using that to help poor farmers become more productive). It was also the fact that they had a community in which mission was possible becuase they met together to discern and held all things in common. Funny how Church people lept to associate that kind of living with "Communism" rather than the New Testament.
I mentioned in an earlier post today about my longtime fascination, adoration, and indebtedness to the life and works of Martin Luther King. He is among the names I reel off when I talk about some of the most influential people on my journey. I mentioned how I did a Chruch history paper in Seminary, at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. It explored the reactions and views of the various Southern Baptist groups to Martin Luther King. I often compared and contrasted the writings of two State SBC paper editors from Alabama and some other state (I think it was Maryland, but I don't recall--- it was the more sympathetic and affrirming).
It seems to me that in the "old SBC" (that SBC prior to the "house cleaning" done bythe present "administration"), there would have been a group assigned to the developing of resources and studies in things like Civil Disobedience, Race Relations, and the theologial contribtions of Martin Luther King, Jr. But not today. Things like Civil Disobedience have been moved to the "troublemaker" column, just as they were in the old South, when people called the Civil Rights movement "a bunch of outside agitators". The Christian Life Commission of the "old SBC" used to be an agency that did such things, and would resource the community on these things, when such "leftist" and "anti-American" things were not only permissable, but encouraged by a portion of the SBC community.
This past weekend I saw a video I had ordered for my Dad, one produced by a group from Koinonia Farms in Americus , Georgia. It was titled Briars in the Cotton Patch: The Story of Koinonia Farm. Today, of course, is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, and a similar theme and example is observed. Clarence Jordan came back to Georgia in 1942 to begin a Chrsitian Community. He had studied New Testament Greek at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and determined to live out a Christian Community ---all of it.
What Clarence Jordan found was that the culture around him, including the Churches, were not focused on the quality of their fellowship, but on the "content" or "appearance" of it, which included a racial mix. This was "taboo". The cultural mores , in many cases, outweighed any "alternative" reading of the Scriptures which would challenge assumptions about "the way God wants things".
 | I was hoping to hear something at church today about Martin Luther King. I kind of expected it, but it didn't come. I was a bit angry. King has been an inpiration to me for 26 years, since I saw a TV mini-series in 1978 called “King“, where King was portrayed by Paul Winfield. Although Winfield didn't look or sound at all like King, he gave an impassioned performance, and from that day forward, I was somewhat taken with and inspired by the speeches and writings I sought out and read. I wrote a college paper in Law and Society class on “King and Civil Disobedience“, and then the following year, in Seminary , wrote one on “The Southern Baptist Resonse to Martin Luther King“ for Church History class. A few years later, when the movie “Gandhi“ came out, I was there because I knew that King had been inspired by Gandhi.
|
Speaking of Football and watching it on TV, I was in Cicuit City and Best Buy earlier as the Indy-New England game was starting, and watched a good bit of the first half as I walked around waiting for my son to choose some playstation gear to use his Christmas gift cards on. WOW. What a picture. There's a 55-inch Mitsubishi that is just a great looking set. It's not a plasma, super-flat kind of deal, but its $1800 and change instead of 4 to 6 grand, too. I'll give up a couple of feet of depth for that difference in price. (Of course, right now, the $1800 is completely out of range, too, until that day when work is more dependable and conssitent.
uh, oh, looks like Philly is in trouble now. Just went down 14-3 late in the 3rd, and McNabb was hurt late in the second half when he was hit while on the ground. He's back in, but he's gotta be in pain.
My sports blogging has been almost completely nonexistent for a while. This is not any indication that my sports fan-dom has waned. I've been watching (the Titans, who lost a close one last weekend to the Patriots, and the Kentucky Wildcats, who were just terrible yesterday). I'm watcing the NFC Championship now as I read a bit in Linked: The New Science of Networks, which explores many types of Networks, and the common properties. It was interesting to see the author identify the Apostle Paul as one of the examples of an early use of networks. (Anyway, this digresses from sports--- more on Linked in a bit)
I 'm pulling for Philly, even though they've been there before (albeit 24 years ago). They've been to the NFC Championship 3 years in a row and not gotten past it yet, so I feel a bit empathetic (being a Rams fan back in the 70's and 80's, when the Rams made it to several NFC championships and seemed to lose everytime to either the Cowboys or the Vikings, but finally made it in 79)
The AFC game I was pulling for Indy, but Peyton couldn't do it quite as easily against a much stingier Pats defense (4 picks).
