04.26.06
Posted in faith, culture at 2:05 pm by Brandon
These bits of news were what RelevantMagazine.com decided were particularly newsworthy today:
Apple has decided to block MySpace.com from being accessed on the demo computers at its retail stores. Employees have reported customers using the in-store computers, taking up bandwidth and blogging on MySpace for hours at a time …4/26/06 | 2:43 PM
The ’90s rock favorites the Lemonheads are reuniting. The band has signed to Vagrant Records and will be releasing a new album later this year …4/26/06 | 2:42 PM
In an interview with MTV, UK pop-darlings Keane said that prior to recording their new album, Under the Iron Sea (which hits stores June 20), the band nearly called it quits. Two years of being on the road together brought the band to the edge; the result of the drama, they say, is a much darker, more complex album … 4/26/06 | 9:34 AM
Well, there’s trouble in paradise for the American Idol crew. Host Ryan Seacrest has said that he is not talking to Paula Abdul after the two have publicly bashed each other on talk shows. Simon has wisely decided not to take sides in this catfight …4/26/06 | 9:33 AM
A Roman Catholic Bishop in Croatia is attempting to ban bikinis on one of the country’s islands. The bishop wants there to be a “decency zone” at the town center on Krk Island where tourists frequently wear swimsuits …4/26/06 | 9:33 AM
This Saturday, thousands of people across the world will be taking part in the Global Night Commute, a peaceful demonstration for the Invisible Children of northern Uganda—children who have been unjustly caught in the middle of a 20-year-war. Click here or watch Oprah to get more info about the movement …4/25/06 | 7:44 PM
So, Mr. Strang, you run a for-profit (yes that means he’s paying people) magazine, and this is the best news about God, Life, and Progressive Culture you can offer me? A spat between Ryan Seacrest and Paula Abdul, you remind me to watch Oprah for my social justice needs, and you inform me that Catholics in Croatia are banning bikinis. Sweet crap, man!
Could we find a bigger Merchant of “cool”?
Tags: Relevant Magazine, News, Slices
Permalink
04.21.06
Posted in culture, blogvention, life at 3:29 pm by Brandon
This entry isn’t intended to have a theme, per se. Just some thoughts that’ve been rolling around as I’ve attended the Festival of Faith and Writing.
The first session I went to was a session on New Media. I was extremely disappointed in this session. Basically, a bunch of hip young morons and new media folks from Zondervan sat around and told us how to use blogs and websites to market our writing. I felt like I needed a shower to wash off the Zondervan schmooze fest that I sat through. It turns out that I’m really turned off by the idea of writing being so commercial, surprise, surprise. In the end, I think that I came to the belief that Zondervan is, corporately, the anti-christ. Or, at very least that the Zondervan logo might just be the mark of the beast.
Craig Gross, the triple-x church guy was there, too. It seems he’s got two new books out that talk about porn. He kept wagging his mouth about “his ministry.” Now, I’m fine with the triple-x church anti-porn message. I may be a bad Christian, but I’m no friend of porn.
What really turned me off, though, was the idea that Craig shared that when you have a website that generates content, and you want to be an author of print media, too, you need to hold some content back from your website. Sorry Craig, but what you’ve described can in no way be considered a ministry any longer. What you’re talking about is running a for-profit business–you’re now not trying to help people with a porn problem. Now the goal is to use people with a porn problem to generate income. The fact that this gets lauded as “holy” is fucked up.
The fact that Zondervan uses this tactic to make money from all sorts of people is doubly fucked up.
I have, alternatively, seen some other really cool authors. For example, humorists Tom Mullen and Phil Gulley, were a hoot to listen to. I bought two of Phil’s books, and one of Tom’s books. I’ll let you know how they are, but I’d strongly recommend you check them out. Phil has a series called the “Harmony Novels” which are about his experience as a Quaker pastor in midwest America. My wife is currently reading one of the books and chortling as I write this…it must be good.
