Vengeance is mine sayeth the imperialist, and the current iteration of that deadly reality is American. In reading international news sources, which I've done since childhood, I'm struck at how military intervention for "national interests" has become nearly ubiquitous across the planet. It seems every empire has arrogated unto itself the prerogative that belongs only to God when it comes to final judgement, life or death.
This is not a uniquely American behavior by the way, it's been true of every great empire across human history. But these last hundred years have seen US being the military top of the hill. And like every other empire, we gladly fabricate an appropriate mythology to fit our place in the political pantheon seemingly sensing that we are somehow uniquely immortal, unlike every other empire which has passed before us.
Caesar is not Lord.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Christian as Insider and Outsider
The Christian is always the insider on the outside and the outsider on the inside.
The Christian is the insider on the outside because they are always engaged in the affairs of this world, since they are called by Christ to be in the world, and yet not of it. For a Christian to be involved in the intimate details of our common life, both private and public, yet without succumbing to the ever present idolatrous temptations from all sides, means they must have a concrete reference point from which to judge rightly the circumstances they find themselves in. And the concrete reference point is the very life and ministry of Christ Jesus.
It isn't some objective principle above and beyond the vagaries of history, as though that could give us any insight into what to do in the here and now. No. The Christian is guided in what they can and must do by the radical particularity of Christ's ministry to those directly in his midst. His kingdom spread as far, and only as far, as the sound of his voice and the touch of his hand. This is why he told his disciples the kingdom of God was in their midst.
The Christian is also never fully identified with the environment they find themselves in. The Christian is always a dual citizen, a citizen of whatever earthly city they are a part of, but also a citizen, indeed their primary citizenship, of a heavenly city called forth by God himself founded on Christ as the Cornerstone of a heavenly temple being built in the gritty details of our life here on earth.
The Christian is also always the outsider on the inside, because, while they are indeed residents of a heavenly city, they are also flesh and bone, blood and sweat, living breathing wounds and sins. The Christian recognizes within themselves every impulse, every desire, every hope and fear, of every person in their midst within earshot, eyesight, and physical touch. And again this understanding must be held, not by relying on some theoretical understanding of their corporate and individual creatureliness and fallenness, but with a tangible, indeed visceral SENSE of how this exists and is played out in their own day to day life.
And likewise the concrete reference point for the Christian to be able to get an accurate sense of this reality comes to them through the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. The Christian sees and begins to understand the reality of their own beauty, sorrow, wounds, sins in their majestic broken tapestry only by looking upon the particular hands, feet, eyes, limbs, minds, pulses of those directly touched by Christ the Lord. Thus the Christian sees each wound, each cry, each laugh, each hidden sigh as uniquely belonging to the one owning these experiences as they do themselves, knowing that Christ's word and touch heals and reproves each according to their need.
As Christ has done for us, we are called to do for one another.
The Christian is the insider on the outside because they are always engaged in the affairs of this world, since they are called by Christ to be in the world, and yet not of it. For a Christian to be involved in the intimate details of our common life, both private and public, yet without succumbing to the ever present idolatrous temptations from all sides, means they must have a concrete reference point from which to judge rightly the circumstances they find themselves in. And the concrete reference point is the very life and ministry of Christ Jesus.
It isn't some objective principle above and beyond the vagaries of history, as though that could give us any insight into what to do in the here and now. No. The Christian is guided in what they can and must do by the radical particularity of Christ's ministry to those directly in his midst. His kingdom spread as far, and only as far, as the sound of his voice and the touch of his hand. This is why he told his disciples the kingdom of God was in their midst.
The Christian is also never fully identified with the environment they find themselves in. The Christian is always a dual citizen, a citizen of whatever earthly city they are a part of, but also a citizen, indeed their primary citizenship, of a heavenly city called forth by God himself founded on Christ as the Cornerstone of a heavenly temple being built in the gritty details of our life here on earth.
The Christian is also always the outsider on the inside, because, while they are indeed residents of a heavenly city, they are also flesh and bone, blood and sweat, living breathing wounds and sins. The Christian recognizes within themselves every impulse, every desire, every hope and fear, of every person in their midst within earshot, eyesight, and physical touch. And again this understanding must be held, not by relying on some theoretical understanding of their corporate and individual creatureliness and fallenness, but with a tangible, indeed visceral SENSE of how this exists and is played out in their own day to day life.
