Everyplace & No Place Part Deux
I love the ancient Christian Celts. A great read is George Hunter III The Celtic Way of Evangelism. He recounts the success of St. Patrick and those who followed him in evangelizing the 'barbarians' of Ireland and the surrounding areas.
What struck me was the way Hunter describes the 'three levels' of human existence. The highest level is the 'thoughts of God' contemplative level. The middle level is the 'stuff of the earth' level where fear, sickness, love, joy, birth, death, etc. resides. The final level is the level where most of us live our lives-- paying taxes, selling sprockets, making a living and so forth.
Hunter's thesis is that the Celts were able to succeed in the 'stuff of earth' level. They had prayers about every concievable thing--harvest, rain, giving birth, nursing, death, etc., meaning they beleived that God was a part of it all. God was above all but also in all; almighty and immanent.
I wonder if one of the challenges of our day is to convince people that God is a part of the 'stuff of earh' and the 'everyday' levels of our existence and not just someone we think about when we are about to die.
I have witnessed the births of all three of my children. I can tell you that being a part of the blood, sweat and tears of birth (and I had the easy part) is the 'stuff of earth' at its best.
Yet all that the Faith has given me: the Sacraments, the preaching of the Word, prayer and worship, all of those things were with me for those moments. I cannot imagine any of my moments in life--both good and bad without the Faith and what the Church has given me. The 'Real Presence of Jesus' is what makes me what I am. In the words of the Rich Mullins song, "I did not make it [the Faith that is], no it is making me..."
What struck me was the way Hunter describes the 'three levels' of human existence. The highest level is the 'thoughts of God' contemplative level. The middle level is the 'stuff of the earth' level where fear, sickness, love, joy, birth, death, etc. resides. The final level is the level where most of us live our lives-- paying taxes, selling sprockets, making a living and so forth.
Hunter's thesis is that the Celts were able to succeed in the 'stuff of earth' level. They had prayers about every concievable thing--harvest, rain, giving birth, nursing, death, etc., meaning they beleived that God was a part of it all. God was above all but also in all; almighty and immanent.
I wonder if one of the challenges of our day is to convince people that God is a part of the 'stuff of earh' and the 'everyday' levels of our existence and not just someone we think about when we are about to die.
I have witnessed the births of all three of my children. I can tell you that being a part of the blood, sweat and tears of birth (and I had the easy part) is the 'stuff of earth' at its best.
Yet all that the Faith has given me: the Sacraments, the preaching of the Word, prayer and worship, all of those things were with me for those moments. I cannot imagine any of my moments in life--both good and bad without the Faith and what the Church has given me. The 'Real Presence of Jesus' is what makes me what I am. In the words of the Rich Mullins song, "I did not make it [the Faith that is], no it is making me..."
posted by fatherneo at 9:07 PM
Post a Comment
38 Comments:
Hey! for all our differences, at least we got Rich Mullins in common.
"Well, His eye's on the sparrow
And the lilies of the field I've heard
And He will watch over you and He will watch over me
So we can dress like flowers and eat like birds"
A great read Padre. It has my hearty recommendation as well. Evangelism takes on a decidedly different feel under the Celtic rubric. The Celtic vision with its “earthy” anchor yet also divine tether strikes me as holistic and quite frankly real. It’s a sacramental vision. Another great book that illustrates via historical fiction this same vision is “Brendan” by Frederick Buechner—very raw and very real, though a little whacky at times (by way of the monastic practices depicted), but God haunted throughout. I love it!
I practice the “Caim” with my daughters (it’s still a game to them at their age, which is fine), which embodies what you describe—“God is a part of the 'stuff of earth' and the 'everyday' levels of our existence.” I say amen to that. Of course, much of what passes for Celtic spirituality today tends toward a nostalgic or romantic remembrance of a bygone era, which in turn probably glosses over shortcomings, but I nonetheless greatly appreciate its reemergence in our time. In the fertile ground of our Post Modern world, a rekindling of interest in the Celtic Christian mind provides a great segue or bridge for going forward, or as you like to say Padre—“Ancient – Future.”
