I have been thinking about dishonest people lately now that the great recession we are in continues. Several incidents have brought about an evaluation of our morals during difficult financial times. One of my friends recently attended a conference and noticed that on her last day someone had added a few extra dollars for a tip to her breakfast ticket. I had the same experience the next week, but here an extra $25 had been added for an initial $25 tab. Most people who might contemplate cheating a bit probably would not have increased the tip to 100%, I would think, if they hoped to avoid notice. The most interesting incident I have heard within the last few days centers on the New Zealand man who requested overdraft protection for $10,000. The bank evidently made a mistake and added an extra three zeroes to the amount requested. The man and his girlfriend now seem to have absconded with the ten million dollars to parts unknown.
My question is: Have we always been willing to cheat, or are we being unduly tempted by the recession we find ourselves in? I tend to think it is the latter.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Between the Trees
I recently watched a video of Rob Bell entitled "Trees." Rob Bell is the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Michigan, and has a unique way of presenting his sermons. He always uses a strong analogy to draw attention to his message. In this video he speaks of the tree in the Garden of Eden that is called "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." We remember that God instructed the earliest man and woman not to eat of the tree. We know, however, that God's command was ignored, and sin entered into the world at that point. Bell also speaks of the tree of life described in Revelation 22, the final chapter of the Bible. It is described in the Word as one "which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." It is at the end of time when the original curse of God will be removed. Bell's point of the video is to remind us as Christians that we have a lot of living to do in between the two trees.
To give us help throughout the Bible, God also uses trees as analogies for the way we need to live. One of the most interesting uses of the analogy has always been the plant which grew overnight over Jonah's head (chapter 4, verse 6-10) yet withered by the next morning. It is a symbol of the transience of life and the brevity of time to do God's will. Another key example of trees, which illustrates how we are to live our lives, is found in John 15. In this chapter, Christ compares Himself to being a vine while his followers are the branches that are to bear fruit. As in the book of Jonah, He reminds us that, if we do not produce fruit, we too will wither and be cast into the fire and burned.
As I think about these analogies, I know that God is giving us a recipe of Truth for our lives. Yes, the afterlife is important, but perhaps the more important aspect of our purpose here on earth is to do what we can to improve the lives of others. Jonah was insistent that the people of Ninevah be killed, not given a chance for forgiveness and repentance. Christ says we are to be aware of those around us who live lives of "quiet desperation." Today we have many who struggle with day-to-day decisions on how to live through this great recession that we find ourselves in. As His followers, we simply must invest, through our volunteer efforts, in the lives of others. Living well between the trees is essential.
To give us help throughout the Bible, God also uses trees as analogies for the way we need to live. One of the most interesting uses of the analogy has always been the plant which grew overnight over Jonah's head (chapter 4, verse 6-10) yet withered by the next morning. It is a symbol of the transience of life and the brevity of time to do God's will. Another key example of trees, which illustrates how we are to live our lives, is found in John 15. In this chapter, Christ compares Himself to being a vine while his followers are the branches that are to bear fruit. As in the book of Jonah, He reminds us that, if we do not produce fruit, we too will wither and be cast into the fire and burned.
As I think about these analogies, I know that God is giving us a recipe of Truth for our lives. Yes, the afterlife is important, but perhaps the more important aspect of our purpose here on earth is to do what we can to improve the lives of others. Jonah was insistent that the people of Ninevah be killed, not given a chance for forgiveness and repentance. Christ says we are to be aware of those around us who live lives of "quiet desperation." Today we have many who struggle with day-to-day decisions on how to live through this great recession that we find ourselves in. As His followers, we simply must invest, through our volunteer efforts, in the lives of others. Living well between the trees is essential.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
From Jerusalem to Gaza
I have been thinking about the renewed violence in the Middle East over the past few weeks. These violent episodes have been taking place in not only Iraq but also in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and as always--between Israel and Palestine. We hear from the conservative media that Muslims simply desire to fight a jihad against Western Culture and religion. We hear from the liberal media that diplomacy is the better choice in hoping for a permanent peace. From a Christian perspective, does the Bible offer any advice for peace?