I finished Steven Johnson's Emergence last night, and it has me thinking about how there are hints of this "bottom-up" "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" kind of sentient growth process. I believe that spirtuality is found in this growth; indeed, it is born there.
I 'm not trying to "prove this by science". I am simply admitting my willingness to recognize a pattern in creation. The observance of slimemolds, ants, cities and software in Johnson's Emergence can also , I believe, be observed in the activity of spirtual communities. If we believe, as many such communities do, that we are "called together" to a great collaboration and communion, then this makes sense theologically. The Biblical themes of "People of God" and "koinonia" tell the story of how this "devotion to fellowship" has resulted in "the God movement" (Clarence Jordan's translation of the phrase most often known as "The Kingdom of God".
JOHO and AKMA are getting hit hard by comment spammers
These scum will stop at nothing. The computer industry (better yet, the consumers) need a protection agency to go after these people with the same gusto as , perhaps, the Recording industry pursuing file-swappers, only more so. Make ISP's stop helping these people abuse the online community to traffic in irrelevance and intrusion.
A 13-year old was suspended for 3 days from school for trying a DOS command (built into the system) to send a 1-word message (consisting of "Hey!") to all the computers on his school's network. A Computer instructor at his school , Mrs. Sweeney, called it "hacking" and apprently convinced the principle that an example should be made.
In a letter written to Dave Lieber (the writer of the article in Dallas-Ft.Worth Star telegram, Sweeney wrote:
"Hacking into a system should be highest on the list of tampering violations. I believe the other students are now aware that the district takes this seriously and will not tolerate such misuse of our equipment.
"I invite you, parents, our state representatives, and anyone else that thinks The first problem here is that Sweeney, a computer teacher, apparently doesn't understand the term hacking. Hacking is not using a built-in command to send a message. Hacking is defined in two general ways: 1) use of a computer to break into someone else's computer system, and 2) the sophisticated techniques used by an adept computer programmer.they know how a teacher or a district should react to ANY situation to come live with us for a while -- be a substitute teacher for a few weeks and learn the real world of public education.
"Beverly Sweeney."
Lieber responded in his article:
The first problem here is that Sweeney, a computer teacher, apparently doesn't understand the term hacking. Hacking is not using a built-in command to send a message. Hacking is defined in two general ways: 1) use of a computer to break into someone else's computer system, and 2) the sophisticated techniques used by an adept computer programmer.
I want to expound a bit here. "Breaking In" did not even occur. The student's "transgression" exisits only on the level of a "snicker" or a noise made in class to which most teachers would simplyrespond with a look or a calling of the student's name as a warning to "stop it". I once did a similar thing using a Windows based network messaging program about 10 years ago, in a place of business with about 400-500 people on the network. I didn't get fired, or ven reprimanded. The network people called and asked, and I said that I didn;t realize how completely the message would be broadcast (which was, to everyone). That was enough. I didn't do it again. We laughed about it. They may have taken some steps to gaurd against similar utilities being able to "broadcast" from a client workstation in the future. This was an obvious case of a "Computer Teacher" (whose use of "hacking" and "breaking in" gives me much pause to wonder if I would want my "tax dollars" paying for such puny computer knowledge and understanding in a "Computer Teacher".
The title of this post is a book by Brian McLaren, who I was pleased to meet night before last (Thursday).
Thurday night at Old Saint George (where I am right now), Brian McLaren sat with Larry and I here in Larry's office and talked with Brian about "Emerging Church", and how different groups have received him. He has attracted several diverse groups who have invited and ARE inviting him to speak to them. I learned a lot about all of this. I had also read just about all of "Adventures in Missing the Point" thathe wrote with Tony Campolo, an all-time favorite writer-speaker of mine.
Then a group of about 15 people sat around a table in the dining hall at OSG (known around here as "The George", kind of like Bank One Ball Park is called "The Bob" over in Arizona or wherever that is). Brian was asked to give us a little autobiography. It was interesting to learn how his Church where he is now pastor was started by a person as a calling of theirs as a member of the Church of the Saviour down the road from his church in Washington D.C. I was also interested to know that Brian has always been "into science", and had difficulty early on reconciling some of the tenets of evolution that seemed to be good explanations, and the fact that his faith heritage condemned acceptance of any truth in evolution. This gave me the idea that I could tell him about the Steven Johnson book I am reading, "Emergence". When I held it up to start to say something, he pointed to it and said "Really good book". He also said that a book he had mentioned to the group earlier that night, God After Darwin is a good campanion in the emergence discussion. (I'm just getting to the software exploration pice of the Emergence book, which I 'm sure will have me abuzz with parallels and dialogue between emergent theories of life, and the life of online communications, and beyond that, how all this will affect the theological institutions and evangelism.