The blogvention event happened last night. A few of us gathered and chatted at a local bar. I met Meg from Bridget Jones Goes To Seminary in real life. I knew I’d like Meg, and it turned out that I wasn’t wrong. My friend Kate from Evangelical Expatriate and her husband Nate (who, like my wife, is a self-proclaimed luddite) was there, too. Our good friends Kari and James were there, as were new friends Rob and Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma from Culture is not Optional. It was a pretty low-key setting for the blogvention festivities, but we had a nice time nonetheless. We chatted about life, etc.
Today in the mail I got a package with the book The Secret Message of Jesus by Brian McLaren. I got an email a few days ago from a publicist for McLaren who asked if I’d be willing to do a book review on the blog, here. I thought, “Heck, if I can weasel a free book out of the situation, why not?” So I’ll be working on that.
I ran across two fascinating blogs recently. They speak for themselves. They are Sh-Out the chronicle of a pastor’s wife whose husband recently came out of the closet, and The Accidental Christian, a related chronicle of the pastor and husband of 20 years who revealed to his wife that he was, in fact, gay. Friends, honesty like you find on those blogs is rare in these here parts. Don’t take it for granted!
Finally, not to make a huge deal out of this, but I’m thinking of not blogging here anymore. I’m not looking for a crapload of comments that say either, “It’s about damn time you quit” or “No, don’t stop.” I’m just getting to the point where I’m a little tired of getting into fights about things, receiving unrequested criticism, etc. I doubt my ability to quit blogging cold turkey; I’ll probably be around. I just won’t be blogging here anymore. When will this happen? I don’t know. Probably sometime after I finish the McLaren review, and one other project to be named in the future. I’m sure more announcements about this will follow.
Thanks for listening!
Permalink
03.31.06
Posted in faith, culture at 9:07 am by Brandon
I’m not sure which concerns me more:
The idea of calling God “she” publicly because it might confer less holiness on God.
OR
That I refer to God as a “he” because I’m afraid of the negative reactions I’ll get from people if I do otherwise.
OR
The fact that, even after lots of study about the topic of gender and derogation, I still remain enough of an idiot to believe that holiness, purity, omnipotence, etc. is somehow associated with masculinity. And when it comes down to it, I don’t have the uterus to buck the system.
Perhaps having the uterus to buck the system in real life is what we bloggers tend to share in common. We’d love to do those things we write about, but all too often, we write because we don’t have the courage to “do.” And, maybe deep down, we write because we hope that in writing we can give others the courage to do what we can’t–or won’t–do.
Of course, none of these good intentions really excuse us from the fact that we’re dodging an inevitable bullet. Someday, I’ll be forced to do either the right thing–like standing up for the position of women in the naming of God, for example–or the wrong thing, and until then, I’ll be praying like mad that I’ve got the uterus to do what’s right.
Tags: Confession, Gender and God, Blogging
Permalink
03.29.06
Posted in politics, culture at 4:57 pm by Brandon
Believe it or not, it wasn’t the latest Worldview Weekend article that really got me thinking about immigration. I was thinking about it for a while before I even received notice that the nation’s greatest legal minds (ala Worldview Weekend) had thrown together a common sensical guide to the immigration problem.
Thank God for them.
Anyway, I’m going to take a relatively novel position on this whole immigration issue. Normally, I’m somewhat liberal, but I’ve just got to say, this immigration thing is just out of control. We need to do something, and do something soon.
That’s right, friends. I support becoming a vigilante in order to wipe out illegal immigration all together. First off, it’s the Mexicans. They come up here and they put a drain on our healthcare system, they raise our car insurance rates, and worst of all they refuse to assimilate into our holy culture…damn them. Those bastards don’t even take the time to learn our national language: English! It’s so bad that we’ve got to print anti-theft signs in English AND Spanish. If only they’d stay in their own damn country and enjoy the jobs we’ve outsourced to them. They’re so fucking greedy.
But even worse than the Mexicans, it’s the Salvadorians and the Hondurans. I mean, same sorts of problems follow them up across the border, but hell, they don’t even take good tequilla up with them.