One, of course, could legitimately argue that the Bible contains many examples where the God of the Old Testament orders war and promises to protect the Jewish people in their quest for land. In the New Testament, Christ brings a new order and commands us to love our neighbor as heartily as we love our God.
Perhaps we can find a bit of an answer in the book of Acts, Chapter 8, when Philip is visited by an angel and told, "Arise and go toward the south along the road which goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." Then, in a parenthetical comment, we discover the words, "This is desert." In other words, Philip is ordered to leave the comfort of the city in which he has been residing and preaching and go into the wilderness. He has no idea why until he meets an authoritative representative of the Queen of Ethiopia. Even though the man was just returning from Jerusalem himself, he still had no idea how to interpret the Scripture he was reading. It was not until Philip explained it to him that he understood.
While diplomacy in the Middle East is a very large gamble on the part of the Obama administration, I believe it might offer the best hope for peace in the area--and correspondingly--in the world. Treating each other with respect may actually work; nothing else has up to this point.
One, of course, could legitimately argue that the Bible contains many examples where the God of the Old Testament orders war and promises to protect the Jewish people in their quest for land. In the New Testament, Christ brings a new order and commands us to love our neighbor as heartily as we love our God.
Perhaps we can find a bit of an answer in the book of Acts, Chapter 8, when Philip is visited by an angel and told, "Arise and go toward the south along the road which goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." Then, in a parenthetical comment, we discover the words, "This is desert." In other words, Philip is ordered to leave the comfort of the city in which he has been residing and preaching and go into the wilderness. He has no idea why until he meets an authoritative representative of the Queen of Ethiopia. Even though the man was just returning from Jerusalem himself, he still had no idea how to interpret the Scripture he was reading. It was not until Philip explained it to him that he understood.
While diplomacy in the Middle East is a very large gamble on the part of the Obama administration, I believe it might offer the best hope for peace in the area--and correspondingly--in the world. Treating each other with respect may actually work; nothing else has up to this point.
Monday, May 11, 2009
In Defense of Faith
Our book club is currently reading Susan Jacoby's The Age of American Unreason. Her basic premise is that high culture and education have been deteriorating rapidly in recent years. According to Jacoby, politicians refer to citizens of America as "folks," and our students are woefully lacking in the basic skills for life. As a teacher for thirty-five years at both the secondary and university levels, I must agree with her as I have also noted these changes. A key point, however, where I disagree centers on the importance of religion to our society. Jacoby basically believes that faith is an enemy to reason and that those who believe in religion simply have succumbed to "superstitious nonsense." I would like to present a brief rebuttal.
For Christians, the basic authority of our faith has always been the Bible. This belief in the Bible as Truth is basic to both conservative and mainstream, or liberal, denominations. Certainly, the conservative groups believe in the inerrancy and literal nature of the Word. The more liberal groups, however, believe the Word contains all the Truth we need for daily life but do not necessarily believe that every word is true. They see, for example, the story of Adam and Eve, and many others in the Old Testament, as being metaphorical.
If we can agree then that the Bible still remains the authority of Christians, we must look to it for the definition of faith. It is found in Hebrews 11, verse 1, which says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Ironically, the verse uses language also employed in the sciences: substance and evidence. The very nature, however, of faith is that believers depend upon personal experiences and anecdotes as evidence of their faith. Miracles exist for these Christians because they know they have experienced them. Faith can never be subjected to the same empirical evidence that science demands, but it is no less real to the believer.
A speaker last week on National Public Radio was discussing his work in Africa with AIDS patients and made the comment that religion provides "beauty, peace, and spiritual transcendence." Millions of us disagree with Jacoby's view of faith and know that it is not simply "superstitious nonsense." It provides Christians with all the fruits promised in the Word: love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.
For Christians, the basic authority of our faith has always been the Bible. This belief in the Bible as Truth is basic to both conservative and mainstream, or liberal, denominations. Certainly, the conservative groups believe in the inerrancy and literal nature of the Word. The more liberal groups, however, believe the Word contains all the Truth we need for daily life but do not necessarily believe that every word is true. They see, for example, the story of Adam and Eve, and many others in the Old Testament, as being metaphorical.
