July 2005 Archives

I found the following article extremely interesting. I found it on Jonathan Norman's blog, whom I just met today when our family visted the Church where he serves as youth pastor.

THEOOZE - Articles: Viewing Article

I’m with the program and in deep sympathy with the vision that’s been sketched by folks like Brian McLaren and Robert Webber. But I have this nagging question: “What’s the median income of a ‘new kind of Christian?’”

Not that I'm feeling antagonistic toward Jamie at all (I'm not) but this just jumps out at me: so, what about theologicans of the RO persusasion?

Well, I was impressed with what followed, and somewhat humbled for asking the previous question. I was like, "Oh, OK. That's good. Good answer" (While it didn't answer the question of "median income", I like the posture. I really do. It makes me look even more forward to Smith's upcoming Who's Afraid of Postmodernism?

If one of the key tenets of the emerging church is the centrality of embodied, incarnational witness, then one of the places we need to embody the redemption purchased by Christ on the cross is in the disempowered neighborhoods in our cities. Thus the first part of my suggested program is to merge the concerns of the postmodern church with the concerns of “new urbanism;” in other words, new kinds of Christians should be passionately concerned with building new kinds of cities—which will mean that they should be passionately concerned with impacting the socio-economic structures that systematically disempower parts of town like south Division. Our cities are largely the production of very modern forces, and their decay is a testimony to the underside of modernity. What could be more postmodern than redeeming these urban spaces and city-dwellers, informed by a vision of the kingdom whose telos is a city (Rev. 21:2)? This project for a new urbanism also resonates with another central tenet of the emerging church: its opposition to “Constantinian” Christianity as civil religion. The economic structures which have created the south Divisions of our country are largely the product of classic American liberal polity which the church as civic cult has been all to eager to defend. The postmodern, counter-cultural church as witness will find no better space for exercising its alternative vision than in our cities’ neighborhoods.

The "church as civic cult" is a particularly instructive phrase, for it seems to properly classify how the church follows false gods, and thus idolatrous. False religion IS cultic. Beyond what the worshippers of capitalism do, there is the matter of what alternative structures are meant to be. What is the "City of God" in the context that Smith describes? What he describes of his church and their work sounds extremely faithful. (Reminds me a lot of how they talk at the Church of the Saviour----and also DO to demonstrate their talk.)

The editor of Zion's Herald, whose blog I just found via Untied Methodist (no, not a typo), describes some of the hate email he got after he sent an article to an email list of Zion's Herald

FaithWriter

a quote from one:

"You people make me sick, you do not represent God, you only represent yourself. I wonder how many tears God has shed because you all are too lazy to do what is right . . . How embarrassing you and your fellow so-called Christians are to the United States of America."

How sad that somoene on a list sent to church folks can make such a statement that so blatantly reveals such a fundamental missing of the entire point: Christians are to be concerned about not being an embarassment to God, and the question of whether we are emabarassing to "the United States of America" is an insult to faith. The loyalty to a global faith which is beyond nationality is one which reduces to absolute insiginificance any thought of what "America" thinks of us. An "America" that considers itself above those loyalties is not even an America I want.

BTW, the article had to do with the Iraq war and what to do AFTER the mistake has been made. But to suggest that this was a mistake (a bit of an understatement) is taken to be such a "sacrilige"; which offends me becuase "scaralige" is to defame God. Criticizing "America" is not on the same level. But this is the abaondoning of the truth that nationalism represents. The religion which exudes from nationalism is , by nature of its ultimate allegiance and rush to "defend its honor" above all else (including the sanctity of human life), idolatrous.

I just read the introduction to "A Better Hope", and so the above quoted section of the email is frustrating, and brought about the rant, but somethng very basic in me. (BTW, Hauerwas writes such great Intros to his books. The first chapter is "On Being An American and a Christian")

I was glad to find Untied Methodist, and also the link to the to the ZH editor's blog....becuase it just so happened that I received a copy just this week, and wondered where it came from,. and I may have gotten one of these issues a couple months ago. Maybe it was sent as a sample to a Sojourners mailing list, but there's a lot of Methodist people writing for it.

BTW, the above mentioned mag, Zion's Herald, had an interview with Hauerwas in Jan. 2002 (read it here)

Just arrived from Amazon

"No human being would stack books like this"

Bill Murray as Dr. Peter Venkman in Ghostbusters, 1984

This post from Pastor John Wright talks about the glaring lack of ecclesiology in the American evangelical church. This quote describes as well as one sentence could the "drug" which church has become; a "drug" to help us "cope" in a world where our ultimate purpose is far from the minds of millions.

Pastor John Wright

Worship becomes a means of therapeutic personal experience to help cope with the psychological struggles of the week that comes from competing in a capitalistic market of conflicting personal interests.

and so the conclusion is this:
(with all kinds of "must read" in between, as Pastor John describes the way in which Benedict XVI's doctrine of the church encourages him)

If we would anchor the life of a congregation in the life and sayings of Jesus, in devotion to the Triune God by faith in the participation in the Eucharist, one understands that "personal relationship with Jesus" language just does not approach the profound beauty of salvation in Christ by which we participate in the very life of God in faith, hope, and love. It also prevents the cooptation of the life of the church by powers, while calling us personally and cooperately into the sufferings of a fallen world in the name of its Creator, who desires to call it beyond these sufferings in a celebration of the Life that God is.