And, while our Southern border is bad, it’s nowhere near the travesty we’ve got going on by our northern border. Those Canadians, holy hell, have they become a problem. They’re spreading their gospel of cigarettes, Tim Horton’s, potty mouthery, and curling all over our fair land. There’s just gobs of them; they’re practically stampeding over the border. Our amber waves of grain are being overtaken by Canucks. And, you should see my back yard, it’s damn near full of maple leaves.
And, their beer. Oh, their beer. Whatever happened to the good ole’ days when the Bud girls and talking frogs inhabited our television commercials. Now, we have the Labatt talking bear? Canadians and their God forsaken barley-water are overtaking our most sacred shrine to beer consumption: Budweiser.
But, if we’re really getting serious about this illegal immigration crackdown, I think we’ve got to get retroactive. Take for example Japanese Americans. I’ve never trusted them, with their raw fish and rice wine. Freaks, they are. Furthermore, what about African Americans. I mean, yeah, we brought them over largely against their will, but they’ve kind of quit serving us of late. They’re just more welfare dollars and headaches. If’n they’re not much good to us anymore we may as well deport them.
In fact, poor people must share some genetically shared trait for laziness. (Let’s just be honest, everybody could be rich if they wanted to be, if you’re not, you must be lazy.) I say, we just off all the poor people too, there’s no way they’re REAL Americans. (Also, it seems most civil just to put the poor out of their genetically predestined misery. We should probably just shoot them–thank God for the good ole’ second amendment!)
I’d go so far as to say only the native Americans (you know, George Washington, Christopher Columbus, and Rush Limbaugh and their children and children’s children) should be allowed to stay in the US. Everyone else should be deported, or shot–whichever is most convenient.
But why stop there.
Perhaps, we could restrict access to the US altogether to only allow rich white men residency. Of course we would have to allow some female prostitutes, because, after all, boys will be boys.
And all will be happy, and free, and homogenous, and Christian.
Thank God Almighty I’m a native American.
Tags: Immigration Reform
Permalink
03.25.06
Posted in culture at 10:09 pm by Brandon
If you live around the Grand Rapids area, like I do, it only takes a passing glance at the local news to realize that we live in a town where not much happens. Most of the time, I’m okay with that. I’d rather have the news occupied with stories about school millage elections than local murders. However, while I’m entirely happy to live in a relatively sleepy little town, I must admit that the local news can be a bit maddening.
Lately, there’s been a bit of a “to-do” in the local press about a (drumroll please) mystery development in the downtown area. A few weeks ago intrepid reporter Suzanne Geha decided she needed a story so she decided to sensationalize one. It turns out that there is a developer buying up some Grand Rapids riverfront property. So, a few weeks ago, our roving investigator Suzanne decided she’d do a little journalism.
Suzi tracked down a real estate representative handling the purchasing of the downtown property, and what did she find out? Nothing much.
Now for a normal journalist, this could’ve been a dead end, but not for Suzanne Geha. Oh no, Suzanne pressed on. She found out that by sensationalizing the story, 24 hour News 8 may actually be jeopardizing the development project by sharply driving up the property values. This project that may be bringing in the neighborhood of 10,000 permanent jobs to the community. Some reporters with weaker stomachs might have cared, but not Suzanne.
Suzanne has now been covering this story, recording sound bites advertizing a “MYSTERY DEVELOPMENT!!!!”, for the past month now. After a number of newscasts, each one revealing that we know very little about the aforementioned mystery development, we know just about as much about as much as we knew before we started watching. I admit, this little news scoop hasn’t kept me transfixed.
But, watching this little news drama play out, I realized something: The local news sucks the shit straight out of my ass. More than just being frustrated with this particular story, though, I suppose I’m infuriated that the complete absence of a story such as this one is judged more important by a news agency than, you know, people dying from genocide or any other manner of inconsequential things.
The fact that this “mystery development” gets top billing locally, while issues like the fact that Grand Rapids is one of the top 5 most racially segregated cities in the country go largely unknown at large is a travesty. The local news does a disgusting disservice to the community by sensationalizing completely unsensational events while ignoring really important news.
