I can relate—or perhaps I can’t…

Posted on January 18, 2014 by me

You don’t have to have Asperger’s to experience an inability to relate to the Evangelical Christian culture…

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on I can relate—or perhaps I can’t…

Review: Pastrix

Posted on January 13, 2014 by me


It’s been quite a while since I’ve done any kind of book review, but this one warrants a bit of attention because it is—and it isn’t—what I expected.

Trendy and hip

Anymore, I tend to avoid books that belong in the trendy, hip, postmodern category. Been there, done that. I’ve had enough of disenfranchised, “progressive” or Bono-esque Christians who think their calling is to offend, shock, or stretch the limits of theology. So, when I first heard mention of Pastrix, I thought, “oh, Anne Lamott with tattoos,” and didn’t give the book another thought.

Except, that I knew the person who designed the cover, which is totally awesome. I remember sending JuLee a Facebook message that I’d probably buy the book just for the cover. But, I didn’t, at least right away. I have too many “spiritual” books laying around that I’ve never read.

But, as weeks went by, I kept seeing Nadia’s name pop up, and then found a video of one of her messages. It was probably one of the most grace-filled sermons I’d heard in a long time. Then I listened to a couple of more of her sermons, and found her to have a very tenacious hold on grace, which I am attracted to. So, I broke down and bought the book.

The Review

On one hand, it’s not a great book. I mean, she’s not a C.S. Lewis, and you’re not going to be impressed with either her prose or her theological brilliance (I’d say the same thing about my own book). But, Pastrix is not that kind of book.  It’s also not a typical autobiography, although it is intensely personal and autobiographical. It’s also not an angry rant against traditional evangelical attitudes, or a treatise on gay rights, or an attempt to change anything. Neither is it an attempt at self-justification, the way so many memoirs are.

It is, according to it’s book flap, a spiritual memoir. I would describe it as a confession—of a sinner who is being saved by grace, an admitted misanthrope who was called to pastor “her people” as well as a bunch of people she couldn’t relate to at all.  The book is filled with her past and present failings, and her constant discovery that grace is both challenging and essential, and that life is a process of death and resurrection.

The shocking thing…

There are a number of things in the book that many of what I refer to as “shiny, happy people” Christians will find shocking. Nadia swears like a sailor, has a very colorful past, and uses a few colorful phrases that I don’t even understand. She doesn’t edit her language for the book.  At first, you might think the “f” word is inserted throughout the text on purpose, and in spite of the fact that I believe this is her “native” language, it does seem at times self-aware. But, some of that is possibly due to an editor striving to find a balance between honesty and readability. But that’s not what I think is shocking.

There are also a number of stories about a number of people who fall into the “non-straight” categories, and the fact that Nadia’s church, the House for All Sinners and Saints, is, according to their website, “queer-inclusive.” But that also is not the most shocking thing in the book.

What is perhaps the most shocking thing is that Bolz-Weber is, of all things, a Lutheran. I mean, when’s the last time a Lutheran had a best-selling Christian book? And who would expect a tattooed, foul-mouthed ex-comedian to have such a respect for the Eucharist or baptism or the Liturgical Calendar?  She is, at the same time, both liberal and traditional.

One of the things that struck me was her talking about following the Lectionary, which is essentially a preaching schedule that prescribes what texts to preach from on any given Sunday.  She expresses concern about what would happen should she ever stray from this schedule, and allow herself to preach  on any topic she wishes, as well as her concern to stay true to the text. I could only wish that evangelical pastors could follow this example. It is clear that she does not take her role as pastor lightly, and if anything, is something of a reluctant pastor, knowing that she, on her own, is inadequate.

I imagine, for some evangelicals, the fact that she’s Lutheran will just confirm the fact that she’s not really a Christian (believe me, I’ve heard some wacko stuff through the years, being of Lutheran extraction myself).  But, she understands the gospel, and it comes through time and again. Perhaps, being someone who has admittedly been “forgiven much,” she has a much batter grasp on grace than some of us. It’s no coincidence that she has a tattoo of Mary Magdalene on her arm.

Personal reflection

I expected the book to have a certain amount of self-righteousness due her church’s acceptance of sinners of all stripes, because these kind of books often do. But, there is none of that to be found. Bolz-Weber owns up to her self-righteous tendencies, and calls sin sin, taking an extremely humble attitude, and constantly looks to Jesus as savior, healer and redeemer. I found myself having to admit that at times, my own belief in grace fell somewhat short, and I was challenged to reexamine myself. But, it’s an interesting book in that it never lets you walk away feeling anything less than loved, forgiven, and in the process of being saved.