I ordered a used hardback copy of Call to Commitment (I had one that was borrowed and never returned in 1996 that had been in my collection since 1976). It should get here anyday now. That will mark the beginning of a more disciplined walk-through of the history of The Church of the Saviour, in my attempt to keep myself ready, alert, and reflective on the task of finding a place and a people where such a journey can be taken seriously. The title of the book is a portent of the theology of church which operates amongst this particular expression of the church of Jesus Christ. It requires a commitment which is largely missing from the experience of church today.

The paper back reprint from The Servant Leadership School applies the subtitle: "An attempt to Embody the Essence of Church". For me, the "attempt" has been a witness to me that such a people is indeed a possibility. Were it not for my finding them, I may have considered the church to be a mere eschatological reality. Indeed, my search for such a community is sustained by the "theological" asurance that such a church is not only a possibility, but also an escahtological reality whch beckons me to work as if I assume the journey will not be in vain. I believe that my online friends are also a part of the witnesss to that, and that my participation in many an online discussion and reflection on the nature of theology today puts me (and us) in the company of such a cloud of witnesses as Bonhoeffer and his community, and his journey from academic to churchman and his experience of empire and its implications for theology are something in which we all are sharing. I very much look forward to not only my re-readings of the Elizabeth O'Connor books on The Church of the Saviour, but the latter 80% of Bonhoeffer: A Biography as I will undoubtedly find many items of Bonhoefer's reflection to be extremely relvant to my journey today.

Ok, that's about enough of the posts on "political things". I'm trying to limit my intake of numerous samplings in the news of "things which make me shake my head"). I determined back in November that I was going to change my focus, and I do believe I have siginificantly "reversed the flow", so that now most of my "political" dissents or comments are the result of a theological concern finding examples of how those are "worked against" by the political structures we have so negligently built. It's not that I think I can "separate myself" from the disgust that I feel over the all-tto-obvious "lacking" of true public welfare concerns in the Bush adminkistration (and in fact, their activity betraying their ultimate alleginaces that are very much to the contrary); the contrast in that kind of whitewashing of policies designed to benefit the largest contributors and their own elite interests is glaring when set beside that of the Kingdom (which results in no naive optiminsm about "alternatives" in this political system of ours, where "the other side" is also deeply entrenched in the system). I guess what fills me with such recoil is the participation of the church in America in this theological distortion which marries "American Values" with "Christian Nation" and outputs a "Gospel" which is NOT the "good news" Jesus had in mind. And on top of that, the glaring , unabashed enthusiasm with which my old denomination, the Southern Baptists, in this heretical mix.

The post on the Bonhoefer biography I made earlier highlights a lingering concern of mine: "what to do?" The answer lies in what for Bonhoeffer, was surely and clearly an ecclesiological one; balanced against what seemed to be in Bonhoefer a similar experience of a reticence to "abandon the world to the chaos". But what do we offer as an "alternative"? I think of two things from my own journey, my own Youth Group, and The Church of the Saviour (the latter as a concrete example of a people working out a "Life Together" that assumes that no real participation in the needed responses are forthcoming from government powers, and simply proceeds to build a structure to address that need.)

Build it they did. I have begun to describe a few of those things in my posts about that church, drawing upon Servant Leaders, Servant Structures Supporting this extraordinary amassing of forces to build safety nets from the bottom up is the sense of ecclesiology that they have had from their beginnings in 1947.

I consider ecological issues to be not only deeply theological issues, but also "democracy" issues (thus my categorization of this post), since this is a theological issue that holds one of the more wide reaching "public welfare" issues: that of the affect of "profit motives"* over long term ecological impact (a long term effect getting shorter and shorter every year)

*(ie. energy companies, who seem to have quite a "friend" in the Bush administration---indeed, the energy companies seem to BE the Bush administration)

Energy Bill Raises Fears About Pollution, Fraud

This section is a little worrisome:

I've spent the last week doing all my bookreading in Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Biography, by Eberhard Bethge, since last Friday when I bought it at Border's (with a 30% coupon). I've read about 200 pages, and I'm now at the sopt where he has returned from America, has met Barth and had many conversations with him and continued correspondence, and is now getting involved in the ecumenical movement, and starting to talk of peace in a very "non-compromising" way. In fact, Bonhoeffer joined the World Alliance, despite his thrological misgivings and concerns about the group which Bethge describes as "the group most dominated by the spirit of liberal and humanist Anglo-Saxon theology", becuase "with its emphasis on peace work, it was laso the group most committed to doing something"

He quotes Bonhoeffer :

But, notwithstnading all criticism, it is plain that the World Alliance...is doing work the urgency of which must set everyone's conscience alight, and so far as we know there is no other way of doing it better or more quickly

Interruptions: Acceptable losses?

how many people would be satisfied with a justice system where 9 out of 10 people excecuted were not guilty? And yet in modern warfare 90% of casualties are civilian.

I'm with Charlie on this one (among other things), and this thought I just read on his blog is a good question to put to the majority of people who think they are "just war" advocates (but really have no idea what "just war" really is, but it's a good phrase to rationalize the atrocities of war, most of which they don't "recognize" as legit anyway). Like that would be persuasive to them; the "separation" they invoke in those cases between ideas of justice and assumptions they've accepted about the "special case, "long-term" utilitarian "morality" of war is one of the most sophisticated exercises of denial and self-deception that you'll ever see)

In the end, the final question is "how 'acceptable' would we find such arguments and talk about 'long-term' and 'utilitarian considerations' if the 'sacrafices' were our own families, our own neighborhoods and houses, our own 'land'? My thought is that there would be quite a few more 'dissenters'.