And so, this plea goes out to the news desk at WOOD TV 8: Please stop. Please, please stop reporting on this pseudo-news story. Nobody cares about whether or not some unknown developer is buying up land in Grand Rapids. Get a clue about what exactly “news” actually is, and start reporting on that. I’d suggest a story about disproportionate infant mortality rates for African Americans in West Michigan…and this time, try reporting on more than just the fact that the infant mortality rates between whites and blacks aren’t equal.
People don’t need to hear about some stupid development, in fact, I’d go so far as to say that nobody really cares. If you want to report on exciting news, go about it the old fashioned way and wait until things actually happen, THEN report it. It’s a novel concept, I know, but I think it just might work.
Tags: Suzanne Geha, Mystery Development
Permalink
03.02.06
Posted in politics, culture at 1:26 pm by Brandon
If you don’t support the war in Iraq, it’d probably be best if you, at very least, tried not to look like a muslim while you did it. At least that’s the message that the State Department has been sending lately. Tariq Ramadan, a swiss citizen and world-class expert on Islamic religion was, in 2004, going to begin his teaching post at the University of Notre Dame. Rather unfortunately, Dr. Ramadan was not granted an extension on his work visa.
Dr. Ramadan was a vocal critic of the war in Iraq. And, it seems that this is all it takes to be denied entry into the United States. According to a vaguely worded portion of the patriot act, an individual can have their visa rejected for things something as simple as “ideological exclusion”. As closely as I can tell, ideological exclusion–in layperson’s terms–is the ability for the US government, without supervision or accountability, deny entrance to anyone because they suspect that that person espouses and ideology that the current administration doesn’t like.
People are denied entrance to this country because of what they believe?
This story has found its way back into the media lately. The American Association of Religion has recently challenged the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department’s revocation of Tariq Ramadan’s visa. I can’t help but support their critique.
I don’t know if I’m the only one who finds this whole debacle more than just a little bit ironic.
Seems like just a few hundred years ago that a group of patriots who were fed up with religious oppression hopped in a boat and sailed west. They established a land–a magical happy land–free from tyrrany and religious oppresion. They formed states and together those states formed into a country. And, they named that country the United States of America.
The first few winters were quite cold, and the new patriots relied on the kindness of this new land’s natives. And, they shared turkey and cornbread stufffing and they lived together in pluralism and peace.
Then one day the patriots decided that the frigid northeast of this new land wasn’t enough. They headed west. Often, they bought land from the natives, (they paid them in beads and other shit). When the natives weren’t wild about giving up their land, the patriots just took it from them; they were only savages, anyway. The patriots raped and pillaged (the land, the animals, the natives, you name it) until their hearts were content–free from tyrrany and religious oppression.
Years passed, and the patriots built big cities. And, big towers in those big cities.
One day, some people decided to fly planes into those towers. The patriots were pissed, and rightly so.
The patriots decided they needed an act to make sure that no one flew planes into buildings ever again. So, they wrote the patriot act. The patriots decided that they would be able to decide what types of ideologies and religions were “okay” and which weren’t. Because, ideologies are dangerous dammit.
I just hope the government doesn’t find out I did not and do not support the Iraq war. I might just be denied re-entry to the country. It’s days like this that I begin to wonder just how free from tyranny and religious oppression I really am.
Tags: Tariq Ramadan, Religious Freedom, Ideological Exclusion
Permalink
01.23.06
Posted in culture at 3:12 pm by Brandon
I attended a lecture, of sorts, today. It was more of an exposition of storytelling that was rooted distinctly in the religio-ethnicity of the Jewish storytellers who told the stories. I loved it.
As they told their stories and sang their songs, I got to thinking. Particularly, I was struck by the ways that folktales tend to pop back up into the rhetoric of the day. Folklore is a particularly fascinating set of stories that relate the moral lessons of a society, religion, or culture into a popularly palatable tale.