If we can agree then that the Bible still remains the authority of Christians, we must look to it for the definition of faith. It is found in Hebrews 11, verse 1, which says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Ironically, the verse uses language also employed in the sciences: substance and evidence. The very nature, however, of faith is that believers depend upon personal experiences and anecdotes as evidence of their faith. Miracles exist for these Christians because they know they have experienced them. Faith can never be subjected to the same empirical evidence that science demands, but it is no less real to the believer.
A speaker last week on National Public Radio was discussing his work in Africa with AIDS patients and made the comment that religion provides "beauty, peace, and spiritual transcendence." Millions of us disagree with Jacoby's view of faith and know that it is not simply "superstitious nonsense." It provides Christians with all the fruits promised in the Word: love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Hypocrisy When Ideology and Reality Collide
I am a hypocrite; I admit it. It is just that I have trouble when my ideology collides with my reality. It happened several months ago when I admitted in my blog that I support gun control laws until my own loved ones are threatened in some way. I then do a 180 degree reversal. I am doing it again after listening for the past week or so to both sides of the American torture controversy. And again, my position involves putting my family in a hypothetical situation.
On the one hand, I agree with John McCain and others that torture rarely ever leads to any real and viable information. On the other, however, as I watched a television discussion on the subject last week, one of the e-mails that came in asked a rather startling question. It was, "If your child could be freed from possible death at the hands of terrorists, would you support torture?" In my mind, I immediately responded, "Yes!"
I wish I wasn't so wishy-washy and could take political positions and stand by them. I remind myself of a good friend who recently stated, "I believe whatever the last thing I read." One aspect that I do take pride in is that I listen to both sides of an argument. Since I taught argumentative writing at the college level, I know the value of giving some weight to opposing viewpoints. I am afraid, however, that my emotions tend to take precedence over my intellectual side too often.
On the one hand, I agree with John McCain and others that torture rarely ever leads to any real and viable information. On the other, however, as I watched a television discussion on the subject last week, one of the e-mails that came in asked a rather startling question. It was, "If your child could be freed from possible death at the hands of terrorists, would you support torture?" In my mind, I immediately responded, "Yes!"
I wish I wasn't so wishy-washy and could take political positions and stand by them. I remind myself of a good friend who recently stated, "I believe whatever the last thing I read." One aspect that I do take pride in is that I listen to both sides of an argument. Since I taught argumentative writing at the college level, I know the value of giving some weight to opposing viewpoints. I am afraid, however, that my emotions tend to take precedence over my intellectual side too often.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Disappearing Southern Women
As I listened to Rick Bragg's presentation last week at the Arkansas Literary Festival, he gave a quote by William Faulkner that I have not heard before then. It basically went like this: "Women disappear from Southern towns like beads off a broken strand of pearls." The quote was startling and immediately made me analyze the reasons why this statement could possibly be true. By the next morning at the Literary Festival, as I attended South Carolina writer Dorothy Allison's question and answer session, I realized I had known the answer all along.
As for me, I left my home state of Mississippi the week after I graduated from high school. It was a planned move a long while in coming since I had made the decision at age fifteen. My family, unlike that of Dorothy Allison, did not include numerous cousins and siblings who were subject to drug addiction, early deaths from reckless driving, accidental drownings, and early pregnancies. I had a sister only, and my mother had been an only child. The element that does bind me to Allison's story is that we were both victims of sexual abuse at an early age, by a stepfather for her and a step great grandfather for me. One of my new friends recently told me her abuser was a surrogate uncle.
As children we are, of course, helpless to change our situations because someone has to take care of us in our early years. We become our own advocates, however, as we approach the magical age of eighteen and the possibility of our independence at last. The road for Allison, for Bragg (who suffered much in the hands of an alcoholic father), for me, and for many other Southerners can be a torturous one as we move from the dysfunction of our families to mental and emotional recovery. We cannot do this by staying in the South.
We simply feel we must leave the scene of the crimes committed against us in order to heal. Often, ironically, we choose--after a number of years away--to return to our home states. Perhaps through our writing and speaking of childhood horrors others might be saved from such a fate. We can only hope that to be true.
