S P R I N G

moss on tree.

after the spring rain.

moss.

spider.

budding.

after the rainfall.

spring rain.

blooming air orchid.

my new friend, roger.

roger's house.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell vs. Don't Judge, Don't Preach

I was having lunch in Toronto with a friend of mine recently when we began talking about all of those topics that you're not supposed to talk about in the church. Drinking, swearing, and sexual orientation were at the center of our conversation. We both agreed that there is a kind of universal "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in the church when it comes to such matters. It seems that Christians would rather mind their own business than actually engage with those who might live and believe differently. Kind of strikes me as a form of xenophobia. And I think it's a real problem in Christian culture.

First, the problem with "Don't ask." Not asking means not knowing. Not knowing means not caring. And soon enough we have a bunch of people who don't really care about one another because they haven't bothered to ask questions to people who are different. Instead, people hold surface level conversations about ubiquitous topics rather than going deeper into the complexities and mysteries of life. Differences are a good thing and the church needs to embrace diversity within the unity of Christ. Interestingly, not asking is, in many ways, just a silent way of judging. By not asking, we presume to know someone else - and therefore are not worth talking to.

Second, the problem with "Don't tell." When church culture cultivates a moratorium on sharing, then people are stifled. Our identities are suffocated. We can't share what makes us who we are. As I wrote in a post long ago, the beliefs we hold are near and dear to us, the church needs to be a place where people do tell. A culture of not sharing only promotes hidden secrets, shame, and more judgment due to lack of understanding.

Perhaps the church needs to replace "Don't ask, Don't tell" with "Don't judge, Don't preach." Here are some advantages.

"Don't judge" means that we ought to authentically inquire and go deeper into the mysteries of God and life with others. Without asking questions we do not grow. And we need one another to learn (otherwise God wouldn't have created community at the center of everything). But this needs to happen without judgment. We can never see the world exactly the same as someone else because we all have unique experiences according to our situatedness. Asking is the means to knowing and knowing the means to building relationship. If we ask without judgment, we are afforded better relationship through inquiry.

"Don't preach" simply means to share without an agenda. Do tell, but don't tell in order to convert others to your own opinion (at least not aggressively or coercively. Wanting others to share your opinion is OK in my opinion). This ultimately liberates us to share without fear or shame. We are free to share simply because what we share is authentically ours to share. We share a piece of ourselves because, once again, through sharing we move closer together and build relationship.

Church ethos needs to move away from this simple and anti-relational "Don't ask, Don't tell." We need a community building "Ask! But don't judge. Tell! But don't preach." What do you think?

TIME Gives Props to the Emerging Church

It doesn't take a genius to note that less and less people are associating themselves with organized religion. Put another way, more and more people are identifying themselves as having no religious affiliation at all. This is what TIME recently called, "The Rise of the Nones" (punny, right?) in their March 12 issue on 10 Ideas That Are Changing Your Life. In the article Amy Sullivan reports: "The fastest-growing religious group in the U.S. is the category of people who say they have no religious affiliation. Sometimes called 'the nones' by social scientists, their numbers have more than doubled since 1990..."

While critics of religion love to interpret such trends as the death rattle of religion, (I would caution such analysts to ponder the irony of pronouncing the death of a religion whose God dies) there is more evidence to support that the rise of the "nones" is not a death, but an evolution in faith and spirituality. "Many of those who have given up on organized religion have not given up on faith," says Sullivan. Although the "nones" are increasing, statistics for agnostics and atheists remain low, at about 4%. What we have are a lot of people who still believe in a god of sorts, but can't find a safe, flexible place to explore and live out their faith.

Nevertheless, people are responding to and evolving with these trends. One of the key Christian movements is the Emerging Church movement: "The U.S. has a long tradition of producing spiritual innovators and entrepreneurs. Today they're the organizers of the emergent-church movement, an effort by younger Christian leaders (there's a similar movement among Jews) to take religion away from musty pews and fierce theological fights by creating small worship communities that often meet in member's homes," writes Sullivan.

The Emerging Church movement is difficult to define and I'll make no attempt to elaborate in this post (I've included some links at the end of this post). It's simply encouraging to see TIME acknowledge a serious trend in American religious life, as well as the important response movements that are taking place. Sullivan concludes her article with a quote from Erin Dunigan, a pastor of "Not Church" in La Mision, Mexico. Dunigan says, "It allows the folks that I spend time with to say, 'If organized religion is willing to try something new, maybe I should give organized religion a chance.' "

Links:

Five Streams of the Emerging Church by Scot McKnight (2007)

Emergent Village

The OOZE: Evolving Spirituality

Tall Skinny Kiwi

>> Andrew Jones' Response to D.A. Carson's Critique on the Emerging Church

>> 50 Books on Emerging Church

The nine core practices of the Emerging Church:

1. Identifying with Jesus (and his way of life through incarnational living)
2. Transforming secular space (overcoming the secular/sacred split)
3. Living as community (not merely as strangers in proximity at a church service)
4. Welcoming the stranger (radical and genuine hospitality that is inclusive)
5. Serving with generosity (not merely serving the institution called "church," but people)
6. Participating as producers (not as widgets in the church program)
7. Creating as created beings (releasing God’s creativity inherent in each one)
8. Leading as a body (beyond control and the CEO model of leadership)
9. Merging ancient and contemporary spiritualities (recognizing and celebrating the contribution of 2000 years of Christianity).