The message of the book is not to build up Nadia Bolz-Weber in any way. Where some authors take the “this is just who I am” approach to justify who they are, Bolz-Weber never falls into that trap. She knows she is inadequate, so clings strongly to the Cross and the Empty Tomb. The message that comes through loud and clear is that the Gospel is dangerous, that it will confront you and change you. That, in the words of another friend of mine, the Gospel accepts you as you are, but it won’t let you stay the way you are.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I am challenging myself to reexamine some things, and this book was quite helpful in that regard, as it identified and challenged the “boundaries” of grace. This personal challenge, by the way, is not a response to current events or issues, but from actually reading the Gospels. As I’ve stated in the past, when I read the Gospels as a whole, rather than in bite-size chunks, I tend to come away more “liberal,” with a much bigger picture of grace. I noticed, for one thing, that when Jesus says,”Go and sin no more,” he doesn’t identify which sin. I try never to be presumptuous in interpreting Scripture, but it’s funny how easily we fill in certain blanks.

I am not saying I agree with everything in the book

I don’t want to give the impression that I agree with everything in the book.  She makes some statements that make me go, “Now, hold on a minute…”  I’m guessing everyone could find at least one of those in the book, and some people obviously more than others.  But, why bother to read a book that you already agree with?  That’s kind of a waste of time.

Pastrix, perhaps, is not a book for everyone. I can think of many people I wouldn’t give the book to, for a number of reasons. But, if you think you understand grace—or want to—and dare to be challenged, this may be a great book for you.

Click here to read or listen to some of her sermons.

 

Posted in Good News, Reviews, The Gospel Uncensored | Leave a comment

Why I Like Conservatives

Posted on January 12, 2014 by me

Before you read this post, read Why I Like Liberals.

Like I said in the previous post, I lean conservative, but I’m not an “across the board” conservative, and am by no means an ultra-right-winger. Of course, a lot depends on how you define your terms, and what you’re talking about.   “Liberal” and “conservative” are relative terms. Today’s conservative may have been yesterday’s liberals. But, for the sake of this post, I’ll refer to conservatives as those people would you think of as contemporary conservatives—you know, those people who listen to Country music, own guns, attend evangelical churches, and watch Fox News. For the most part, I’m not one of those people.

Rooted in History

One of the first things I like about conservatives—whether politically, religious, or socially—is that they are rooted in history. Where liberals tend to be free and untethered from historical attitudes (though not unaware or uninfluenced, necessarily), conservatives tend to have a greater sense of obligation to the past. This is certainly true when it comes to issues of American Government. Conservatives are typically strict constructionists when it comes to interpreting the Constitution, and liberals tend to see it as a “living document,” open to changing interpretations. If we’re talking theology, conservatives will tend to take the Bible more literally, whereas liberal Christians often tend toward metaphorical readings.

One of the problems with this is that conservatives often don’t realize that their views of history may not necessarily be historical in themselves, but may have their roots in the 1950’s, or the enlightenment, or some other point in history.  Still, it is the tension between conservative roots and liberal ideals that keep us from being stuck in a rut on one hand, or meandering about like a ship without a rudder on the other.

Tradition!

The song from the movie Fiddler On The Roof (and the whole play) makes this point well. Similar to being rooted in history, conservatives tend to like tradition, if for no other reason that it’s traditional. Unconventional behavior is neither understood nor appreciated. Liberals (always speaking in general terms) are more open to the unconventional, the avant garde, and often find tradition too confining. This, I think, goes along with the tendency to be more creative, as I mentioned in the last post. However, there is a lot to be said for tradition, the passing down of stories and ceremony and customs that teach us history, but also attitudes and respect for the past.

Conservatives are generous

Contrary to what many believe, studies have shown that conservatives generally donate more to charities than liberals, and are more likely to volunteer their time. That’s all.

Morality

Here, let’s just say that conservatives and liberals will tend to hold to different standards of morality, and this tension has gone on for centuries. Conservatives, generally, are like parents who say things like, “If your friends jumped off a cliff, would you jump off too?”  Liberals, like many children, are prone to say things like, “Why not?” A whole lot of “why not” thinking would send the world to hell in a handbasket. Conservatives act as moral brakes, or as the red warning lights on the dashboard that tell us to change the oil before we fry our engines. Sometimes they are right, and sometimes they are wrong. But, like liberal challenging the conservative status quo, conservatives challenge those who would cross the line into potentially dangerous territory. Not that extremists on either side will listen, because they seldom do. But, for those of us who are not extremists (the majority in the middle of the bell curve), the questions and challenges assist us in our thinking through the issues.