I've been to Iona and to the "thin" place that the community there believes it always to have been and to be. The people there encourage each other in community to stay close to the experience of this intimacy. It's hard not to pray there as you walk. My Celtic past calls to me almost daily. I want to live intimately with him. I want to wear and share St. Patrick's Breastplate. If it's possible to type with a brogue, it's coming out of my fingers now.
Well, this is kind of ironic. In the morning I have been working on developing the habit of immediately after waking, putting on a meditation song,quieting myself for a few moments and then reading a passage from "Extreme Devotion". ( a Devotional I highly recommend BTW) My song choice of late ... " Be Thou My Vision." I also enjoy the music of Eden's Bridge, a Christian Celtic group. But aside from all of that, Tony Campolo wrote a book a while back called Seize the Day, in which he mentions reluctantly going on a retreat during which he was taught by monks to enjoy nature as a sacrament. His reluctance was short lived.
Personally, having been raised on a farm, it is quite easy for me to see all of life, death, birth, seasons, nature, etc... as an endless chain in which every link is an echo of the voice of God. I also have held fast to a belief that our universe is pregnant with the voice of God, to the point that only those who wilfully chose not to are incapable of hearing Him speak.
I have not read the book that you mentioned Fr. Neo. But I certainly will.
NeoLuce.
You seem to think that our faith will continue without the church and clergy, but that cannot be. Without teaching our children there will not be adults who know the scriptures or the order of worship. Without worship, we will soon be mood-making our way through cathedrals to ourselves that have no real accountability. There is nothing more certain than the ability of man to self-delude and substitute his wants and needs for those of God. We might put God first in our solitary mountain river wanderings, occasionally, but not dependably.
Jesus said that where two or three are gathered together in His name, there He would be also. That must mean that two or three is the minimum church. Though prayer can be done in solitude, it might lose its priority without the social expectations of one brother or sister for another. We need each other and the church to keep the faith. The first century church made that obvious. Let's stay with the game that got us this far.
neoluce -- I notice you have had no comment on my post concerning my pastor or the accomplishments of the Faith Community I am a part of. They would have been impossible to accomplish without a unified church united under the vision of our pastor. It took a combined effort of many. But our pastor was the one who gave us direction. Without a vision the people perish. If you think you can do better on your own working by yourself...lots of luck.
I'm getting a tad frustrated here.
Luce and Sheila Jo - From where do you think "the Bible" came? Given that you grant it such authority in your posts, I suspect you are confident of its origins. A simple question that requires a simple answer. And please don't answer, "God." That's a cop-out.
Who said anything about abdicating their individual authority? Who said anything about not using our individual gifts? Since when is sitting under a Pastor and using our individual gifts and callings mutually exclusive? Who said anything about letting another do our thinking for us? If I waited until Sunday service and Tuesday night Bible study to be spiritually fed, I would be a malnurished soul indeed! I go to the feet of Christ daily to be fed the Bread of Heaven. I use my gifts and callings within the body I am apart of. My pastor will tell you that he learns as much from the body he leads as we do from him.
What disturbs me the most about the anti-clergy postings is the unwillingness to admit that there are ANY good clergy out there...
I can understand disatisfaction with a few, and even many...but with everyone? Our church needs our pastor to provide the vision. Our pastor needs us to help it manifest... Trust me, no one does Angevoix's thinking for her... Its not about thought police controlling everything we do and say, its about direction for the church to manifest the Kingdom of God on Earth as it is in Heaven...
ICorinthians 12:21 "The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!"
And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!"
vs. 27 "Now you are the body of Christ and each of you a part of it."