Lady Gaga... Liberation Theologian?

In the March 12 issue of TIME, pop icon Lady Gaga was featured in the "10 Questions" portion of the magazine. Interestingly, the interview focused less on her work as a musical artist and more on her efforts to put an end to bullying.

What fascinated me about the interview was Lady Gaga's response to the first two questions:

You just launched the Born This Way Foundation. Is it aimed at preventing bullying?
This is not an antibullying foundation. This is a youth-empowerment foundation. This is about combatting meanness and cruelty. This is about inspiring bravery in young people and their parents and culture worldwide to work toward a kinder and more accepting society.

Isn't inspiring kindness the same thing as combatting bullying?
We do not make a distinction between the bully and the victim. Each person is an equally important and valuable member of society. What the foundation is about is a transformative change that is going to take a long time to affect the overall culture. Bullies were born this way too.

A line in each answer reveals something most interesting and exciting. First, Gaga claims that her foundation is not against bullies, but rather for kindness. It is not about labeling people good or bad, but claiming good and bad behavior, which can be enacted by all. Second, Gaga explicitly states that she does "not make a distinction between the bully and the victim. Each person is equally important..."

Gaga's principles resonate extremely well with the movement of Liberation Theology. While vacuous attacks have painted Liberation Theology as a mere social agenda, it is not. Liberation Theology is fundamentally about oppression amongst all races, classes, and genders. Both Gaga and Liberation Theologians recognize that both the oppressed and oppressors are caught in a dynamic of violence; and both are in need of liberation.

Though he may not be considered a liberation theologian, the Brazillian philosopher and educator Paulo Freire has contributed much to the liberation movement. His major work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, offers insights the dynamic between oppressors and the oppressed. Here are a few that my friend Stephen pointed out to me:

Dehumanization is the fundamental characteristic of the oppressed-oppressor dichotomy, liberation is the restoration/creation of the humanity of both.

In order for there to be true liberation, the oppressed must not turn around and become the oppressors: In order for the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors to have meaning, “the oppressed must not, in seeking to regain their humanity (which is to create it), become in turn oppressors of the oppressors, but rather restorers of the humanity of both” (44)

Kind of sounds like Lady Gaga, doesn't it?

Project 28: The Year of Female Authors

When I was a young teenager, I had this bizarre fantasy to spend a year in prison just so I could workout in 'the yard' and get really jacked. Junior high boys are strange. I blame too many Jean Claude Van Damme movies for that one.

But there is something natural to the idea of giving oneself to an ambitious project for a year. I think that it's fairly common for people to wish that they could devote a year to something like learning to play guitar, scuba diving, or hiking the Appalachian trail. We're goal-oriented people. So, at least my teenage heart was in the right place.

Last week I turned 28 and I found myself wanting to set a goal for the upcoming year. A week later it came to me: I will devote this year of reading to a majority of female authors - 28 to be exact. Over the next year I would like to read the works of at least 28 different women.

Why women? Because our 2012 world is a world catered for men. My recent adventure through the Millennium Trilogy reminded me that the world today is still very much bias toward men. It is a world where women earn less money than men and can't obtain the same opportunities as men. One quick look at political leaders, CEO's, and TV commercials reveals the misogynous reality of our world. I mean, how else can a national debate on women's reproductive health be dominated by men? How is it that we have consistently excluded the voices of those from whom all of life originates?

My field, in particular, is still wrestling with the relics of patriarchy. Even today many women are not permitted to serve as clergy. As I look at the books shelved above me, 90% of my own books on Christian theology and ministry have been authored by men.

So, I know what to do this year. I'm going to listen to the voices of my sisters. I'm going to attempt to see the world through their eyes. My hope is to gain a fuller sense of who God is and what it means to be human. After all, my sisters bear the divine imprint equally as much as men.

Here's what I need from you: Suggestions. I will conclude this post with a list of authors that I have compiled. If you have additional suggests, please comment or email me. Thanks!

AUTHORS:

Elizabeth Johnson

Sallie McFague

Margaret Suchocki

Catharine Mowry Lacugna

Donna Haraway

Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza

Loida Martell-Otero

Karen Armstrong

Kathleen Norris

Mary Daly

Anna Lamott

Nancey Murphy

Molly T. Marshall

BLOGS:

Rachel Held-Evans

KONY 2012

Here's the viral Invisible Children "Kony 2012" video. If you haven't seen it, WATCH IT. And then go print out some posters to share. Find out more at www.kony2012.com