In introducing these folks to the community of hearers their introducer made a passing comment about the “soundbyte” nature of 21st century culture. The person giving the introduction made it seem as if the fine art of storytelling was nearly dead. On one level, I agree with his assessment. After all, the act of remembering stories together seems to be quickly falling to the wayside in the medium of television. More and more reality TV, the portrayal of real life, real time circumstances is becoming the preferred subject matter for the US subculture. After all, it’s much easier to seamlessly add a product placement into a reality tv show than it is during a sit-com. Advertisement may well prove to be a damning blow to the act of storytelling on television.
On the other hand, it seems that popular folklore is alive and well in some genre. Now, it’s rare that you’ll find the out and out portrayal of traditional folktales in television media; however, what’s more common is the portrayal of particular character types that come directly out of traditional folklore–whether the audience realizes it or not.
In what I hope will become a series (thus the volume 1 designation of this post), I’d like to take some time to explore these character types in the modern media and muse a bit about the use of these pre-fabricated characters in modern storytelling. Because of the use of these ancient character roles and the reliance on these cultural stories, it is my contention that the act of modern storytelling is alive and well in the contemporary media. Yet, despite the prevalence of the telling of stories in the media, our cultural values are often frighteningly present in the stories of our mass media. I will look at the good and the bad of contemporary cultural portrayals in order to find those cultural values that are being delivered into our homes.
Any thoughts on this exploit would be coveted! I hope you’ll join in the discussion!
And, as a teaser, I’ll tip you off to my first topic. Bart Simpson - Trickster extrordinare. This should be fun.
Tags: Storytelling, Media, TV, Folklore
Permalink
01.16.06
Posted in faith, politics, culture at 8:46 pm by Brandon
I’m hardly an apologist of any sort. And, to be fair it may be a bit confusing to call me a progressive Christian. It’s not that I’m not liberal or progressive (pick your label), and it’s not that I’m not a Christian–I am. Yet, it’s not so much my Christianity that is progressive as my political viewpoints. I think it’s worthwhile to make a distinction on this point as so many “progressive” Christians are actually relatively conservative when it comes to the tenants of their faith. Anyway, I digress–already.
The point is that I wanted to take a few paragraphs to respond to Jacke’s recent post in response to my post about faith and politics and so forth. I’m glad that Jacke and I have been able to have this conversation. I think one of the really cool things about discussions that happen in the blogosphere is that you meet–and have to explain yourself to–people with such divergent opinions. Doing this self-introduction really forces you to get to know and explain yourself. And, to tell the truth, I’ve been able to, once again, think through the things I believe and clear up, for myself and others exactly what it is that I’m thinking about life, faith, and the confluence between the two.
So, the goal of this note is to go through Jacke’s post and answer her main question: If Conservative Christians are redefining Christianity, I would like to know how? This is something I asserted earlier, that Conservative Christians, just like Progressive Christians, are trying to redefine their faith in order to suit their own political ends. Here’s a quote from Jacke’s post:
Okay, my problem is this. If Conservative Christians are redefining Christianity, I would like to know how? By believing that God’s Word is true? By believing that we can draw conclusions from God’s Word based on implications regarding other subjects which can be reasonably applied to modern day issues which are not mentioned, specifically, in the Bible? How is that redefining Christianity? How is believing in widely accepted interpretations of the Bible which have a long history in our faith somehow redefining Christianity? I would like more specificity on how, exactly, Conservative Christians have redefined Christianity by continuing to believe in time tested interpretations of theologians and Biblical scholars for ages. I would like to know how remaining committed to trying to live one’s life according to our understanding of scripture we are somehow redefining Christianity.
First of all, we need to take a step back, here. My comment that Conservative Christians are redefiniing Christianity was embedded in the understanding that it wasn’t ALL Conservative Christians doing so. And, Progressive Christians are playing the same game. In fact, my statement endorsed the life views of a Conservative Christian whose conservative politic grew out of their desire to pursue Christ.
But, what about this other contingent of folks. This group of people whose politic grows from the fact that modernism / Christianity / conservatism are inextricably linked rather than any desire to become more like Christ–How are these Conservative Christians redefining Christianity? By choosing which parts of scripture the’ll view as important and which parts they’ll view as unimportant.