I have often brought up this thought here: there was an episode of the "Twilight Zone" movie where a bifoted individual with a big mouth was spouting racial epitaths in a bar, and a couple of black men nearby asked him to show some respect, and he refused, so the men threw him out of the bar. On the outside, as he brushed himself off, he found himself in Nazi Germany and was being hunted and was shot; then he was a shot as a VietCong, and was , again, being loaded into a train bound for a concentration camp. Often I have thought that many Americans need a dose of experience from the side of the victims of American imperialism; of Iraqi families, Vietnamese peasants, El Savadorian families and agrarian communties struggling to survive, Japanese inhabitants of Hiroshima and/or Nagasaki, or any one of dozens of other Japanese cities where tens of thousands in each were eliminated by bombing campaigns, or Native Americans during the onslaught of Western settlers who took the land, makig promise after promise that they apparently never intended to keep.

Whatever happened to actually taking to heart the command: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?" Is this what we would wish upon ourselves? Is this where we would wish to find ourselves?

My organization has recently moved a portion of its Website offiste to be hosted by an Application Service Provider. Until their system is able to output RSS for us from the content we add to that data almost every day (several times on many days , in fact), I am wondering if there is a way to build an RSS file from data received from say, a Web services interface on the provider. Presently, we are re-entering the content where we formerly entered it (our in house CMS) when we still hosted that content here. I jumped into the code of that CMS when the content was submitted, and wrote the RSS file using the file system object, so that the RSS got updated whenever a new story went in.

I don't want to have to re-enter this data, so getting it output in a form that I can then write into an RSS file would be ideal. Any ideas out there amongst you developers? (No, we don't have direct access to their database. And we can't write our own asp to give to them to pull it out of their database, at least not at this time).

Charlie points to an article that Eric found by Brent Laytham, author of God Is Not: Religious, Nice, One of Us, an American, a Capitalist , which Charlie has just read.

Interruptions: Loyalty Oath

I thought of Patrick Miller's recent pamphlet on the first commandment. In The God You Have he differentiates between loyalty to others and obedience to God. Loyalty, he says, may appropriately be given to spouse, family, neighbor or country. It roots in and expands on the fifth commandment. Obedience, on the other hand, belongs to God and God alone. It is rooted in the absolutely fundamental claim of the first commandment. First commandment first; obedience before, beneath and beyond every loyalty. The problem with Miller's categories is that, in Caesar's hands, they can too easily become a distinction without a difference. In the U.S. there is assumed to be a smooth fit between discipleship and killing. That assumption, held so easily and unreflectively, trespasses against our obedience to God alone. I wonder whether my questioner understands that for descendants of Jeremiah and followers of Jesus, obedience to God may require us to refuse the state's claim to our loyalty. Does the Department of Defense grant that my fundamental obligation is not loyalty to country but obedience to God? I doubt it. In such circumstances, where Caesar cannot distinguish between our proper subjection and our ultimate allegiance, it may be best to say bluntly, "A loyal American? Of course not. I'm a Christian!"

This last point from the above: "In such circumstances, where Caesar cannot distinguish between our proper subjection and our ultimate allegiance, it may be best to say bluntly, "A loyal American? Of course not. I'm a Christian!" is close to what I see Bonhoeffer doing in Germany during the rise of the Nazi regime, and as they , for Bonhoeffer, show some pretty clear signs of abuse of power from the get-go.

This is where I can make the most direct and appropriate link between our situation today as BushWorld impinges upon this quesiton of loyalty. For sure, the levels of evil cannot be equated, but "level" is not what interests me so much as the question of ultimate allegiance. Ultimate allegiance to God requires a refusal to cede that allegiance to any encroachment by the state. I picked up Bonhoeffer back in post Nov.2 becuase I wanted to know something more about how this political awareness dawned upon him. No matter what the extent of evil that propogates, the tragedy of six million Jews, added to the other millions of civilian casualties during World War II, simply does not negate nor render inconsequential the tragedy of Iraq, the tragedy of Bush's aggressive tipping of the economic balance or "full-steam ahead" capitulation to the whims of corporate America is simply not "covered" by appealing to "well, that was so much worse, there's no comparison". JUst as obedience was called for in Nazi Germany, so obedience is called for in a Bush America (and surely, in America under "other than Bush", which has never really operated as a nation truly "under God". I had just typed, "never truly been a nation under God", but I changed it to "never really operated as" , since it is actually true that America is "under God", but BEING under God and living as such are two entirely different things. God IS the ultimate author and soveriegn over history. America and ALL nations are truly "under God", and it is the curch that is called to witness to that fact by her life.

Interesting irony: Bush wants to end lawsuits against gun companies becuase they're frivolous. But he backs the move against peer to peer networking becuase they allow people to use them for "unlawful" reasons.

Daily Kos: Political Analysis and other daily rants on the state of the nation.

Got that? If a company makes a product that is inappropriately used to illegally copy a movie, that company is liable. If a company makes a product that is inappropriately used to illegally kill a human, that company is not liable. What's the common logic holding these disparate concepts together? Massive corporate special interest money. Welcome to your government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations, where a pirated copy of "Hollywood Homicide"* is bigger threat than an actual Hollywood homicide.

I've been meaning to ask about this for some time, but what happened to the site http://www.therightchristians.org? They changed their site name to thevillagegate, but were still reachable via that "therightchristians.org" domain, but now that domain is kaput (some squatter company has it)as well as thevillagegate.org, which is "parked" right now at "Go Daddy". Where did they go, and when did they "sign off"?