And likewise the concrete reference point for the Christian to be able to get an accurate sense of this reality comes to them through the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. The Christian sees and begins to understand the reality of their own beauty, sorrow, wounds, sins in their majestic broken tapestry only by looking upon the particular hands, feet, eyes, limbs, minds, pulses of those directly touched by Christ the Lord. Thus the Christian sees each wound, each cry, each laugh, each hidden sigh as uniquely belonging to the one owning these experiences as they do themselves, knowing that Christ's word and touch heals and reproves each according to their need.
As Christ has done for us, we are called to do for one another.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Dragonflies and 9/11
Early this Sunday afternoon I went for a walk on campus. I went to the top of the hill behind our building and sat on a bench and read for a few minutes as the sun shone down. I put my head down and laid there for a few more minutes, all the while listening to the sounds of nature buzz around me. I sat back up and noticed an aircraft flying overhead. I was reminded that ten years ago in the days following 9/11 I saw and heard no aircraft flying anywhere since they had all been grounded from coast to coast. The sight and sound of an aircraft has become normal again these ten years later. It was an odd feeling to realize that.
I got up from the bench and walked on the grass looking at the dragonflies darting around my feet. These supremely beautiful creatures used to scare me so much as a small child, partly because of their name, and partly because of their fearsome look. But now as I spy them from mere feet or even inches away I notice that these amazingly aerodynamic creatures with their nearly transparent wings flit from blade of grass to blade of grass nibbling away as they survey the vast expanse of a field so seemingly small to me.
I wander towards the edge of the hill to a group of trees and find them clapping their leaves as the breeze flutters through. What they were applauding I don't know, except to say that they seemed happy as the bees and bugs and birds all intertwined in the majesty of nature right before my eyes. A bumblebee, seemingly clumsy, navigated a spiders web and flew effortlessly through an opening in the web from one flower to the next. A nest of wasps or hornets crawled out from under an overhang on a concrete pillar on the hill as they make ready for cooler weather so close at hand.
Each of these beautiful creatures make their way whether as flora, fauna, insect, bird, human, all bound together in a much larger web of intertwined life. The quietness of this respite from the rampant noisiness I far too often give myself over to reminds me that there are sounds and sights that transcend us. But these sights and sounds are also a part of us at our core. The breeze blows and dragonflies take flight from blade of grass to blade of grass and feed on the field before them. As it rested on a blade of grass I could see the blades beneath it through its shimmery wings. I can hear the breeze as well and wonder where it will carry me to next.
I got up from the bench and walked on the grass looking at the dragonflies darting around my feet. These supremely beautiful creatures used to scare me so much as a small child, partly because of their name, and partly because of their fearsome look. But now as I spy them from mere feet or even inches away I notice that these amazingly aerodynamic creatures with their nearly transparent wings flit from blade of grass to blade of grass nibbling away as they survey the vast expanse of a field so seemingly small to me.
I wander towards the edge of the hill to a group of trees and find them clapping their leaves as the breeze flutters through. What they were applauding I don't know, except to say that they seemed happy as the bees and bugs and birds all intertwined in the majesty of nature right before my eyes. A bumblebee, seemingly clumsy, navigated a spiders web and flew effortlessly through an opening in the web from one flower to the next. A nest of wasps or hornets crawled out from under an overhang on a concrete pillar on the hill as they make ready for cooler weather so close at hand.
Each of these beautiful creatures make their way whether as flora, fauna, insect, bird, human, all bound together in a much larger web of intertwined life. The quietness of this respite from the rampant noisiness I far too often give myself over to reminds me that there are sounds and sights that transcend us. But these sights and sounds are also a part of us at our core. The breeze blows and dragonflies take flight from blade of grass to blade of grass and feed on the field before them. As it rested on a blade of grass I could see the blades beneath it through its shimmery wings. I can hear the breeze as well and wonder where it will carry me to next.