Bottom Line

Conservatives tend to be hard-working, decent, salt-of-the-earth kind of people. Often their attitudes seem quaint, or even out of step with contemporary society, and they may have little or no respect for liberal ideas. But, there’s a lot of wisdom in folk tales and lessons learned through experience.  New is not necessarily better than old, we need the constant reminders of that from conservatives.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Politics/Current Events, Random Thoughts | 2 Comments

Why I Like Liberals

Posted on January 7, 2014 by me

I like liberals.

This is not a joke

Seriously. It’s not.

I like a lot of liberals. Not all, mind you, but I like a lot of liberals. In fact, I like all of the liberals that I know personally. I say “a lot” because a few of them—at least their public personas, which is all I have to go by—just seem really, really mean-spirited, psycho, or just generally unlikable. But perhaps I’d like them, too, in person. For example, Bill Maher and Ann Coulter are actually friends, which suggests that what we see on the air may involve some role-playing. And to be honest, there are conservatives I don’t really like, either.

Now here’s a little secret: A lot of people think that I’m really, really conservative, but actually, I’m really not. I lean to the right, but I try never to fall over. I at least make an attempt to be open-minded. There are things that I appreciate about both liberals and conservatives, and my plan is to list some of those points in this and my next post (“Why I Like Conservatives”).

So, Liberals.

One of the best things about liberals is that they aren’t afraid to think outside of the conservative box. They have their own box, granted, but it’s at least it’s a different box.  Conservatives tend to be a fearful bunch, which ends up hurting them. They’re afraid of change, they’re afraid of new information, and they’re often afraid of challenging the status quo. Liberals love to challenge the conservative status quo. They ask really tough questions like, “why?” and “why not?”  That’s not to say that the status quo is necessarily wrong, but we won’t know unless it’s questioned.

So, I like and appreciate that there are those who question whether or not the Constitution is outdated, or whether the Bible is true, or ask why gays can’t be married. I like that liberals are so fearless, willing to “go where no man has gone before.” Again, this doesn’t mean that all of their theories are correct, but at least they ask questions and at least think they are willing to accept the outcome. And, sometimes they’re simply right. Just in the last 50 years, liberals have caused significant change in areas of women’s rights, racial equality, environmental issues, and so on. And, there’s more to be done, and we need to hear what they have to say.  Unfortunately, there are some liberals who are idealogs on one issue or another, which has negatively impacted the dialogs that could happen. The liberal box can be just as rigid as the conservative box, and sometimes “open minded” is just a term for having found a new box. I also think there’s a tendency with some liberals to fear not changing.  But, I never said liberals are perfect.

Liberals care

Another reason I like liberals is that they care, and they tend to be passionate about the things they care about. Liberals (speaking generally, of course) care about minorities, the disenfranchised, and the down-trodden. They tend to be more world-focused than conservatives. They care about the environment and about animals. And, they care about beauty—I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most artists, musicians, actors, and other creative people would consider themselves liberals. However, they often care to a fault, and can sometimes lose sight of larger issues. But, perhaps that’s important, too. I don’t know if it’s a right-brain/left-brain issue, or a heart vs. head issue, but in general liberals tend to see things differently than conservatives, and that brings beauty to the world.

And they act

I also like liberals because they do stuff to impact the world. At least in America, conservatives tend to be the “boot-straps” people, and there’s much to be said about the “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps” way of thinking. However, that often results in lack of action. Note that it is the more liberal churches who tend to be the most socially active, taking Jesus’ words to heart about feeding the hungry, healing the sick, etc. I admire that, and to be honest, I tend to really suck at those things, being somewhat anti-social.

Liberals are human people

There’s a tendency for many hard right-wingers to classify “libs” as the enemy, or evil. And, of course, liberals do the same thing to conservatives, but that’s not my focus here. But, as with any other labeled sub-set of people, liberals are individuals who think, and feel, and who want to be loved and accepted, just like the rest of us. We may dislike some of their ideas, but like Maher and Coulter, we should look to find areas of commonality. It’s easy to be an arm-chair politician and start seeing the work as black and white, never realizing that many of the folks we see arguing in Congress are having a beer together afterwards. People are people, as the song goes.

We Need Liberals

A world where everyone is conservative would be boring, and almost unbearable. It would be like the 50’s all over again, only worse. We need people to question and say things like “this isn’t right” and then try to do something about it. If liberals didn’t exist, we’d have to invent them (if only so we’d have someone to argue with).

So, yes, I like liberals.  Quite a bit, actually.

Posted in Random Thoughts | 4 Comments