The below quotes are from Eric's comments on a post the other day about the "dangers" of expressing your thoughts on blogs. Eric captured the sense (as did another commenter, "provoked")

Movable Theoblogical: Self-revelation of Bloggers

I blog in exact opposition to those who would want to keep stifling forms of institution in my face. I blog, while respecting academia, but also because I acknowledge its limitations.

I trust my friends enough to hold me accountable. It's called community, and more particular, the Church.

The limitations I see are also somethign that the church could do well to take seriously, especially given its vast shortfall of attention to the neglect of serious discipleship structures, the expectation of "accountability" to one another, and the CERTAINTY that there is a close-knit, intimately concerned group of people who make it their business to keep abreast of what's happening to us and IN us. In our blog world, that includes reading some of those "inner thoughts" that we've decided could be helpful to someone else, and that we don't mind sharing, but also that which we actually feel would be helpful for the world to know about us. It's like our "business card", except it's business that we feel represents a good sample of things which concern us, things which enrage us, and things which fill us with joy.

I always feel the need to append a quid pro quo to the end of posts where I extol the virtues and the advantages of blogging, to say that I DO NOT expect nor want for blogging to replace or supercede face-to-face church. I emphasize the "extension" quality or role of blogging; it is A resource and channel for enhancing and perhaps introducing us to snapshots of personality and passion which we woudl do well to address in our face to face meetings. Indeed, to encourage the increased building of new and addtional structures of sociality to enable the kind of close-knit society we need to nurture this faith journey that is not only very personal, but meant to be traveled in a group.

This segment from Servant Leaders, Servant Structures describes the contributions of two artisans who combined their separate skills into a work of art. The story re-awakened in me a deep desire to finally do something about finding out how I might make my online community skills/knowledge available to this church which has almost singlehandedely taught me of the depths of church.

Movable Theoblogical: SLSS Ch3: Expressions of Community Flavor

After visiting with Jim (my note:the pastor of The New Community Church, one of the sister communities of the Church of the Saviour), Greg had returned to the job where he and Nicoli (my note: a recently hired hand from Russia) were working and told him about the church and the new commission he had for an iron fence and gate that would tell the story of Zacchaeus. Although Nikoli spoke little English, had never read the Bible and knew nothing of Zacchaeus, he grasped immediately the importance of what Greg was telling him. ...After Nicoli read the story of Zacchaeus, he and Greg planned the iron fencc and gate and Nicoli created the design that they would together put into iron and steel.

Jim found in Greg a ready and eager artisan. "I had always tried to tell myself, " Greg said, "that bars are useful, that bars keep people and their possessions safe, but I could not put myself into my calling. Talking to Jim that day I knew I was going to be able to express myself and my love of God through my work, and that this was the meaning of 'calling."'

Later, at the close of this chapter 3 section,

One art work seems to inspire another. Some days I think that in a future time visitors will come to the communities simply to look, and to hear by chance, or so they will believe, the story of the mission groups and their institutions.

Immediately, I feel a renewal of the urge I have felt many times. I feel drawn toward the idea of helping this wonderful community of
communties tell its story.

Just recently I read of how Ray McGovern, who WAS with Servant Leadership School, is now with a Publishing (Tell the Word) effort started by COS. This may be the mission that would be most closely related to my vision of getting their story online, and introducing them to the archival, journaling, and dialogue functionality of blogs and such, and things such as the bookgarden.org that I know they would love, since they are very much a people whgo love all kinds of books, and also love passionately discussing and envisioning with them.

It's pretty incredible, what this church has done over the years. I feel that they could see their circle of influence spread if they were to avail themselves of the tools the Internet offers and "artisans" of that Internet who have sensed a CALL to render something out of those tools that could extend their reach, and also give them a way to share more of their journeys and learnings with one another.

Bears repeating....over and over and over again until enough people get it:

The Gutless Pacifist: How Much is Too Much... For Other People?

If we are naieve enough to believe that war is actually about saving people, how many murders of the people we are obstenibly trying to save are acceptable in order to save them? And of course, this question is couched in the understanding that this only applies to people other than ourselves. I mean, it would naturally be totally unacceptable to have yourself or your family murdered in order to "protect" your nation, be it your domestic police (eg: London) or an invading army (eg: the atomic bombings of Japan).

Of course, the latter part I have used in many an argument, and rarely does anybody ever consider that this is exactly the way they "omit" from their circle of reasoning. Do unto others AS YOU WOULD HAVE them do unto you. Not that hard to understand, but seemingly very diffcult to get through some very stubborn filters of assumptions we've assimilated from the world.

As long as it's some "other" group of people, preferrably in some OTHER country, and on some OTHER continent, then it makes "perfect sense". Well of course they're expendable. Go for it.

Did I say Larry was stoked? Another post in the wee hours of this morning testify to this, and the message resonates with me, becuase I have been so deflated and discouraged with the division IN THE CHURCH in this highly charged time of political/theological fighting that has driven formerly alienated conservatives to beome bullies in their positions of percieved power, and for those calling for a more progressive Biblical approach to be forming new alliances to provide outlets for serious reflection and search for effective means of dissent (as well as , I hope, "faithful" means).

While the term "Progressive" is a borrow from the political realm, I prefer the idea of a "Confessing Church". Some of the telos of the church as constituted by the sentiments of the Barmen Declaration that the German Churches expressed as their statement of faith that warned against the idolatrous and disastrous Nazi-Church alliance in Germany , and expressed alternately a church of radical contrast.