Monday, August 22, 2011
The King Jesus Gospel
Scot McKnight is one of my favorite Christian teachers out there right now. His blog, Jesus Creed, is one I visit almost daily, where he's posting about theology, science, popular culture, or whatever. His Anabaptist ethical impulse is one I share deeply and he's not afraid to ask the difficult questions of faith. I look forward to reading his newest book.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Tisha B'av and Ritualizing Loss
Today commemorates the destruction of the first and second temples in Jerusalem as well as other severe losses in Jewish history, most notably of course the shoah or European holocaust. During the service of Tisha B'av, the rabbi reads through the book of Lamentations in Hebrew, and if you're in a non orthodox synagogue, he'll (or she'll) also read through it in English. Tisha B'av is a holy day that isn't "celebrated" just as Yom Kippur isn't "celebrated" since both are considered deeply solemn days. In other words, you don't say to a Jew "happy Tisha B'av" or "happy Yom Kippur" since these days aren't meant to be happy but painful and necessary reminders of our sinfulness before a holy God and of a deeply broken world in desperate need of God's shalom.
As a Christian Tisha B'av is also personally important to me, since I experienced my own deep loss and sorrow 13 years ago last month with the unexpected death of a woman I loved very much and who also loved me. And then two weeks later I attended the Tisha B'av service with her family at their synagogue. Listening to the rabbi read through Lamentations as the prophet wails over the destruction of his beloved city and holy temple struck home with all of us that day as we too wailed over a much closer tragic loss of one so beloved.
Any religion or spirituality worth its salt so to speak knows how to ritualize loss and pain. To be human is to, at some point in your life, experience unexpected loss or pain. And even when it's expected, that doesn't make it any less painful; just a differently experienced pain. Judaism has Tisha B'av, Christianity has Lent and Good Friday, and I'm sure many of the other world religions have their ritualizations of loss as well. And that's how it should be. As an evangelical Christian in America, I often wonder at the total lack of a serious sense of this part of our spiritual and physical reality in American evangelical circles. I consider myself very fortunate to have discovered the book of Job as a child as well as Ecclesiastes. Having grown up in a pretty disfunctional family environment these dark but honest books of the bible gave me a voice I didn't always have for myself in my own words. It asked the questions I could only murmur. It also had the honesty to not answer those questions to my satisfaction. Any god who offers up a happy clappy or neat little theodicy isn't a god I want to deal with. As unsatisfying as not getting a clear answer is, I'll take that over an all too easy answer that I know instinctively isn't true.
In the days and weeks (and yes, even years) after my deep loss and sorrow, my only word to God was "why?" I still don't have an answer to that question that satisfies me, and I hope I never get it. But I am glad that there is a God who honors that question by including it in his word, thus giving me the freedom to ask it with a brutal honesty knowing that God's big enough to take it and even absorb it into himself. I want a God who understands grief and sorrow and pain and anger at wrongful loss. I want a God who knows what it is to ask in a dying breathe "Why have you forsaken me?" This is a God who I can understand, even if only dimly, because I know that this God can understand me.
As a Christian Tisha B'av is also personally important to me, since I experienced my own deep loss and sorrow 13 years ago last month with the unexpected death of a woman I loved very much and who also loved me. And then two weeks later I attended the Tisha B'av service with her family at their synagogue. Listening to the rabbi read through Lamentations as the prophet wails over the destruction of his beloved city and holy temple struck home with all of us that day as we too wailed over a much closer tragic loss of one so beloved.
Any religion or spirituality worth its salt so to speak knows how to ritualize loss and pain. To be human is to, at some point in your life, experience unexpected loss or pain. And even when it's expected, that doesn't make it any less painful; just a differently experienced pain. Judaism has Tisha B'av, Christianity has Lent and Good Friday, and I'm sure many of the other world religions have their ritualizations of loss as well. And that's how it should be. As an evangelical Christian in America, I often wonder at the total lack of a serious sense of this part of our spiritual and physical reality in American evangelical circles. I consider myself very fortunate to have discovered the book of Job as a child as well as Ecclesiastes. Having grown up in a pretty disfunctional family environment these dark but honest books of the bible gave me a voice I didn't always have for myself in my own words. It asked the questions I could only murmur. It also had the honesty to not answer those questions to my satisfaction. Any god who offers up a happy clappy or neat little theodicy isn't a god I want to deal with. As unsatisfying as not getting a clear answer is, I'll take that over an all too easy answer that I know instinctively isn't true.