I was emailing Larry the other day about how Brian reminds me of the lay renewal movement when I was in college (1974-78). He is not simply echoing the same kind of ideas, except that the call to authenticity and psychological/sociological relevance seems to be a strong theme. Both the lay renewal and the emergent church movement seem to be calling for a closer look at our language in communicating the gospel. it seems as if the exploration of questions like "What does the "Kingom of God look like for today?" is a pivotal and energizing quesiton for the Emergent Church (and for a lot of "Church" I have sought after)
There may be a few people to meet when Larry gets through eating some lunch with some people getting out of the Mayhem event up in tri-county (northwest Cincinnati). Brain McLaren has just wrapped up the event up there at the Vineyard, a nd I 'll be interested to hear how "the Vineyard people" reacted. I'm sure there will be a wide range of reactions.
I also hope that through my association with Old Saint George, and Brian McLaren's enthusiasm about our book store here, that there will be some ongoing contact between OSG and "The Emergent Village". There definitely seems to be some synergy between the kind of theoplogical diversity OSG reaches, hosts, and provides a Great Good Place for dialogue. Brian really liked the OSG line: "Where divisive issues become shared concerns".
It was great meeting Brian. He's a wondefully warm and intelligent, articulate guy.
The spookily "dejavu" feeling I get when I read this account by Mike James on Howard Ahmanson Jr., whom he calls "The Avenging Angel of the Religious Right" (taken from the same-title article found on Salon
This is the same triumphalistic, Theocratic, we-have the "final authority" and everybody else MUST see it or be "excommunicated" kind of approach that the Southern Baptist Convention has taken. I subscribe to Albert Mohler's weblog (or the long treatises thathe spews out on a daily basis using Weblog technology). I subscribe because he often provides me with an "Antichrist" story that I feel compelled to debunk, and one of the things that drives me to do this is that he's so damnd sure of himself (How could he, or anyone else like him, be otherwise, when it's apparently their God-given task to correct everybody else's corrupted worldview and tell them what "God's worldview is".
|
by Tony Camplolo and Brian McLaren
I am reading it (i'm at page 190), and liking what I hear as my first exposures ( I think) to the perspectives of Brian McLaren. Tony Campolo I already know and love (see my web entry about him on my "List of Influential People" ) The book has an imprint of EmergentYS, the YS being Youth Specialities, another one on that same list. Emergent is the church movement that is so reminiscent for me of the Church Renewal movement of the 70's , which shaped me in a big way as a college student from 1974-78. The "postmodern" movement has its present day Keith Millers (another one on my list) in Brian McLaren, Spencer Burke, etc.
A question just posed itself to me: Is it possible to embed an anchor (the in a trackback, so that the destination link will know exactly where in the referring document the link has been made? This seems to me to be a key feature of helping the Web to become more supportive of Emergent attributes (Johnson refers to the Web as lacking two-way feedback, a nd I thought of trackbacks as heading in that direction. I just made a link, in my previous post, to an old article of mine on "The Cosmic Christ" , and thought it would be most helpful if the article's trackback could point back to the actual place in my new post where this link happened. The reader of the old article would then be able to see not only the specific place, but also be plopped down right in the middle of the context of the discussion. Seems to me this is a key feature of the dialogue we want on the Web (at least I do) I may soon need to create an "Emergence" category. I'm reading Steven Johnson's Emergence
Continue reading Bottom-up, Cluetrain, Emergent Church.