As for me, I left my home state of Mississippi the week after I graduated from high school. It was a planned move a long while in coming since I had made the decision at age fifteen. My family, unlike that of Dorothy Allison, did not include numerous cousins and siblings who were subject to drug addiction, early deaths from reckless driving, accidental drownings, and early pregnancies. I had a sister only, and my mother had been an only child. The element that does bind me to Allison's story is that we were both victims of sexual abuse at an early age, by a stepfather for her and a step great grandfather for me. One of my new friends recently told me her abuser was a surrogate uncle.
As children we are, of course, helpless to change our situations because someone has to take care of us in our early years. We become our own advocates, however, as we approach the magical age of eighteen and the possibility of our independence at last. The road for Allison, for Bragg (who suffered much in the hands of an alcoholic father), for me, and for many other Southerners can be a torturous one as we move from the dysfunction of our families to mental and emotional recovery. We cannot do this by staying in the South.
We simply feel we must leave the scene of the crimes committed against us in order to heal. Often, ironically, we choose--after a number of years away--to return to our home states. Perhaps through our writing and speaking of childhood horrors others might be saved from such a fate. We can only hope that to be true.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The New Authority
My Wednesday book study group has been reading Phyllis Tickle's new book The Great Emergence. Her thesis is basically that every five hundred years in the history of religion a great cataclysmic change of some type occurs. She asserts that we are now in such a time period.
For example, she goes back in time to five hundred years before now and points out the beginning of the Reformation as the Protestants broke away from the authority of the Catholic Church. The new authority at that time became "Scripture and Scripture only." Five hundred years before the Reformation there occurred the Great Schism between the Eastern church and the Western church. Before that, five hundred years approximately, the Dark Ages ushered in a long period of monastic tradition. When we return to the years 70-130 of the common era, we find the beginnings of the Christian church and its break with traditional Judaism.
On the one hand, as we review this church history, change seems inevitable and evolving. On the other hand, we might be fearful of whatever changes might lie ahead for us. Tickle's point about these "great emergence" periods, however, is that they are always divided into two parts that become stronger than ever before. We need only to look at the growth and proliferation of Protestant churches as one proof.
The new authority of the 21st century, Tickle suggests, is going to be an emergent "beloved community" where all work together as the early New Testament church did to provide for the needs of all its members. She argues that the Bible will no longer be valid as the authority since numerous scholarly articles and books have been written recently to suggest the somewhat arbitrary nature in which the Bible was assembled. In addition, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls have challenged traditional beliefs. The Bible may no longer have the inerrant content and infallibility that Protestants once believed.
I personally have believed in the Bible's Truth as authority for too many years to support this new theory though I am open to seeing how a new community of believers might work. As a relatively new Episcopalian, I value already both tradition and Scripture, but I am now open more to using experience and rationality as an additional test of faith.
For example, she goes back in time to five hundred years before now and points out the beginning of the Reformation as the Protestants broke away from the authority of the Catholic Church. The new authority at that time became "Scripture and Scripture only." Five hundred years before the Reformation there occurred the Great Schism between the Eastern church and the Western church. Before that, five hundred years approximately, the Dark Ages ushered in a long period of monastic tradition. When we return to the years 70-130 of the common era, we find the beginnings of the Christian church and its break with traditional Judaism.
On the one hand, as we review this church history, change seems inevitable and evolving. On the other hand, we might be fearful of whatever changes might lie ahead for us. Tickle's point about these "great emergence" periods, however, is that they are always divided into two parts that become stronger than ever before. We need only to look at the growth and proliferation of Protestant churches as one proof.
The new authority of the 21st century, Tickle suggests, is going to be an emergent "beloved community" where all work together as the early New Testament church did to provide for the needs of all its members. She argues that the Bible will no longer be valid as the authority since numerous scholarly articles and books have been written recently to suggest the somewhat arbitrary nature in which the Bible was assembled. In addition, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls have challenged traditional beliefs. The Bible may no longer have the inerrant content and infallibility that Protestants once believed.
I personally have believed in the Bible's Truth as authority for too many years to support this new theory though I am open to seeing how a new community of believers might work. As a relatively new Episcopalian, I value already both tradition and Scripture, but I am now open more to using experience and rationality as an additional test of faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