In the days and weeks (and yes, even years) after my deep loss and sorrow, my only word to God was "why?" I still don't have an answer to that question that satisfies me, and I hope I never get it. But I am glad that there is a God who honors that question by including it in his word, thus giving me the freedom to ask it with a brutal honesty knowing that God's big enough to take it and even absorb it into himself. I want a God who understands grief and sorrow and pain and anger at wrongful loss. I want a God who knows what it is to ask in a dying breathe "Why have you forsaken me?" This is a God who I can understand, even if only dimly, because I know that this God can understand me.
Monday, August 8, 2011
In Memory of Senator Mark Hatfield
A wonderful testimony of the impact of Senator Mark Hatfield's life and ministry as a public servant. He exemplifies what it truly means to be a Christian statesman. He made being a "politician" something to be an honor and not a term of reprobation. We desperately need more leaders like him today, now more than ever.
Monday, August 1, 2011
International Corporatism Vs Being Human
The more I read the more I realize we've entered an era of International Corporatism. The largest corporations are larger and much more powerful than most if not all nation states. What is your citizenship? To whom or to what do you belong? Are you a human being or a product, being bought and sold?
Here's an appropriate piece about seeing beyond the old left/right dichotomy.
And here's another piece about Breaking the Spell of Money.
Here's an appropriate piece about seeing beyond the old left/right dichotomy.
And here's another piece about Breaking the Spell of Money.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
The Rhetoric of Identity (and how to Identify that Rhetoric)
The answer to our country's problems isn't to return to some mythical past when all was well and everything was right (or left) in the world. The New Deal, the Great Society, the Reagan Revolution, Compassionate Conservatism, or even more recently, Yes We Can, are all but dim reflections of their times, broken as they are, each in their own way.
But neither is the answer to ignore all of these previous attempts to make things better. The rhetoric of each of these political and cultural movements were aspirational, even if rather transparently manipulative. But it's in this strange confluence of aspiration and manipulation that we need to analyse where we've come from and how we've gotten into the predicament we're now in.
Why do these rhetorical appeals work? In the ten Presidential campaigns I personally remember, along with many other campaigns for various products being sold to us, we've been sold an identity, a sense of who we are and our place in the great movement of history. We're told that if we join this campaign or buy this product, we'll find our true meaning and purpose for our lives. But if we don't come alongside this great movement of history and instead choose to go down another path, we're consigning ourselves not only to insignificance, but we're separating ourselves from the common identity that exists among our family and friends (or so the ad and campaign execs say).
And who wants that? In some way or another we all want to belong. It's a part of our being human that we join ourselves to various groups so that we can identify ourselves as a part of some larger whole. Even the lone wolf exults in their identity as a lone wolf because of the pre-existing myth of the lone wolf. Myths don't exist in a vacuum. They always serve a purpose.
But the question before us today is this: in light of the fact that we're being told that if we don't do....(pick your side)...all hell will break lose economically, politically, and possibly even cosmically, how can we step back and analyse the rhetoric being used and how it's being used so as to conflate the aspirational with the manipulative? In other words, how are we being bullshitted?
The classic bullshitter knows how to combine flattery with fear of failure, and hope with a sense of impending doom. Juxtaposing each in such a way that the victim...um customer...um voter has their emotions massaged to work up the response the purveyor wants from them. Either a vote, a sale, or a believer. Any will do. As long as they give their feasance to them. Or more importantly, to the ideal.
Can we cut through the deep rhetoric? Can we see beyond the silly semantics of salesmen telling us what we need before we know it ourselves? Can we recognize that all of this exists in us too as we see others behaving this way? Can we recognize ourselves as the bullshitter in chief before we accuse those we don't like of being the chief bullshitter?
You see, this is the Augustinian side of me coming out. It makes me a Christian skeptic, especially of myself. And I think it's my democratic side coming out too; in that I'm pretty sure we all have this in us. I could be wrong of course. But I doubt it. Only time will tell. And time seems to be telling.
But neither is the answer to ignore all of these previous attempts to make things better. The rhetoric of each of these political and cultural movements were aspirational, even if rather transparently manipulative. But it's in this strange confluence of aspiration and manipulation that we need to analyse where we've come from and how we've gotten into the predicament we're now in.