The "order of worship" in the churches to which I have been exposed appears to be a modern expression of what we know of the worship of the church in the first century, the creeds of the early meetings of the church (Nicene and Apostles Creed), the Psalms, scripture readings. It gives the progression of the church calendar from Advent through Lent and Easter, the prayers handed down to us, such as the Lord's Prayer, the prayers of St. Chrysostum, the praises of glorifying God, blessing His name, approaching his altar, the bringing in of new members through Baptism, the invocations and prayers of thanksgiving, forgiveness of sins, Communion or The Eucharist, sometimes seasonal foot washing from the book of John, etc. Stuff like that.
I was raised Roman Catholic, raised my kids in the Methodist church and now attend worship in an orthodox Anglican parish. I believe that what I'm calling the "order of worship" is a gift from our history and from the early saints of the church that brings continuity and scope to our worship.
Go visit a church with traditional liturgical worship form and see if you don't feel the same. But even if you go to a community church which has truncated itself from church history for historical reasons no longer known in the pews, there is an order of beginning, middle and end which makes worship, even though sparse and contemporary, a formal approaching and respectful experience of the presence of God among us.
Admittedly, you don't get much of this in the woods.
More nonsensical verbiage. Still no evidence of any fruit. Talk is cheap Luce...put your money were your mouth is and give us some examples of the success of your way. The proof of the pudding is in the eating...so far you have nothing but hot air.
God help me to never be so self- righteus that I beleive myself to be one of few that are truly hungry for God. False prophets will be recognized by their fruit. Jesus didn't tell us to look for who can quote or misquote the most scripture. He didn't tell us to look for who had the most impressive gift or who could pray the most eloquent prayers...He said to examine the fruit. If the Spirit of God is truly at work in our lives there should be tangible evidence. What our faith community has accomplished under the vision of a pastor took a lot more than good intentions. It took marching the streets against gang and drug activity for seven years. It took sit ins and arrest...for which I still have my ticket. It took letter writing and phone calls to politicians. It took heat from the media, and very real death threats from the drug dealers. It took the combined efforts of a lot of people. I didn't march the streets alone. It took a hunger not to just read the Word and quote the Word, but to see the Word manifest on this Earth even as it is in Heaven.
"toward a very articulate and wise orator of truth and logic. namely me."
You forgot to add humble...
I ask again...where is your fruit?
And if you must know...Lucey Goosey.
My Fall out with Fallwell is over the fact that he had the nerve to call Tinky Winky of Tele Tubby fame gay... a slanderous and rediculous accusation for which I for one will never forgive him, regardless of the eternal consequences...
Let the chips fall where they may...
In other words you are a no show in the Arena and chose to sit on the sidelines critiquing those actually engaged in the battle while having absolutely nothing that attest to your qualifications to do so.
My comments were made in defense of clergy whom I have seen called every name in the Book, Henchmen, Hirelings,false prophets, to name a few. The only criteria we are given in which to judge the authenticity of the ministry of another is the fruit. This is Christ's standard of judgement...
You are the one's who brought the clergy to trial here...I am just delivering the evidence that they have been tried and convicted unfairly...
"I do not postulate that all church leaders are pied pipers or evil demons who capture the souls of men."
So you admit there might just be a few good clergy out there...
And yes I admit, it is a mistake to get caught up in our works BUT we also have to remember that without works our faith is dead. As followers of Christ our lives should be of use to someone besides ourselves... it isn't that deep...I beleive that encouraging our neighbor over the hedgerow is as important as serving in a soup kitchen...but we ought to be doing SOMETHING! ANYTHING!
Neoluce...despite your "verbaige" you and I are not as far apart as you might think on this issue...I just think you are overly extreme in your across the board judgement of clergy... But its easy to point out the problem, it takes courage to find the answer. I don't think retreating from the battle is it. In fact some would posit that those who have retreated from the battle have forfeited their right to have a say about it.
Luce in the sky with diamonds,
Do a spell check next time, white boy.
This exchange is disheartening. Sad.
Is there no room left for love from the regulars - beyond the common "me too" and long-winded parsing of fine points?