Perspectives

We really do need a wider, calmer dialogue. When so many feel so angry and isolated we must ask why. And we must seek new ways to create conversation to change the national conversation. Our national political leaders have demonstrated their incapacity to do this. If we can't do it in the church, where will such a dialogue occur?

It seems that it is only through a distinctly Christian theological focus can we create the proper framework for dialogue that encourages us to look to the role of the church and find the resources to do what we must do. There will be the inevitable struggles with Constantinians, and often these will reject the very premise of looking first to a Confessing Church, since many in that camp feel there is nothing to confess. But these must not stop the exploration of what it means to be a Confessing Church, even though we realize that this will be perceived to be a division or dialogical chasm within the church. But at some point, the work has to proceed, a nd we can only, at best, maintain an invitational posture toward those who would promote a far more pervasive assimilation of materialism, consumerism, and "regrettable violence" as "neccessary in a world of terrorism".

Larry returns from a four day event "stoked" by the things which were explored.

Refreshed, Renewed, Hopeful

The closing paragraph also is the kind of thing I need to be hearing right now, which is a looking to the role of the church as the purveyor of hope, renewal, and refreshment, and , once again, it's coming from a Methodist (these two blogs -- this one and the one from my previous post, were among the first to show up as having been updated most recently among my RSS feeds that I noticed first this morning)

I leave the conference enamored with another thought. In this culture that is often so coarse, shallow and utterly material, I believe there are those who deeply want something with greater depth and purpose than popular culture can ever offer. What they want is something worthy enough, and big enough, to believe in. Something large enough to commit one's life to.

Here's the big thought. As a Wesleyan Christian, this means to me making a commitment to heal the earth of our environmental harm, work for peace and end poverty because personal commitment to Jesus Christ, at the level of the heart and the depth of the soul, impels one toward this lifestyle. To know Jesus is to know the face of the poor, the war-ravaged and the forgotten.

This individual commitment further impels us to collective expression of faith; to a community of faith in which we are renewed, refreshed and in which we find hope.

This post quotes from a book by a United Methodist Bishop. This is an encouraging sign for the United Methodists

The Phaith of St.Phransus: CHURCH GROWTH MOVEMENTS AND PRACTICAL ATHEISM

When the consumerist motivation becomes pervasive everything is reduced to a utilitarian market commodity. Worship is reduced to a marketing tool to attract the masses and is shaped by personal preferences and individual tastes. Evangelism is seen more as joining the church than a radical reorintation of life in response to prevenient, justifying, santifying, and perfecting grace. Ministry becomes a commodity to be dispensed by the professionals and received by the laity. Institutional participation is equated with discipleship and mission is treated as an optional object of occasional financial support. The church is viewed as another of the many institutions competing for the loyalty and support of people, who shop for the institution that best fulfils their self-identified needs.

So true. This , in my experience, contributes to a bland and discouraging sameness with culture. What then, is the need to join yet another social/civic outlet, albeit one with "religious appendages"?

Contemporary Methodists tend to trust planning processes, organizational strategies, institutional structures, and the insights gleaned from the social sciences more than the power of gospel proclaimed and lived.

written by Bishop Kenneth L. Carder (former bishop for TN Conference); excerpt from Rethinking Wesley's Theology For Contemporary Methodism; edited by Randy Maddox

Thanks, Jonathan, for posting that. I'll want to read that whole article.

Jamie Smith's thoughts on the reaction of London (the killing of the uninvolved guy on the train), and he asks the quesiton that seems to be an assumed "Yes", or not asked at all, but just accepted as "the way it is" and "what has to be done to live in the world".

Fors Clavigera: America Supports UK War Against Terror: By Sending the LAPD to London

What is "security" worth? Is this an end we should even hope for?

Jamie also mentions the shooting of the baby as police confronted a man who was using the baby as a shield. I had ofen used that type of scenario as an argument against the killing of innocent civilians in war, vs the restraint we assume neccessary in a hostage situation. We (at least I) do not consider it worth it to kill an innocent civilian in order to punish the guilty. But here, they just went ahead and did it, and killed the baby, but hey, they got their guy! Very disturbing.

"Security" is a false God, an "idol". Hauerwas says that it's what we "trade" away in order to faithful. It's the final hurdle.

Via MyDD and TPMCafe || Politics, Ideas & Lots Of Caffeine

I submit this statement to the Congress in an effort to correct a malicious and disingenuous smear campaign that has been executed against a friend and former colleague, Valerie (Plame) Wilson. Neither Valerie, nor her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson has asked me to do anything on their behalf. I am speaking up because I was raised to stop bullies. In the case of Valerie Plame she is facing a gang of bullies that is being directed by the Republican National Committee.

MyDD :: "I am speaking up because I was raised to stop bullies"

Former CIA agent and State Department counterterrorism official Larry Johnson posted at TPMCafe the prepared text of the testimony he's giving House and Senate Democrats this morning on the outing of Valerie Plame. Though we've heard from Johnson many times before on the Plame/Wilson smear campaign, this testimony is likely to garner the most attention from the media because of the relative high profile of the Congressional Democrats' joint hearing.

Johnson's testimony will hopefully be fully digested by the media, who, while angry that the White House has continually lied to them, have also been all too willing to accept the GOP spin that the outing of Valerie Plame was ultimately no big deal. That's a myth that he's out to set straight

I could hardly believe my eyes when I saw this at rhe foot of a "Blog" post on Al Mohler's "Blog". I say "Blog" in quotes becuase your blog, Al, is ANYTHING but. Re-runs?