Why do these rhetorical appeals work? In the ten Presidential campaigns I personally remember, along with many other campaigns for various products being sold to us, we've been sold an identity, a sense of who we are and our place in the great movement of history. We're told that if we join this campaign or buy this product, we'll find our true meaning and purpose for our lives. But if we don't come alongside this great movement of history and instead choose to go down another path, we're consigning ourselves not only to insignificance, but we're separating ourselves from the common identity that exists among our family and friends (or so the ad and campaign execs say).
And who wants that? In some way or another we all want to belong. It's a part of our being human that we join ourselves to various groups so that we can identify ourselves as a part of some larger whole. Even the lone wolf exults in their identity as a lone wolf because of the pre-existing myth of the lone wolf. Myths don't exist in a vacuum. They always serve a purpose.
But the question before us today is this: in light of the fact that we're being told that if we don't do....(pick your side)...all hell will break lose economically, politically, and possibly even cosmically, how can we step back and analyse the rhetoric being used and how it's being used so as to conflate the aspirational with the manipulative? In other words, how are we being bullshitted?
The classic bullshitter knows how to combine flattery with fear of failure, and hope with a sense of impending doom. Juxtaposing each in such a way that the victim...um customer...um voter has their emotions massaged to work up the response the purveyor wants from them. Either a vote, a sale, or a believer. Any will do. As long as they give their feasance to them. Or more importantly, to the ideal.
Can we cut through the deep rhetoric? Can we see beyond the silly semantics of salesmen telling us what we need before we know it ourselves? Can we recognize that all of this exists in us too as we see others behaving this way? Can we recognize ourselves as the bullshitter in chief before we accuse those we don't like of being the chief bullshitter?
You see, this is the Augustinian side of me coming out. It makes me a Christian skeptic, especially of myself. And I think it's my democratic side coming out too; in that I'm pretty sure we all have this in us. I could be wrong of course. But I doubt it. Only time will tell. And time seems to be telling.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Enemies
I'm not your enemy I'm not your foe
you are, you are, please don't you know?
I'm not the one chasing you down the road
chasing me like an unclean toad.
We disagree, is that such a crime
it's not murder, just give me time.
I see the glint of the barrel in your eye
why must we judge before we even try?
Fire at will if it be thy will
but if it be thy will I will be still.
You're not my enemy you're not my foe
I am I am, please don't I know?
You're not the one being chased down the road
chasing you like an unclean toad.
We disagree, is that such a crime
it's not murder, just give me time.
You see the glint of the barrel in my eye
why must we judge before we even try?
Fire at will if it be thy will
but if it be thy will I will be still.
you are, you are, please don't you know?
I'm not the one chasing you down the road
chasing me like an unclean toad.
We disagree, is that such a crime
it's not murder, just give me time.
I see the glint of the barrel in your eye
why must we judge before we even try?
Fire at will if it be thy will
but if it be thy will I will be still.
You're not my enemy you're not my foe
I am I am, please don't I know?
You're not the one being chased down the road
chasing you like an unclean toad.
We disagree, is that such a crime
it's not murder, just give me time.
You see the glint of the barrel in my eye
why must we judge before we even try?
Fire at will if it be thy will
but if it be thy will I will be still.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Singing Prophetically Against Rupert Murdoch (Why Scouses Rule)
BILLY BRAGG - NEVER BUY THE SUN from Billy Bragg on Vimeo.
An amazing song written and performed by Billy Bragg about the Rupert Murdoch scandal in the UK, which could easily spill over into the US if it turns out his minions hacked into 9/11 victims cells, which considering their prior track record, seems entirely likely. The lyrics of the song are well worth listening to, even if you're not a Scouser (from Liverpool), since they speak to issues of powerful media enterprises and giving in to our more base instincts. The line where he speaks of us buying into "tell alls" and how that makes us partly culpable is very telling.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
To Consolidate Blogs or Not, That is the Question
I'm thinking about importing all of my blogs into my main blog, which at this point is The Augustinian Democrat, and just have separate headings depending on the topic, whether it's science, theology, conspiracy theories, poetry, etc. Sound good? Yes? No?
Doonesbury on Teaching Evolution in Louisiana
Here's the original link to Sunday's comic strip.