"Do a spell check next time, white boy." Really, Seraph? Really? Is this the angel's response to a man clearly flailing in the pain of homesickness? Neoluce has spun himself beyond reason, his reason carrying himself well beyond the realities his efforts at reason would normally be intended to address. But you, Seraph, you should know better.
You too, Father Neo. Has mockery become your best way of expressing an un-invitation? You are a voice for home, and you know that for whatever prodigal rantings may come from Neoluce, you represent and are a part of what at some point he may limp home to. You cannot go with him to where he is today, but the fact that you (as a priest) remain a target of his rage means that you also remain the sounding board for his heart.
Is this your pride or your obedience at work?
Neoluce, you're being a dick. You're trading pot-shots for the sake of hearing your roar echo in the dark, and you are adding nothing to the exchange. You rant like an indolent boy, like the prodigal son. But please, my friend, do not let yourself believe that life is better in the far off land, with the pigs.
And do not let yourself believe that the church or the people and spirit of whom it is comprised are nearly the monsters your delusions have promised, despite what you have unearthed here.
The church was the church before Constantine, and there is no question that while the Bride has issues, it is still very much the Bride with whom and through whom Jesus did/does intend to be/make Himself known. He shows up where He is invited, scandalous though that often feels.
And only a fool would divorce himself from the Bride when Christ does not.
There is a place for you within the Body. And the Body is a Priesthood. Even when there are only two or more gathered in His name, there you will still find a priest. To that extent, my friend, you are a priest. You are therefore invited to apply the terms of your own previous finger-pointing to yourself at any point.
You have been seen and saved both as an individual and as part of a saved people. A cowboy approach kicks half your eternal truth out from under you. The approach of a cowboy attacking his missing leg is just silly.
You do not have to live alone, hurling stones and roaring in the dark.
You've been a dick, and you've received dickish responses here. But there are people posting to this blog who know and are great (flawed, of course) friends/witnesses to/priests of Christ. Of Christ, and of the home you are attacking without need or real basis.
Please, see if you can find the hope inside your anger and frustration, and see if you can speak of it here. You will find good counsel, and you may even find something of your missing leg.
HUH? Is right. We're (I'm) here for Luce anytime he wants to drop his fists.
:::HUH:::
Fr. Neo uses sarcasm when necessary. I am cruel when necessary. I'd hate to have to kick your rear. J/K, sort of.
Rio,
What about Norris resonates with you?
We're not going to start resonating again, are we?
What a community we have here! Isn't this "the church". We have teachers, students, priests, men, women. Tough repartee, but always with a tinge of love. We are arguing, but it is the argument of brothers and sisters in Christ. It is a wrangling with an invitation to stay, not a rebuke to go. Awesome, really. True intimacy is often helped by strife and flashes of anger, especially among men. Jesus loved Peter dearly, though he had to bust his chops on a regular basis.
I'm feeling blessed.
My appologies for any untoward rebuttals. I am very concerned for the health and well-being of one particular clergyman right now and a little sensitive about comments that would disparage him or his authenticity. And again I solicit your prayers on his behalf.
Sheila Jo,
I wasn’t offended at your use of scripture per se, but at your (and Luce’s) misuse of the same to discredit and dismiss out of whole cloth the notion (important nuance) of church and clergy. What we call scripture today is nothing less (notice I didn’t say “nothing more”) than the product of the early church for good and ill. Your almost one-sided use (Luce’s too) of scripture as a means to dismantle “the church” is akin to biting the hand that feeds you. As for scripture telling us that scripture is true and God-breathed, well, that’s tantamount to the parlor trick of circular reasoning. Regardless, let it be known to those here that I give proper credence to scripture. If the denomination you referenced is the same that requires full baptismal immersion for “salvation,” then I understand much of your vehement rhetoric. Their hermeneutic is a case in point as to my concern for engaging in bible sword drills. The cost, as you have given witness to here by your comments, can be grave. The best man in my wedding was and is COC and would still say to this day that I’m on the highway to hell with AC/DC and the rest of the lot who got sprinkled etc. Their theology is a master/servant modal vs. a parent/child. The world currently has enough of the former to deal with in addition to having some “Christians” adopt the same mentality. They, and others like the nutcase Fallwell, are also the same who would have you submit for no other reason than your gender. If his ilk alone were the example I’d too be running for the hills.