Crosswalk.com - Albert Mohler's Weblog

This article was originally published on November 16, 2004. New daily columns will resume on August 1, 2005.

That's great. I guess he had started to repeat himself anyway, so what the heck?

David Weinberger comments on Rebecca MacKinnon's experience with a Newsweek article that bungled basic facts about her.

Joho the Blog: Rebecca on doing business with China - and Newsweek's sloppiness

Rebecca also blogs about Newsweek's sloppy characterization of her. As she notes, it's not a big deal, except that the MSM [Mainstream Media] keep telling us that they're better than bloggers because they have fact checkers, they're professionals, they get their facts right, etc.

Yeah, that's what they like to claim. Still have to actually work at it, though. One of my "favorite" things about Fox is how they, more than any other "mainstream" network, seem to rely on "pasing comments" and scores of unsubstantiated innuendos and "facts" . They basically run without footnotes, and provide many "fact checking bloggers" with a lot of blog fodder.

This was an interesting read, in that it reveals what most of us have already heard given to us as "warning", but it seems to me that the passage below unmasks what SHOULD be a "then so what?" for these who judge blogers to be "too wierd".

Chronicle Careers: 07/08/2005

But it's also not hard to find examples of the worst kinds of uses.

A blog easily becomes a therapeutic outlet, a place to vent petty gripes and frustrations stemming from congested traffic, rude sales clerks, or unpleasant national news. It becomes an open diary or confessional booth, where inward thoughts are publicly aired.

Oh, they left out "What I ate for breakfast"

Worst of all, for professional academics, it's a publishing medium with no vetting process, no review board, and no editor. The author is the sole judge of what constitutes publishable material, and the medium allows for instantaneous distribution. After wrapping up a juicy rant at 3 a.m., it only takes a few clicks to put it into global circulation.

We've all done it -- expressed that way-out-there opinion in a lecture we're giving, in cocktail party conversation, or in an e-mail message to a friend. There is a slight risk that the opinion might find its way to the wrong person's attention and embarrass us. Words said and e-mail messages sent cannot be retracted, but usually have a limited range. When placed on prominent display in a blog, however, all bets are off.

So, if "we've all done it" , then why the judgement? For me, that's the appeal and the power of blogs to a large extent. It's a way to get to know people, and know them beyond the usual "PR", sanitized, tidy, and often as a result, PHONY extension of their persona. With blogs we can sense the absence of corporate posturing and "one size fits all" marketing BS. I think that is crucial for theological blogging.

This is PARTICULARLY why I believe blogging to be a candidate for being a crucial resource to churches, to let members explore in more depth and detail afforded by face to face events and meetings, the passions , concerns, joys, and humor of one another. Indeed, there are plenty of examples of people who see each other every Sunday (and perhaps even on Wednesday nights, if you're a Baptist or a Church of Christ person) to have the "I didn't know you were interested in X or that you thought Y". It is a springboard for many offline, face to face "real life" encounters and growth of relationships, because the blog has "given permission" and opened awareness that there is much of mutual interest to talk about.

And when I say "Real life", that's another questionable assumption. When relational breakthroughs like the above described "I didn't know you thought X" happen, an avenue of very real revelation of personal truth has happened, and no thanks to the "real life" of traditional social interaction that somehow and often "blocks" this from happening by sheer intimidation, and by the tendency of churches to "fill the time" to the brim with little time left for actually getting to know people, unless you want to "catch someone at the door", and then have to deal with the fact that you maight be "detaining" them from getting on to their next scheduled event. With the blog's personal background, maybe people are not so apt to "rush out" of the post event buzzing of conversation and look up someone who has raised an issue in their blog that deserves a conversation, or has had a particularly entertaining or profound point about some issue that is worth a face-to-face kudo.

Heh-heh

Daily Kos: The Plame Floodgates Open

The Plame Floodgates Open

Bloomberg is reporting that Rove and Libby both gave testimony to the grand jury that flatly conflicts with the testimony given by those they said they talked to.

We now know that the Top Secret memo most consistent with the talking points that Rove and Libby told reporters was seen in the hands of Press Secretary Ari Fleischer in the days before the leak occurred. And that Fleischer told the grand jury he never saw it.

Read also here, on MSNBC

I bought this a couple hours ago, since I had a 30% off coupon, and was just about to order it from Amazon anyway. It is one FAT book (1048 pages). I 've been wanting to get deeper into this story for quite some time, since I saw the DVD Bonhoeffer, which I bought last November.

To get some perspective on just how FAT this book is, here is a pic of it sitting on top of Hauerwas's Performing the Faith

The following is a "selected reading" of sorts, from the below link, which is from Servant Leaders, Servant Structures. This narrative describes the struggle to reorganize the Church of the Saviour when they realized that they may be getting too large (an almost alien notion to us in the age of the "mega-church", especially since this came when they had reached a whopping 110 members).

SLSS: Chapter 2: Therefore, My Sisters, My Brothers | Entries | Movable Theoblogical | Movable Type Publishing Platform

The following section describes the overarching call the church feels as a community; the overarching narrative from which this community has built an identitiy for itself.

PrefaceI added to this blog, back in September last year, the text of Servant Leaders, Servant Structures. Back in 1996, I had scanned and put it online with the permission of Elizabeth O'Connor as I told her of my desire to do some sort of online collection of reources akin to their Servant Leadership School, and in support of their many misison groups who are always exploring certain books.