(I had posted the original cartoon here, but the width interfered with seeing the side bar links, so I recommend visiting the link above to see the cartoon. It's well worth it)
(I had posted the original cartoon here, but the width interfered with seeing the side bar links, so I recommend visiting the link above to see the cartoon. It's well worth it)
Monday, July 4, 2011
Very Nicely Done Cartoon Version of Evolutionary Theory.
Here's a great cartoon rendering of the theory of evolution that I found just now from reading Jimpithecus's science and religion blog. In a blog post on June 25 which I only saw today, he links to a great cartoon from another blog explaining the theory of evolution, but in cartoon form, from Darryl Cunningham. Very nicely done indeed.
The American Revolution for Ideologues
Since this week is the annual celebration of America's independence from Britain on July 4th, I'm seeing the usual assortment of essays from the left and the right, from the religious and the irreligious, all with their particular axes to grind to "prove" their view of America's history is the "right" view. And since we now live in the era of twenty four hour "news" or to put it more accurately "infotainment" we're seeing these competing narratives getting airtime because they're attention grabbers. And attention grabbers get ratings. And ratings bring in advertising revenue. And advertising revenue helps companies sell more goods and services to consumers. And these companies sell us these goods to satisfy our felt needs. And we know what these needs are by watching twenty four hour news and entertainment.
Ah yes, the circle of life.
I have friends across the spectrum both ideologically and religiously, from the hardcore right to the far left; from fundamentalist Christians to dyed in the wool atheists. Black, white, Asian, Latino, multi-ethnic, straight, gay, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and friends from every continent except Antarctica. But in this special time of year, when patriotism flourishes and the reaction against it also flourishes, passions flourish no matter what or why. It's very similar to the various other contentious debates we so love to argue and divide over: Creationism/evolution, climate change, gender roles, sexuality, Yankees/Red Sox, etc...
So at this time of the year, the two biggest controversies are over the founding of the United States and how much religion played a role, in particular evangelical Christianity, and in a related issue, whether it's appropriate for modern evangelical Christians to be "patriotic" and celebrate America's Independence Day. Let me say from the outset that I'm not going to give my own ex cathedra declaration as to what is the eternal and always correct answer to these contentious issues. Read what I've written elsewhere to figure that out. I've certainly touched on both topics more than a few times. Instead, here I'm more interested in how each side has played the game of what the founders had to say about religion either privately or publicly and as it related to its role in governance, and how evangelical Christians should relate to their country as Christians.
I've noticed four views that seem to have predominated when it comes to this issue:
1) The "Christian America" view, which sees the founding era as being guided by orthodox/evangelical Christian views and which also believes that the US was specifically founded upon these beliefs and therefore should return to them in order to be blessed by God once again. The late Rev. D. James Kennedy, most Reconstructionist/theonomist Presbyterians, and most well known now, David Barton of Wallbuilders, all represent this perspective.
2) The alternative Christian view that the founders were a bunch of deists at best, and atheists in some cases, and therefore the US was not founded on Christian principles, but instead on Enlightenment ideals. This view is most often espoused by Anabaptists as well as some of the more conservative liturgical churches, such as Missouri Synod Lutherans, some fundamentalist separatist Christians, and many quite liberal Christian denominations. This view certainly has its strange bedfellow thing going on to say the least.
3) The strong secularist perspective that says, similar to the Christians above, that the founders were anything but Christian, and were deeply driven by Enlightenment concepts in their political thinking, and most importantly, in their drafting of our founding documents. But for these secularists this is of course a good thing. Some of the Christians above would agree, such as the Danbury Baptists, because of the freedom of conscience the Bill of Rights gives. Whereas some other Christians see Enlightenment thinking as being antithetical to basic Christian orthodoxy.
4) A less common viewpoint in this spectrum are the secularists who do acknowledge the role of religion in the founding period, and in the subsequent years following the revolution (not to mention the preceding Puritan era), but who see this presence as something to be expunged from American life, since "religion poisons everything" as some are wont to say. The New Atheists (TM) seem to be split between these two camps on this point, since some prefer having religion around to have as an appropriate boogey man to posit every national sin upon.
What makes all four of these competing narratives appealing is that they can each claim historical facts for their perspective. However, precisely because all four can do that, all four are also deeply mythological in their understanding of American history. Views one and three both share an American-Exceptionalism viewpoint, but obviously from very different philosophical/metaphysical bases.