Angevoix,
Ahh…no apologies now! You were doing just fine, as always.
Rio,
Norris rocks!
HUH,
I like your style. I didn’t agree with everything you said, but you got hutzpah…kind of like Scout (a hero of mine).
Thanks Constantine...
My church that I attend now is really the first thing I have ever known that was anything like a family to me, and yes I love them dearly... to hear them disparaged... yes it hurts and offends me. And it is even moreso with the current state of affairs with my pastor's health. So maybe I take it a little more personally than I should...
But perhaps that is a lesson in and of itself...before we begin blustering negative generalizations about an entire group of people, especially a group which we are no longer even a part of...maybe we need to stop and think. We were all basically maligned...the clergy were painted as insincere huksters and those of us who follow thier leadership were painted as naive simpletons... so hells bells...what AM I appologizing for? Why is it that only one side of this argument has carte blanche to say whatever they damn well please while the rest of us are lectured to play nice?
I've spent the hours since my last post praying for you. Last night my network went down, and while I knew how to fix it, I took it as a sign to wait until morning to see what was posted after me. I had dreams about replies, and I feared that I had cut too deeply.
What a beautiful response from you all. What an incredibly blessing - and rare reward - for risking (albeit anonymously) to speak my heart. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
My spirit continues to labor for neoluce, a man in pain but for whom I suspect your prayers and love could become and incredible salve. Neoluce, if you check back in, may the responses of the people here speak to you of the humility that seems to grow best in a setting where the desire for peaceful community makes itself known as more compelling than the desire to win immediate quarrels. If your own response does not feel like theirs right away, ask yourself if you wish it would - it may be that missing leg of which I spoke yesterday.
In fearful service.
.
Yes, and may I add that I wish that my responses sounded a little more like the invitation to stay that Morpheus spoke of, rather than heated retort to offense.
There are problems to be sure in God's household just as there are with any family...but the intention should never be to shut one another out in the cold.
:::HUH:::,
Great--now it's time for you to come up with a name that is at least a noun. You wouldn't be the anonymous White Rabbit from previous posts would you be?
No White Rabbits here, my friend. Just someone who's gained something for her heart from the conversations here, and was sad to seeing it going sideways. I have been impressed with you - and with many of the people here - and was all the more blown away by your responses to my challenge. Thank you once again.
Oh, and HUH is also a noun...it means visual palindrome. I'm the bell curve of accountability - offensive in equal measure on both sides, but hopefully mounded with love in the middle for those who are willing to endure the climb.
Maybe HUH is also the noun for the sound a person makes when they read such weirdness.
The best to you, Father Neo. Does your Sunday effort earn you Monday off? Maybe listen to some Mariah Carey?
...
Ah, Mr. yingyang has Status Anxiety. I am Galled.
Sheila Jo,
Under your definition of “church,” how would you propose to carry out the desire of our Lord to “do this in remembrance of me”? Given that this is a “command” from scripture, I would think you’d place considerable emphasis on its veracity, yet would be hard pressed to offer a reasonable suggestion as to how this particular desire of our Lord could be facilitated without the institution of the Church.