Later that year, Gordon Cosby sent me a handwritten letter thanking me for the work I did in getting that and other things about The Church of the Saviour online. Even to this day, when I Google Church of the Saviour , Washington, I get several hits at the top of the list from my Web site.

This September "intention" never proceeded vey far after I moved that book text over to this blog. Ironically, the political issues of the fall last year were allowed to overshadow what I still believe could be an invaluable discussion of the content of this book, Servant Leaders, Servant Structures. There was a previous "trilogy" of the history of The Church of the Saviour, all by Elizabeth O'Connor. Call to Commitment, Journey, Inward Journey Outward, and The New Community. Servant Leaders, Servant Structures is a more concise summary, with a few updates from the late 70's and 80's and early 90's, but as you will see if you read some of this, still written with a narrative style that the author is particularly gifted: for that of story which communicates the sense of expectation and prescence that accompanies life in this community. Perhaps I am making a connection here with my own experiences when I have gone to visit, but Elizabeth's style is as gifted in that regard as any other writer I know. Although she can never be replaced, I cannot help but think that this is a seriously important role that needs to be passed on in some way, so that the story of this unique community (now a "community of communities"; several independent but related by tradition and the same lineage)

Eric posted here about a link that was suggested to him re: "Difference" wherein Miroslav Volf writes about the Relation Between Church and Culture. Eric comments at the cojnclusion of his quote from this article:

Not sure how many of you were reading this silly blog last summer and fall, but the above definitely reminds me that I need to not be like I was at that time.

I can relate to that. In fact, Eric found my blog , I believe, from the recommendation of a mutual blog friend, Pastor Draven, based on the fact that Eric and I seemed to have similar frustrations with the Bush administration and the Religious Right. In no small way Eric's fellowship with me among others, via the blogs, has led to my dialoguing with RO (Radical Orthodoxy), political language, Hauerwas, and the reinvigoration of my own search to find a place in a church.

The below description of a Church of the Saviour "Come and See" event is something with which I need to hook up. This "Wellspring Gathering" is one of the many missions of the Church of the Saviour, and their task is to be a resource for helping other churches explore some of the structures/implemnetations of their journey as church.

Servant Leadership School Come and See

Wellspring Gathering June 23-26; November 10-13

If the Come and See event dates are inconvenient for you, we highly recommend that you consider a visit to the Wellspring Gatherings offered by our sister ministry. Dayspring Retreat Farm provides the primary setting for this four-day opportunity to go deeper on the spiritual journey. A Wellspring Gathering, rooted in the fifty plus years of experience of the Church of the Saviour, focuses on three ways of moving toward a balanced spirituality: an inward journey (personal and corporate prayer), an outward journey (discovering God's call to work in the world), and life together as faith community. $230 covers accommodations and meals. For more information or to register, contact Wellspring staff directly at 301/428-3373 or missionwel@aol.com.

As in, "not be used"

AKMA’s Random Thoughts

we ought to live in ways that bespeak the uniquely authoritative, aniconic, useless God of whom the commandments teach.

If we target “justice” or “freedom” or “openness” as the characteristics of our people, the dominant culture can comfortably ignore us; they know all about justice and freedom and openness, and our protests that “that’s not what we mean by justice” or “that’s not true freedom” will fall on deaf ears. But godliness names a characteristic that the nation-state cannot as readily simulate and co-opt; we have a few more seconds of a fighting chance to define our own terms.

Good stuff. I would, however, notice that there IS much more to "justice" than what people know, especially those who live outside of Kingdom notions of justice. There are those who also feel they "know about what is "church" and what is "Christian" and what is "Biblical". Of course, we have much to do to "fill in" the gaps and defintions, and the task is never-ending. But this does not mean we should eschew using that language altogether. As I have insisted before, this simply abandons the world to chaos; what WE mean (and hopefully, something of what is meant in The Kingdom of God by those terms, we have SOME responsibility to insist upon meanings that lie either beyond or in sharp critique of how our culture have appropriated them.

What is most important in all of this, however, is the representation/demonstration/embodying of what is meant by these things. If we're not doing that, nothing we say is trustworthy.

via Musings of an Emergent Postmodern Negro

Cornel West is an impressive guy, and I like a lot of what he says. I like the WAY he says this, but at the same time, not at all sure he has Hauerwas right:

like Hauerwas, he (Milbank) fails to appreciate the moral progress, political breathroughs, and spiritual freedoms forged by the heroic efforts of modern citizens of religious and secular traditions. It is just as dangerous to overlook the gains of modernity procured by prophetic religious and progressive secular citizens as it is to overlook the blindness of Constantinian Christians and imperial secularists. And these gains cannot be preserved and deepened by reverting to ecclesiastical refuges or sectarian orthodoxies. Instead they require candor about our religious identity and democratic identity that leads us to critique and resist Constantinian Christianity and imperial America

I'd like to hear Hauerwas respond to that, becuase I think he would have some "on the other hand" items, and I am simply fascinated with the issue of dialogue with culture, and how we can faithfully pull it off. I find myself wanting to (and do) defend Hauerwas, James K.A. Smith, Eric, Jim Wallis, and Cornel West, too. And all of us do share a common obsession: to live faithfully in contrast to empire and in contrast to the emptiness of much that is thrust upon us by culture.

I read something else from West the other day on Harbinger that for me highlights the absolute neccessity for and dependence upon an "enabling" body in which to grow, be, and flourish:

I do not think it possible to put forward rational defenses of one's faith that verify its veracity or even persuade one's critics. Yet it is possible to convey to others the sense of deep emptiness and pervasive meaninglessness one feels if one is not critically aligned with an enabling tradition. One risks not logical inconsistency, but actual insanity; the issue is not reason or irrationality, but life or death.