They redefine Christianity as a modern religion. That is, they redefine Christianity as a religion that is fundamentally and essentially a product of a specific period of human existence–particularly, the period of culture humans formed in the US in the first 80 or so years of the 20th century. Christianity is not a modern religion. Christianity, though a culmination of cultural traditions, is bigger than just what mankind brings to it. I believe Christianity to be fundamentally divine.
So, yes, while Christianity is a religion in which God seeks to reconcile with man and does that in different ways and in different cultures, it fundamentally supercedes culture. What I think that many USian Conservative Christians have done is to, if you will, create an idol out of one historical period in Christianity.
Here’s what I mean: take alcohol for example. Many Christians use biblical principle to support their belief that drinking is either wrong or better not done. Now, this of course, is a cultural artifact more than it is a Christian artifact. Yet, Christians have redefined what it means to be Christian. Fundamentally, because of this cultural artifact, many Christians will tell you that it’s a sin to drink.
I think that the part about Jacke’s rhetoric that riles so many of us progressive Christians is that it takes the position of the rhetorical high ground. That is, it fundamentally uses language that presumes that progressive christians don’t believe the Bible is true or that we don’t believe that it can be used to understand how we, as Christians, are to behave. Progressive Christians, too, believe that the Bible is true, and we believe that one can extrapolate good things about how to conduct oneself in the work-a-day world from the Bible. Many progressive Christians believe in scriptural truth that have long traditions in our faith (for example, the traditionally progressive perspective on simplicity and living a non-ornamental life and worshipping in simple ways goes back to early protestantism in europe).
Just because modernism has been around for the past 100 years or so doesn’t make it THE traditional way to interpret Christianity.
If we cannot stand up in the face of those things of which God clearly did not approve, and in fact condemned in His Word, before they get a foothold and change our entire American society and value system how can we then claim that we are pursuing radical orthodoxy? It makes no sense to me.
You see, your definition, Jacke, of the things of which God did/does not approve is inextricably rooted in modernism. I’m arguing from a different place–probably best described as postmodernism (though, I think that’s a little incomplete). I’m simply saying that the grace of God is bigger than what makes sense to you, or me. Frankly, I have no clue how a conservative Christian can call themselves a “follower of Christ” and support a war effort that kills innocent people the world over, I haven’t any idea how a person could call themselves a “follower of Christ” and not support legislation that has the best intentions of the disenfranchised and marginalised at heart.
And, further yet, I have no idea how a person who says that they “follow Christ” could ever vote for a person who has used the racist fears of a white majority to win a political election for the office of President of the United States. I have no idea how a person could do these things which seem to me to be so “anti-the-will-of-God” and call themselves a pursue-er of radical orthodoxy. But, you know what, I still believe they can.
Just because something makes no sense to me, doesn’t make it wrong. And, the same is true for all of us. Sometimes things that don’t make sense are true.
So, how are Conservative Christians redefining Christianity? In short, I believe some of them are doing so by idolizing one particularly comfortable cultural context for Christianity (namely a modern understanding of Christianity) and treating that as if it were orthodoxy. They use modern Christianity as if it were some holy baseline from which to both look forward and back. As if the cultural platform that offered them their vantage point on all of scripture was somehow holier than any other cultural vantage point. And, it offers them a perspective that allows them to more correctly (than it does for others) look at all of Christianity. Their bias is that their perspective is traditionally historical (when, in fact, ancient Christianity and modern Christianity have a cultural ocean of differences between the two.)
Now, it’s also true that postmodernism is but another man-made platform from which to observe and (for some) to interact with Christianity. It’s not perfect, either. From these various platforms, Christians tend to form their political views. Some of those views are progressive, others liberal. I’m not arguing that ALL moderns idolize modernity. I’m simply saying that it’s a common pitfall for some.
I may have more on this later, but for now, I’ll take a break and let you respond if you wish!