As to the “True Church” being dismantled…it won’t be, though it certainly may appear to be so, or in the process of becoming so, at any given time in history. A cursory review of Church history provides ample evidence to this affect, i.e. the Reformation, the 1054 Schism, the Crusades, when the light of the Church was indeed dim, if not seemingly extinguished, and sadly often brought about by its own hands. We could even now be entering another “Dark Age” for all we know (if the “Left Behinders” ilk gain much more footing with their ghetto mentality and become what the world sees as “Christian,” then indeed the church could cease to flourish for a time), where the institution of the Church would seem to be irrelevant, even dead, during our life time. A generation, or even a few, come and gone is but a season really. For all we know, maybe we are still in the “early Church” era. I’ve expressed this idea to others and it’s not even my own, but one that helps to bring perspective in the “here and now.” If I were to type out to you now the date of this post saying “in the year of our Lord 2005,” but instead made an inadvertent error and keyed in an extra zero to make the number 20005, the notion of Church history from that vantage point would be remarkably different I suspect. Now, there are those who would say, “Impossible!” But I would say, “But of that day and hour no one knows…” I remember asking one of my teachers when I was a sophomore in high school at a private non-denominational (read “born again” here) school-- where by the way I read the Bible too much and had it paraded before me ad nauseum--when he thought the Lord would return, and after hedging that “only the Father knows,” proceeded to tell me he couldn’t see the world going another 20 years. Well…he was wrong. Who knows, it could be another 2,000 years or 20,000 years instead of the short sighted 20 years he served up to a young and impressionable mind, and as such we should expect and not be surprised by all manner of things in the Church visible/militant.
Btw Sheila, I’m not suggesting that you go back to the lunacy from which you escaped, but only saying that Church per se is not as you or Luce would have it exclusively.
Here's a thought, C. I am not saying I beleive this...I'm just saying that it might be worth considering... perhaps while we are waiting on Christ to return...He is actually waiting on us to stand up and be the church without spot or blemish...the church which doesn't compromise to popular thought, political or social...the church that is ONE...as he prayed, the church that says thy Kingdom come, thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven, and rather than using the its facilities as bomb shelters to hide from battle, it uses them as boot camps from which to emerge to fight the good fight? If that be the case you might just be right C. It could take until 20005 for christ to return.
A little post-millennial pondering, eh Angevoix? That line of thinking definitely puts the onus on the church to live out its mandate. It basically affirms that God is more patient than we.
Matthew 11:12
And from the days of John the Baptist until now the Kingdom of God suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force...
Sheila Jo,
I wholeheartedly affirm the biblical teaching that the church is a 'holy priesthood.'
Part of my vocation is to model Jesus' high priesthood & his intercession for believers. I also try to help others 'offer their bodies as living sacrifices' & I do my best to draw others to Jesus' once for all sacrifice on the cross.
We are all part of the body. I am just one unworthy shepherd of one wonderful flock.
Sheila Jo,
I was born and raised, as is often said, RC, and remain so to this day (with one very intense detour). There was also a point in my youth when I very seriously considered Holy Orders (vocation as Priest). As a freshman in high school, for a variety of reasons (no, I wasn’t a rebel in need of reform), I went to the aforementioned “Christian” school only to return later to the public school domain. You said you detected some “contempt/bitterness” in my comments regarding the “Left Behinders” and the “born againers” and you’re right. These two groups are essentially synonymous in my view. They use scare tactics to build their ghetto, which for them means predominantly one thing: individual and personal salvation from the everlasting fires of Hell into which you’ll be thrown by God in His wrath (even though He loves you sooo much…smooch…smooch) if you fail to confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord etc. (read here a bunch of Bible stuff). If your own “bitterness” is improving then God bless you Sheila Jo. It’s probably a healthier path to tread. Mine’s not and I don’t care. I also find this ilk overwhelmingly sappy, saccharine, and sickly sweet. Have you ever listened to “Christian” music? God spare me (sorry to fans out there). Many in this camp behave as if God were a cuddly teddy bear who plays celestial vending machine by acting accordingly to the “Prayer of Jabez.” This, of course, bears little to no resemblance to St. Clive’s description of God as “not a tame Lion” (as in Aslan from his “Narnia” series). Read the book of Job again or watch the recent, though achingly not uncommon, news about the little girl Shasta and her brother, and its plain as the nose on our faces that God is very hard to pin down. He ain’t tame folks. (Although, I do believe, down in my bones, His Love is unconditional, infinite, incomprehensible, and long-suffering beyond all that we can imagine. Being “not tame” and the source of unconditional Love needn’t be a contradiction.)