Checking out Brian McLaren's website today (A New Kind of Christian....he has a book by that name) I love this point: One more thought on universalism. I feel about universalism much the way I feel about pacifism: anyone taught in the ways of Jesus Christ, if they aren't a pacifist, should be a pacifist sympathizer - hoping that even if pacifism isn't true yet, it will be someday. Similarly, if universalism isn't true, nobody should be happy about it, but should wish that it could be true. After all, Scripture tells us, God doesn't wish for anyone to perish, but wants all to come to the knowledge of the truth. But once again, I think that the question that universalism answers is not framed wisely, and so I would rather focus on other - to me, better - questions. | Link to article From the interview mentioned in the previous post, Gordon Cosby says is at the heart of conversion: Sin has very little meaning to the average modern mind, so I use the expression, “Detoxification from the culture” to describe what we really mean by sin—sin being the inability to transcend ourselves and to live for others. What the Bible really means by sin is that we are addicted to the values of the world, the systems of the world. Jesus said that if we stay with the world’s systems, the way the world views life, it leads to death. The realm of God which Jesus embodies and which he describes in the Beatitudes is the way that he says leads to life. We are so addicted to the culture that we don’t even know it. We don’t even know that we need detoxification. We don’t know that we need an intensive recovery program! It is an attribute so appallingly lacking from the quality of life in our Churches. So much "civil religion", consumerism, privelleged lifestyle glorification; clothed in "spiritual adoration" that sometimes I wonder who it really is that they (the Churches) are adoring. From an interview with Gordon Cosby ..we want to work with you as to what your “call” is. We get down to the concreteness of it. We commit to help you explore possibilities, and when you see it and are ready to launch out on that call, and you find a second person who can be with you in that call among the membership, which will make it corporate, we will help you create structures for that call. You can either stay within this Body of Christ if that’s right, and we will include your call, or you can start a new little faith community or anything you want. But we stick to that concept of ‘call’ because we feel that each of us have one, and that if we are here long enough together and pray together, we will find it. Then all of us are being faithful at the point of our calls; we are not just joining some amorphous group because it has a few charismatic leaders. All of us are leaders around our call and our gifts. So the concept of ‘call’ and the concept of ‘gifts’ are absolutely essential. In our mission groups, we would work with each of us until we have a gift that we bring to that group, and all of us are bringing our gifts to make stronger and deeper that group, which is then flowing out in compassion to the world.
Continue reading Centrality of Call.
In his post at Tread Lightly , Mike James writes this: God has never appointed us policemen of this world. What he appoints us to be are its stewards and its servants. If Jesus is right, our present tack of meeting violence with violence will never work. If Jesus is right, meeting people’s needs from out of our abundance will.
In his post on Tread Lightly, Mike lifts up some fine stuff on The Right Christians. (The Blog for "The Right Christians" has a great subtitle: The Right Christians Blog I noticed yesterday that when I follow a link to a "Category Page" such as one that says "See related posts in category1" , that the page at /archives/cat_categoryname.html does not have navigation to other posts in the category, and only shows the most recent post to that category. I need a list of other postings. How can I do this? Sojourners points to an article in the St. Petersburg Times about the use of faith talk in political campaigns Yesterday Al Mohler praised the Lord of the Rings stories as shining examples of Christian fiction, and I was thinking all the while: "If Tolkein's theology were laid out before Mohler, he'd likely decide that Tolkein was a satanic influence, not because I think there's any sign of such, but becuase for Mohler, if there is anything thatstrays from the "system" of "checks and balances" Mohler rigidly follows, then he's gonna be on the black list." Well, today, Mohler tears into Howard Dean. Now let me say this: I am not enthralled with Dean's statements about his faith. I don't see any great depth. But I also know that Mohler is certainly the epitome of someone I would absolutely mistrust in public office, such is his certainty that he has all the right slants on everything, and such is the very judgmental tone of nearly everything he writes. "In reality, Gov. Dean's religious convictions are so private, even he doesn't seem to know what they are." Mohler would say this about anyone who didn't use the "key evangelical words".
Continue reading Mohler on Dean.
I have a file (an ASP file) into which I have attached a Dreamweaver template, which MX 2004 names "Template1.dwt.asp" I want the rollovers in my ASP/Flash page to work in whatver directory the host file is without having to copy the same swf files to each subdirectory (I know there HAS to be a way) Read on if interested
Continue reading Loading swf files into SWF Files hosted by a Dreamweaver Template.
The Church of the Saviour (now named as the various communities of mission thathave grown out of it and exist as "separately named" but spirtually descendent of the original Church in 1947) NEEDS the Web and all of its "reach" to help the continued PUBLISHING of its resources. So much of what is produced from its life and members that would be invauluable resource to the ministry of other Churches is not available because of what is required to publish, especialy in the widest of distribution channels. The Web, a nd the Weblog, provide a way to "get the Word out" , especially to those who take the initiative to find help and resources. Search tools more widely link otherwise disparate and disconnected resources. A new collaboration is highly possible. When I see the breadth and relevance brought to the Church by the experience and CALLINGS from within the COS community of faith, I see a body of past work and ongoing work that is REQUIRED to help the Church fulfill its call. It's REQUIRED because it is something which would expand the effectiveness and the REACH of the Church, and therefore REQUIRED for full stewardship of the available resources from which the Church has to draw. Another COS-related conviction: that the Church exists on this earth to be a conduit for mission, whch is the natural outgrowth of "the gathering" of the People of God. The Church exists to train members in doing ministry. Any "profesisonal" ministers should treat their call as "to train the non-professional ministers to BE ministers -- which involves helping them discern what their CALL is. Further, this "discernment" hjappens in community, and is a crucial responsibility of the Church community. Shame on those congregations and professional ministers who "oppose" this movement of God among the people, and in particular people. It sounds funny to imagine that professional ministers would oppose the affirmation of CALL, but they tacityly do so constantly by failing to aid in this crucial process, or to even acknowledge that this is their role. The problem with so many "professionals" and "ordained" is that they see themselves as God's specially endowed conduit of wisdom, to the extent that many "lay ministries" are threatening to them.