Tags: Postmodernism, Modernism, Christianity, Politics, Political Christianity
Permalink
12.21.05
Posted in faith, culture at 4:24 pm by brandon
So, I’ve been catching up, slowly, on my blogosphere reading and listening. And, I’ve just worked through listening to the Tony Jones interview over at Stupid Church People. Anyway, great stuff. I think I really like this Tony Jones fellow. Now, as much as that may surprise you, I still like Josh and Steve, too. Even if they did nominate for Tony Jones as a Stupid Church Person of the year.
I liked hearing Tony’s thoughts about the commodification and banalisation of the contemporary Church. And, I think–despite the initial raising of my cackles over this whole “National Director of Emergent” business–I’d like to buy beers for Tony if he’s ever in Grand Rapids (yes, Tony, if you’re reading this, that’s an official invitation.)
One thing that struck me was how Tony defined, albeit loosely, what the hell emergent is anyway. As he put it, and I’m paraphrasing here, emergent is Christians realising that the Church needs to grow and change and become what God wants it to be as it relates to a post-modern (or post-postmodern) culture. I like that, I think.
Now, I don’t think that leaves a whole lot Churches out of the mix, I think that most would say that they want to become what got wants them to be in light of the current cultural climate. But, I think that this distinction can ellucidate a bit of the divide that’s driven me a little nuts about certain places that affiliate themselves with what it means to be emergent.
To me there’s two ways to go forward into the culture of today. The first, and to me less preferable way, would be to take our current understanding of Christianity and simply transpose that current understanding of the sub-culture of faith onto a broader post-modern cultural context. The problem with this, as I see it, is that it often ends up that the Church basically ends up tossing a post-modern table cloth over a modern table and calls the whole damn thing post modern. This kind of church ends up with what I’ve termed a “sexy modernism.”
The second way for the Church to move forward, and this is the one I prefer, is to try to first separate itself from it’s current sub-culture–often mired in modernism–then, reinvision Christianity as it arose from its earlier forms (i.e. the early Church). In short, I think that in order to go forward, we’ve got to look back.
As much as it pains me to do it, I’ve got to admit that this is something that Mars Hill Bible Church’s Rob Bell does pretty well. He takes great strides to really go after the roots of Christianity as an ancient Middle Eastern religion. Now, lest you think I’ve lost my edge, I still think that the Mars Hills–that is, the megachurches–of the world suck rocks. But, Rob Bell does a good job with this (though, I still think Mars Hill is a ‘type I’ emergent church.)
I was enamoured with Tony Jones. That doesn’t happen all too often. Especially not with someone so, well, formally connected to a movement. I tend to be pretty skeptical about such formal movements, as they often suck. But, my friends, Tony seems to be the real deal. Did I mention I’d love to drink beer with him sometime?
If any of you know Tony and would like to pass along the word of my open offer for free alcohol, let the man know!
Tags: Emergent Church, Stupid Church People, Tony Jones.
Permalink
11.13.05
Posted in politics, culture at 12:48 pm by
I got to thinking this morning about the tenets of capitalism. I’ve been inspired by a great conversation Zalm has going on over at his blog about the free market and Christianity. Further, my thinking was drawn along by a little junket Jen and I made last night to a local (in the sense that it is near our house) eating establishment. In the sense that the buisness is owned by someone in the community, our trip to Friday’s was in no way a trip to a local establishment. However, it is our friends (who were our dinner companions last evening) favorite place to eat, so we went there.
Some of you will remember a post that I wrote a while ago about spending our money at places that are worth patronising, adding value to your local community, etc. Really, that post is a modest defense of capitalism. That is, it defended the idea that casting our votes (spending our money) at places that are a benefit to their surrounding community is a good thing to do.
In theory, such a thoughtful capitalism sounds like a good idea.
Let me tell you the story of two restaurants. One is named Caramba’s. It is the little mexican restaurant that I told you about about a year ago. The food was great, the service was fantastic, and it was an investment into our local community to purchase food there. 100 percent of the proceeds that this restaurant gained would eventually be invested back into the community of Grand Rapids. A great place to spend money, both for quality of food and for the community.