Yes, the RC Church in its official dogma (even after VC II, though it’s presented thereafter with a touch more generosity) claims to be the one true Church on earth—basically that via St. Peter they hold the keys. Rome asserts that Protestants (even Eastern Orthodoxy in some measure) are “separated brethren.” I find your Mother Teresa experience a common occurrence among the uninitiated. Her life was indeed amazing and filled to the brim with the love of God. Be careful though! Keep watch and gird up your loins! You might find yourself (especially if you attend a Mass with your friend at say the next Easter Vigil) drawn as a moth to a light if you hang around Rome too much. And then you’ll find yourself in a real conundrum to be sure, trying to find the same thing without going to Rome. (Sorry, a little inside joke and jab for Padre Neo.) Btw, Rome often gives me heartburn too. In truth, the “via media” tradition of Anglican thought resonates with me the most, as well as the ambiguous and foggy neo-orthodox.
I’m glad you like the idea of the Church being charged to GO out instead of stay in (at least exclusively). At the end of the RC Mass, the benediction/dismissal often says in so many words, “GO in peace to love and serve the Lord.” Alas, my experience is that most of we (me included) cradle Catholics have no clue what the hell that means. Rome likes to tell you what to do, not explain it.
"Alas, my experience is that most of we (me included) cradle Catholics have no clue what the hell that means. Rome likes to tell you what to do, not explain it."
What a riot, and oh so true. I went through RIC classes before I was baptised, our church puts a huge emphasis on understanding what you are doing and why you are doing it. I am really at a loss as to why Rome doesn't emphasize this more. The other adults and I were deeply moved by the meaning behind the traditions we were taught... I think this would make an incredible difference to the young people coming up in the church. I felt kind of bad... as if us newcomers were getting a better deal than the "cradle Catholics".
Also I have a big beef with the Christian music industry...I'm really sick of this fanciful fluff nonsense that passes as Christian Music...what is that about? My experience as a Christian has had high points to be sure, but there have also been times when I felt as if my heart and soul and entire being were being nailed to the cross. Where is that expression in the Christian music industry? What I hear doesn't sound anything like my life, which has been a road pock marked with sorrow and tears, sacrifice and obedience, when it hurt like hell. If I hear the same lyrics regurgitated one more time...! Do we know how to say anything to God besides, " I exalt you, I lift you up, I praise you."
Somebody please slap the turn table, the record must be skipping...
Are we afraid to tell the truth about what it is really like to live out this Christian journey?
It’s not really anger as such, but frankly disrespect. (Though there are certainly times when anger is appropriate—i.e. the clergy sex scandal in the RC Church. Just don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.) Here’s my bottom line on the “Left Behinders” and “Born Againers.” They are beyond annoying to the point of being a hindrance in my book.
Do I think my own Church (RC) ever uses fear tactics? Yes, they have a long history of employing, and I’ve personally experienced, fear tactics. My contention is this. A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist, regardless of where they hang their hat—in Rome, as a “Left Behinder,” or as a radical separatist/last remnant breed (Luce). I’d rather take my chances with the secular lot or the "lukewarm" than with the fundies. Just being honest.
What do I think “born again” means? I think it’s a lifelong process often punctuated by events/experiences, some of these being sacramental in nature—i.e. “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.” The path of salvation for most, certainly me!, is a curvy, up and down one. Here’s a suggestion. Pick up a copy of Frederick Buechner’s book “Wishful Thinking.” It’s a “lexicon” of sorts that offers insightful and fresh definitions for worn out “Christian/theological” words. He has several books along these lines. I like his definition of “born again” a lot.
Btw, I don’t feel “threatened” or intimidated in the least from the fundies, wherever they happen to reside, just annoyed. When I was young and didn’t understand you have to take authority for what you believe the fear tactics worked. They don’t anymore.
Post a Comment
<< Home