Views two and four both lean towards an anti American-Exceptionalism view, since they both emphasize the historic wrongs done by the US from the Puritan era to today (though liberal Christianity in the late 1800's to WWI held deeply to American-Exceptionalism during the progressive era, and some still do).
In any case though, the reality of the role of religion in America's founding as a Republic is complex enough that each of these views have been able to rise up. So in each of them we see a little bit of truth (some more than others to be sure), but a good deal more myth in their narrative telling of America's origins ideologically and theologically. I'm sure I've oversimplified some of these issues in putting this together. If so, please call me out and explain where I've gone wrong. For further info on this topic, I highly recommend you visit some of the links on my right sidebar under the heading "Religion and Culture" where they deal with this topic in depth and quite well if I do say so myself.
Ah yes, the circle of life.
I have friends across the spectrum both ideologically and religiously, from the hardcore right to the far left; from fundamentalist Christians to dyed in the wool atheists. Black, white, Asian, Latino, multi-ethnic, straight, gay, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and friends from every continent except Antarctica. But in this special time of year, when patriotism flourishes and the reaction against it also flourishes, passions flourish no matter what or why. It's very similar to the various other contentious debates we so love to argue and divide over: Creationism/evolution, climate change, gender roles, sexuality, Yankees/Red Sox, etc...
So at this time of the year, the two biggest controversies are over the founding of the United States and how much religion played a role, in particular evangelical Christianity, and in a related issue, whether it's appropriate for modern evangelical Christians to be "patriotic" and celebrate America's Independence Day. Let me say from the outset that I'm not going to give my own ex cathedra declaration as to what is the eternal and always correct answer to these contentious issues. Read what I've written elsewhere to figure that out. I've certainly touched on both topics more than a few times. Instead, here I'm more interested in how each side has played the game of what the founders had to say about religion either privately or publicly and as it related to its role in governance, and how evangelical Christians should relate to their country as Christians.
I've noticed four views that seem to have predominated when it comes to this issue:
1) The "Christian America" view, which sees the founding era as being guided by orthodox/evangelical Christian views and which also believes that the US was specifically founded upon these beliefs and therefore should return to them in order to be blessed by God once again. The late Rev. D. James Kennedy, most Reconstructionist/theonomist Presbyterians, and most well known now, David Barton of Wallbuilders, all represent this perspective.
2) The alternative Christian view that the founders were a bunch of deists at best, and atheists in some cases, and therefore the US was not founded on Christian principles, but instead on Enlightenment ideals. This view is most often espoused by Anabaptists as well as some of the more conservative liturgical churches, such as Missouri Synod Lutherans, some fundamentalist separatist Christians, and many quite liberal Christian denominations. This view certainly has its strange bedfellow thing going on to say the least.
3) The strong secularist perspective that says, similar to the Christians above, that the founders were anything but Christian, and were deeply driven by Enlightenment concepts in their political thinking, and most importantly, in their drafting of our founding documents. But for these secularists this is of course a good thing. Some of the Christians above would agree, such as the Danbury Baptists, because of the freedom of conscience the Bill of Rights gives. Whereas some other Christians see Enlightenment thinking as being antithetical to basic Christian orthodoxy.
4) A less common viewpoint in this spectrum are the secularists who do acknowledge the role of religion in the founding period, and in the subsequent years following the revolution (not to mention the preceding Puritan era), but who see this presence as something to be expunged from American life, since "religion poisons everything" as some are wont to say. The New Atheists (TM) seem to be split between these two camps on this point, since some prefer having religion around to have as an appropriate boogey man to posit every national sin upon.
What makes all four of these competing narratives appealing is that they can each claim historical facts for their perspective. However, precisely because all four can do that, all four are also deeply mythological in their understanding of American history. Views one and three both share an American-Exceptionalism viewpoint, but obviously from very different philosophical/metaphysical bases.
Views two and four both lean towards an anti American-Exceptionalism view, since they both emphasize the historic wrongs done by the US from the Puritan era to today (though liberal Christianity in the late 1800's to WWI held deeply to American-Exceptionalism during the progressive era, and some still do).