I resonate with that and know that for me, the church still is and must be yet again an incarnate, affirming, enabling community for me. It can be literally "maddening" and cause one's "grip" to falter. I can feel it emotionally, the desire for an infusion of incarnate, tangible hope (if I might, even though that might seem contradictory)---but "tangible" in the sense of embodied and communally experienced.

Yet another gem:

AKMA’s Random Thoughts

To the extent that our lives do not differ perceptibly from the lives of convinced advocates of U.S. exceptionalism, the rest of the world will justifiably number us among those advocates.

A very Radically Orthodox notion, this "difference" invoking. I have felt for a while now that churches need to REFUSE adulation of America , especially and particularly on those days when everyone is expected to bow down.

In this sense, then, I suggest that we need to take Sacramerica seriously as a cultural system. People really commit themselves to live (and die!) for the American Way. We don’t undermine that whole system of assumptions and the practices that express and reinforce Sacramerican beliefs simply by talking.

It is a cultural system that breeds loyalty from those who refuse to name it. In the spirit of "Naing the Powers" (the Walter Wink study), we must be ready to name them and identify where we see them.

And most of all, and first and foremost, BE that difference so that , as Hauerwas writes "the world might know that it is the world"

I am presently in the process of listening to AKMA's presentation, to be followed by another MP3 I downloaded but haven't finished listening to yet: The presentation by William Cavanaugh. Both presentations are on the theme of the Ekklesia gathering: Empire.

AKMA coined this phrase at Ekklesia, and uses it in description of the "holy day" type qaulity of national holidays and observances (Memorial Day, Independence Day, and Sept. 11 henceforth since 2001) those three are what come to my mind as I read and hear about Sacramerica.

AKMA’s Random Thoughts

In the name of realism, in the name of deference to honoring those who bear the effects of war (effects that our everyday language reveals that we regard as a sacrifice9), strident voices demand that Christians profess their loyalty to a national ensign, and observe the festivals that the government establishes as though they were feasts of holy martyrs. The combined interests and sensitivities – often innocent, often commendable – of state power, of patriotic citizens, of injured families, and of corporate advantage converge in an ambiance I will call Sacramerica. In Sacramerica, the national pride of the United States blossoms into a displaced messianic hope that subordinates the God of the Decalogue to the sentimental consolations and pragmatic policy interests of a vast congregation of baseball fans, apple-pie eaters, and fireworks admirers.

a "displaced messianic hope" also captures my sense of these festivals of honor

Upon this occasion:

Notorious Christian terrorist Eric Rudolph was sentenced to two life terms on Monday. The one-time fugitive had carried out four bombings that terrorized the southeastern areas of the United States. Among his crimes were the blowing up of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed a policeman, and a bombing of the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, Georgia.

Informed Comment

Christian Terrorist Rudolph Sentenced
What the Rightwing Press Will not Say

Juan Cole asks some questions that stir things up a bit (just a couple quoted here):

Daniel Pipes will not write a column for the New York Post suggesting that white southern Christians be put in internment camps until it can be determined why they keep producing terrorists and antisemites.

George W. Bush will not issue a statement that "Christianity is a religion of peace and we will not allow the Eric Rudolphs to hijack it for their murderous purposes."

The New Yorker: Fact

GET OUT THE VOTE
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Did Washington try to manipulate Iraq’s election?

As always with Mr. Hersh, great writing and reporting. Wonder what will become of this one.

via Mike James

Harbinger and RoundTower talk Progressive Evangelicalism:

RoundTower: Conversing with Progressive Evangelicalism: Pt. 4 - A Response

Roundtower:

Jim Wallis, for example, decries the hyper-politicization of E and would identify that as a key reason he wanted to differentiate himself from E. That's why it's problematic if that problem shows up in PE.

Steve B.:

If you are selecting partisan politics as a crucial error in evangelicalism, the question is why is partisanship an error for evangelicals, given their other commitments? And if it is the case that partisanship is also a defining feature of PEs, why is that an error for them, given their other commitments? What is about partisan politics in principle that is theologically problematic? Those to me are the most substantive questions.

But fair enough, at the end of the day, you're right: it's an interesting question as to who is more invested in partisanship.

and
(from here

In my previous post, I mentioned that the statement issued by Sojourner’s this past November made some helpful points by outlining some general Christian concerns and priorities for thinking about politics. The statement highlighted general principles that, in my estimation, any Christian would have to take seriously in engaging politics. Where the statement went wrong, I argued, was in its unpacking those principle in ways that seemed partisan and constricted. But that a very broad spectrum of Christian could have endorsed that statement had it refrained from its not-so-subtle hidden message is a point well worth taking very seriously.

Roundtower (David) does a pretty impressive job of talking about some areas where "differences" are more policy/implementation differences than theological/telos differences. That is certainly true in SOME cases, but then Roundtower acknowledges what I would also offer:

At the same time, as Christian we must manifest a healthy suspicion for the ways in which the interests of such experts shape the conclusion they come to and the solutions they propose. We must be aware that investigators (like the rest of us) are often driven by their own sin-corrupted agendas and avoid for our own part falling into the trap of buying into one particular “conservative” or “liberal” vision.

So there ARE many many telological differences , based on real theological differences.

Then Roundtower says this, whcih resonates with me, especially in regar