Continue reading The affirmation of CALL.
My blog on Mike Jame's observations about faith talk in the Bush and Dean campaigns is a segway right back into COS, since out of my reference to the Sojo issue on EMPIRE I see the Next Issue after that is the SPY GAMES issue with the interview with Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst. The intro to the article: Ray McGovern came to the CIA in 1964 in the wake of President John Kennedy's call to "ask what you can do for your country." For the next 27 years, McGovern did his best to speak the truth, as he saw it, to those in power—including presidents and their national security staffs. David MacMichael also worked for the CIA, investigating Reagan administration claims that Nicaragua was fomenting regional wars. Both men came to the conclusion that ideology and politics, not "truth," was fueling U.S. foreign policy, in Iraq and elsewhere, and have since been on a mission to bring light to the shady world of spy vs. spy—and encourage their former intelligence colleagues to refuse to remain silent. They were interviewed in July by Sojourners editors Rose Marie Berger and Jim Rice.
The article includes this bio info on Ray: Ray was a CIA analyst for 27 years, but his Catholic faith and other life twists have led him to very different work. He is co-director of the Servant Leadership School, an outreach and training ministry located just a few blocks west of our office. He has been outspoken for the past year about the false and faulty intelligence that’s been used to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Mike James (who blogs on Tread Lightly) blogs something I have wanted to say but have thus far avoided , at least on my blog, and that is: Actions speak louder than words, which is a typical sin of the politican, like the student council candidates who vow to get coke machines put in the cafeteria (back in the days when this was unheard of and not to become reality for most schools for years to come). While I have no doubt that religion in general and Christianity in particular has become a lot more prevelant in political campaign language, it is treading on blasphemous boundaries; not because "religion and politics don';t mix" (which I think they DO and MUST) , but in the sense that "the name of God" has much more to do with "walking the walk" than "talking the talk". Mike blogs today on the Dean and Bush campaigns and the willingness to talk of faith. http://maikimo.net/weblog/sideblog/archives/2004/01/index.html#002866 My oft-repeated point is that talking about faith -- but acting in ways that oppose the Spirit of God, as Bush does -- is not a sound reason to vote conservative. If faith matters, then you should vote for the candidate where you see the walk happening. (For me that is Democrats, however otherwise imperfect.) Actions count; talk is, well, cheap.
Continue reading Talk is Cheap.