Last night, we ate at Fridays. The food wasn’t that good, the service was probably a shade worse than the food, and while some of the proceeds, I’m sure, were invested back into the community, much of the money the restaurant makes is also given back to a corporate entity. Realistically, buying food at TGI Fridays isn’t doing much for your community. You certainly aren’t getting much bang for your buck.
Theoretically, capitalism says that the market shops where they choose. Thus, it would make sense that places that benefit the community should do well. Thus, all is right with the world.
Unfortunately, Caramba’s went out of business at the end of this summer. It turns out they just couldn’t compete with the TGI Fridays, Logan’s Roadhouses, Famous Dave’s, Taco Bells, and Chilis of the world. Capitalism works in theory, but not in practice.
In practice, we Americans are shaped by the media, by our culture, and by the ads we see almost every minute. TGI Fridays has the money to pour into national and international advertising campaigns. TGI Fridays has the power to ‘win’ the battle over competitors not because of some altruistic motives that the buisness provides, but because it’s popular. I’m telling you, they’re not popular because people like going to Fridays (though I’m sure people do), but they’re popular because they’ve got the money to tell us that they are popular.
Capitalism is broke. It doesn’t work. It used to work. Before the days of the multinational corporation, when the small business was the primary foot soldier of the free market, capitalism probably really did reward hard work–to some degree. Those days, however, are gone. Capitalism will on rare occurances reward hard work, but with increasing regularity, capitalism now rewards privilege and old money.
The downfall of capitalism was individualism. In a society where we think of others more than we try to think of “me” capitalism could thrive. Unfortunately, we don’t have a culture that thinks of others. We’ve got a culture that rewards selfish action. Self-gratification is the purpose of money, not contributing wealth to the community.
Now, it’s true that free market Christianity supporters like Ted Haggard are crowing about how the free market generates wealth for the community. I would respond that wealth for individuals in a community does not make for a wealthy community. Especially not when the individuals gaining the lion share of the wealth were wealthy to begin with. That smacks frustratingly of a theology that says it’s okay to pave the streets with the poor as long as the rich have it well off.
This fairy tale that the free market generates wealth for a community is certainly an appealing one for the rich. I mean, wouldn’t it be great to know that you really didn’t have to change your lifestyle and could still be contributing to the poor. That’s why such a groundswell of support is likely to follow a character like Haggard. Hell, I’d love to believe that by shopping at Wal-Mart and eating at the local Chain Restaurant ™ I was contributing to the well-being of the most disadvantaged. It’d be great, I wouldn’t have to change my lifestyle at all!
It seems to me that if such a free market system was so good for communities’ wealth, we should’ve seen some empirical evidence of this by now. We should see communities to whom we’ve offered free trade benefits gaining wealth. We should see companies to whom we outsource buisness offering their employees better benefits and improved working conditions, right? Am I the only one who’s missing these folks’ improved condition?
Now, I haven’t given up all hope on capitalism. I still support initiatives to buy from organizations that have real value for communities (both here and abroad). Fairly traded goods are a great example of some of the fruits that a thoughtful capitalism could possibly reap. And, I’m so diluted as to think that a national socialism is without all ills (though, I admit that the thought of all people being able to go to the doctor when they’re, you know, suffering from a potentially crippling disease sounds appealing.) But, in the end, I just can’t believe that the free market would’ve been how Jesus would’ve handled society. I can’t imagine that Jesus would’ve left the well-being of the poor to the whims of a trickle-down system where the rich were given the luxury of continuing their lives in comfort.
Jesus was just way too hands on for that.
This all brings me back to Caramba’s and TGI Fridays. If capitalism was really contributing wealth to the right places, it wouldn’t be so hard for a buisness like Caramba’s to stay in business. BUT, it’s not. I’ve just got to pray that we don’t lose too many more places like Caramba’s to realize that capitalism isn’t a Savior–and the minute we set it up as a God it becomes an idol like everything else that we falsely set up as a God.
Permalink
« Previous entries · Next entries »