In any case though, the reality of the role of religion in America's founding as a Republic is complex enough that each of these views have been able to rise up. So in each of them we see a little bit of truth (some more than others to be sure), but a good deal more myth in their narrative telling of America's origins ideologically and theologically. I'm sure I've oversimplified some of these issues in putting this together. If so, please call me out and explain where I've gone wrong. For further info on this topic, I highly recommend you visit some of the links on my right sidebar under the heading "Religion and Culture" where they deal with this topic in depth and quite well if I do say so myself.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Dark Girls
A preview of an upcoming documentary called Dark Girls about how skin color is judged both by other ethnicities and within the black community as well. Intrablack racism is a direct consequence of slavery and the institutional racism that America has had since its beginning. A very painful topic, but one which needs to be addressed.
Dark Girls: Preview from Bradinn French on Vimeo.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Katharine Hayhoe: Evangelical Christian, Climate Scientist
A wonderful post at Biologos about a climate change scientist who is also an evangelical Christian. Please be sure to watch all three videos at the link. This video needs to go viral and shatter the false dichotomy between faith and science so prevalent in the popular media.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
An excellent interview with Francis Collins about Science and Faith
Here's the link to the full video of Francis Collins talking about the Human Genome Project, but in this link, he also speaks about the relationship of faith and science. Well worth checking out.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Some excellent Websites dealing with Conspiracy Theories
Here's a round up of a few websites I've discovered that deal primarily or at least occasionally with the issue of conspiracy theories.
Mind Hacks is a mind science website that post frequently on issues relating to cognition. Always entertaining, very insightful, and sometimes hilarious.
A website I only discovered this evening because of a facebook friend Paul Kimball, who writes quite often about the paranormal and UFOs, is called Skeptico. It doesn't primarily deal with conpsiracy theories, but it does touch on that kind of thinking in many of its posts, so it's definitely worth checking. I look forward to reading/listening to more in the days ahead. Looks fascinating.
There's also the always good factcheck.org website that deals primarily with political issues, and of course one of their biggest fact checks has been about President Obama's birth certificate. Consistently good stuff here.
And then there's the more general fact checking website known as Snopes, which also has a great track record of exposing some truly bizarre conspiracy theories. They cover political, scientific, and just about every other cultural expression of bad thinking and crazy logic and amazing hoaxes.
And of course my favorite blog dealing with conspiracy issues has got to be Muertos, which has written extensively on the bizarre conspiracy theories associated with the Zeitgesit Movement, and it's spin off movement, the Venus Project. Thankfully it seem these crazy movements seem to be splitting apart amidst internal squabbling.
If you know of any other good websites dedicated to exploring conspiracy theories and their adherents and the psychology/sociology behind them, I'd very much appreciate the feedback. In a world filled with 9/11 Truthers, Obama Birthers, and now bin Laden Deathers, we need more than ever to work at helping those who are reality impaired and deeply fact aversive.
Mind Hacks is a mind science website that post frequently on issues relating to cognition. Always entertaining, very insightful, and sometimes hilarious.
A website I only discovered this evening because of a facebook friend Paul Kimball, who writes quite often about the paranormal and UFOs, is called Skeptico. It doesn't primarily deal with conpsiracy theories, but it does touch on that kind of thinking in many of its posts, so it's definitely worth checking. I look forward to reading/listening to more in the days ahead. Looks fascinating.
There's also the always good factcheck.org website that deals primarily with political issues, and of course one of their biggest fact checks has been about President Obama's birth certificate. Consistently good stuff here.
And then there's the more general fact checking website known as Snopes, which also has a great track record of exposing some truly bizarre conspiracy theories. They cover political, scientific, and just about every other cultural expression of bad thinking and crazy logic and amazing hoaxes.
And of course my favorite blog dealing with conspiracy issues has got to be Muertos, which has written extensively on the bizarre conspiracy theories associated with the Zeitgesit Movement, and it's spin off movement, the Venus Project. Thankfully it seem these crazy movements seem to be splitting apart amidst internal squabbling.
If you know of any other good websites dedicated to exploring conspiracy theories and their adherents and the psychology/sociology behind them, I'd very much appreciate the feedback. In a world filled with 9/11 Truthers, Obama Birthers, and now bin Laden Deathers, we need more than ever to work at helping those who are reality impaired and deeply fact aversive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)