My previous post about how COS needs their story told more widely, and that the Web (by inference) would make a wonderful channel with which to expand the reach of this story, leads me to the observation that I know the story is important becuase I constantly long for more stuff to read about it. I further long for people with whom to explore this issue of what Church means, and how to be a community focused on this. Not only focused on the CONCEPT of Church, but on the ACTIONS and EMBODIMENTS of Church. It is basically the INWARD JOURNEY/ OUTWARD JOURNEY balance they have explored at COS for 55 years. The Web makes a revolutionary literary container/channel for things of the COS community. Just as Elizabeth O'Connor was called to be a "historian" of the COS journey, and applied her gifts of writing to the chronicle of the first 50 years of COS, it is my dream to be involved in the next 50 years of COS stories and make the conversation a part of that. Blogs, forums, books and resources databases, and links between all of these. The Amazon Books story (which is now Amazon.com, with its many partner vendors) suggests that there can be similar "aggregators" of resources in the Church culture, making available a diverse set of resources, conversations, and discussions, and the stories of the ministries of all the communities who gather at this "portal" for Christian community. Enough of what's wrong in the Church. How about what we have going for us, and then figuring out how to "tell THAT story". I blogged over the weekend about the Church of the Saviour, which has always (since I began reading about them and going to visit them when I could in 1976 to the present)represented for me WHAT's RIGHT about the Church. Their model (which is not as cut and dry as the term "model" would sugest) is one that works. They've been in existence since 1948, and have birthed a staggering number of social ministries that are unmatched by larger organizations. They exhibit an integrity of membership unheard of in today's Church. Their "membership" roles are small (and are now distributed among several sister communities, all with particular missions and mission groups within them. They value very highly; even as "holy" the "story". They speak of GIFT and CALLING and spend their days seekig to identify their gifts and sense what God is calling them to do in mission, and their structure depends on what God is calling a particular group of people to do at a particular time. This focus on the calling and on doing the work required to set up the structures which support the carrying out of this call, and the personal/psychological/spirtual support required to maintain the energy and the sense of call behind it ; they call the work that goes on to "work the mission" as the Outward Journey; the engagement with the world, and bringing Christ to bear on it. The Inward Journey is the latter; the support to the people of the misison in sharing their personal journeys, seeking new outlets for newly discobvered gifts, and continuing to remain open to the receiving and recognition of gifts , and the discoveries of those gifts. All of this is leading up to my proclmation that this story needs telling. And the recipients of this story NEED to hear it, and be invited to join the conversation. And my "Cluetrain-theology" requires that it be so. Perhaps it is actually the theology of Church that has been formed through my association and exposure to The Church of the Saviour made it inevitable that I would find myself resonating with the Cluetrain Manifesto. The problem with guys like James Kennedy and Richard Land complaining about "religious freedom" is that one only has to take a look at what this concept means within the ranks of the SBC's own denomination. "Freedom" goes only as far as the restricted theology they advance as THE theology. Stray from that theology and you soon find out how much "freedom" there is. If it weren't so sad and so damaging, it would be comical how blind they are to this inconsistency. But their blindness comes from the sin of KNOWING that they are right; in the belief of not the "Inerrance of Scripture", but the Inerrance of their theology. Land is saying that "we don't need government sponsored religion", since in that instance, the government thinks they own it. They "squeeze the life out of it". And I think to myself (and , blog it) and so what are you proposing? Isn't there a mass Christian right movement to impose the Religious Right's platform upon the nation? And not only that, "squuezed out" are issues of social justice, environment, etc.
Continue reading Land on GOvernment Sponsored Religion.
I 'm presently listening to James Kennedy of the Coral Ridge Church, expounding upon "prooftexts" to byutress his argument thatthis is a Christian nation. Supreme among these arguments was the use of "the Year of Our Lord" in the constitution. This PROVED that they were Christian. The fact thatthey used the word "Lord" also further cemented this. BALONEY. The Year of our Lord is a PHRASE, used by EVERYBODY. Pointing to this as a SIGN that the framers were Christian is ludicrous.
Continue reading James Kennedy preaching on the Nation Under God.
Their site is nicely designed, but their stated "goals" need some Web-based "for instance". I love the language, and certainly know what they are encouraging, but the world of readers needs some definition, and I'm sure the past participants would value continued contact with such reflection. The site puts forth their "offerings"
Continue reading Wellspring.
Last night I spent a couple of hours perusing links from a hitlist of results from searching Church of the Saviour as a phrase and Washington or Gordon Cosby as the "any of these words" parameter. I remain hopeful that I can help them become a "Portal site" with blogs, forums, RSS Feeds, and other Web goodies that would help them ride some of the advances in Social Software to help get their story out, and help be a resource to the rather large following they have spread out over the globe. I think of Dayspring, (their retreat Center) and Wellspring (the offshoot of Dayspring that focuses on resourcing the Church at large, offering "conferences and retreats" that help inquiring Churches to explore what makes Church of the Saviour unique;; in other words, they explore what COS has discovered and IS discovering about WHAT IS CHURCH. Wellspring represents a mission that I think forms the "source" of a project to use the Web to extend that same work of helping Churches explore the questions they have been living and help these Churches to ask their own questions. COS has SO MANY resources. Their "library" that they have amaseed over these 55 years of their existence represents a collection of countercultural challenges that many Churches miss. It is of such frustration to me that many of these books and resources are NOT found in many "Christian Book Stores". It is of great loss to the Church that they miss out on many of the resources that have been so , well, "resourceful" to a community which has become a model for many. Yesterday I refelected on a piece from Emergence, p. 64: "isolated hunches and private obsessions coalesce into a new way of looking at the world, shared by thousands of individuals." The observation was relating the phenomenon of scientific advances to the behavior of slime mold, and how collaboration did not ramp up until there w |
