A nice day
Had a little day out this past Saturday. Went to Multnomah Falls, and parts thereabouts. Here are some pics:
on religion
I’ve increasingly come to the conclusion that what traditionally marks religion isn’t devotion to God, but rather a strong belief that God doesn’t really know what he is doing.
First a little theology and background:
In antiquity religion denoted the cultic veneration of God. Cicero defined it as the cultus deorum. Religio could sometimes be used of the relation to other people to the degree that a comparable veneration was owed or paid to them. Cicero distinguished religio as moral duty from the taboo-fear of superstitio. This distinction differentiated the Latin term from the Greek threskeia, which embraces all forms of cultic veneration, even those that are excessive or erroneous, and which occurs also in the NT in this sense. Closer to Cicero’s religio is theosebei, which is not closely tied to the cultus. In Cicero pietas is an attitude of soul which in relation to the gods finds expression in cultic acts. Yet Cicero does not equate piety and religion. He relates the latter term much more to rites and their observance. Nor does he call the knowledge of God religio. In his work on laws he describes this knowledge as the mar of differentiation between human beings and animals, but he does not call it religion. Nevertheless, he regards a knowledge of the matter of the gods as necessary to bridle the expression of cultic veneration.
Unlike Cicero, August in his De vera religione (c. 390) stresses that the knowledge of God and the worship of God are inseparable in religion. For him, then, there is a close relation between religion and philosophy. Doctrine and worship belong together. In this regard he appeals to Plato, but he finds the supreme example of the connection of doctrine and cultus in the church. The true religion is to be found where the soul does not worship creaturely things but the one eternal and unchangeable God. IN his own time this perfect religion was identical with the Christian religion whose teachings Almighty God himself had set forth. These consist of the prophetic intimation and historical recording of the saving provisions of divine providence for the renewal of the human race.
By tying together worship of God and knowledge of God Augustine sought to do something very honorable which was to essential combine thought and practice. However, the problem comes in the perversion of this that happens because we really, at our cores, don’t think God knows what he is doing. We invert this order, making our worship of God become a source of knowledge about God, thus making how we want to serve God become the criteria for what we think God wants.
In other words, we tell God what we will give him and then expect him to applaud our service.
Or we think that God has really left a lot out, forgetting maybe what he wants, and that we need to fill in the blanks, and make others follow our lead in doing that.
This is true from the earliest days and is at the heart of alienating religion. That’s why I think Cicero was right to separate the two. If we truly know God we will likely respond to him as we should. But, far too often we want to serve him without really knowing or trusting him. We create forms of worship he never mandated, and then make this worship the criteria of inclusion among his proclaimed people.
Sometimes God does tell us how he wants to be worshipped. He told Moses the clear guidelines. And he laid out who was to be included, how they were to be included, what they were supposed to do and not do on what days. God can be quite specific when he wants to be.
When he’s not specific we can’t be specific for him. Because it’s showing that we don’t know, like, or trust what God has done when he has freed us from those specific forms and giving the Holy Spirit to be the true marker of who is and who is not part of the people of God.
Worship becomes then not only separated from the knowledge of God, it becomes a barrier to the knowledge of God, creating a false knowledge, and false attributes, always enforcing the forms of worship rather than the fruit of the Spirit and the reflection of Christ.
It’s easy to not trust the Holy Spirit’s work in people. Peter could have rejected Cornelius because Cornelius did not match the liturgical patterns of Jewish Christianity (the true Apostolic form). In fact there was a movement in the early church to do just that, something that was addressed in Acts 15. However, Peter would not have been part of the church any longer himself had he done so. The Spirit forms the church, and Peter followed.
So too today. Which is why I have such trouble with so many forms of leadership which mistake form for knowledge and enforce non-Scriptural patterns as being somehow authoritative for God’s demands. That’s why I have trouble with contemporary emphasis on leadership development that emphasizes roles and organizational structure far beyond what Scripture indicates. It creates a cult of personality and emphasize non-Spirit charisma over and above spiritual gifting and Spirit leading.
Religion that doesn’t trust God is found in both the newest and the oldest forms of the Christian faith, and we see this even in the New Testament letters. Paul is writing to churches who don’t trust God and so created their own misshaped patterns that had to be rebuked or adjusted.
God tells us what we need to know and sent the Spirit to teach us all things. That’s not always answering the questions we might have, however, even as we are taught what is necessary. We can in response either trust God and be free in the freedom he has brought, free in diversity and free in expression, worshiping in manifold ways out of the particular knowledge and gifts the Spirit has bestowed. Or we can betray God, enforcing rules not his own that we attribute to him, thinking that our contrived worship is in fact knowledge rather than whim and habit.
Crying Wolf
CHICAGO, May 15.—The Rev. W.W. Reynolds, pastor of the Brightwood Methodist Church of Indianapolis, recently wrote to Capt. Luke Colleran, Chief of the Chicago Detective Department, inquiring if the use of the bicycle among women had affected their morality in any perceptible manner. Although not offering statistics, Capt. Colleran’s reply deals with the subject in a positive manner.
He writes:
“I am not an advocate of the use of the bicycle among women, when viewing it from a morality phase. Women of refinement and exquisite moral training addicted to the use of the bicycle are not infrequently thrown among the uncultivated and de¬generate element of both sexes, whose coarse, boisterous, and immoral gestures are heard and seen while speeding along our streets and boulevards. Many doubtless es¬cape the contamination, although the contagion be ever present.“A large number of our female bicyclists wear shorter dresses than the laws of morality and decency permit, thereby inviting the improper conversations and remarks of the depraved and immoral. I most certainly consider the adoption of the bicycle by women as detrimental to the advancement of morality—nay, even its stability. I have always entertained deep sympathy for the hosts of noble and honorable ladies, who while riding their wheels are frequently associated with women whose morality will not stand investigation and whose conversation is invariably coarse and undignified.”
On being asked for an expression of opinion, Mrs. Charles Henrotin said:
“This Indianapolis minister must be very hard up for subjects. Perhaps he considers that he has conquered the devil in his own dominions and must go forth to conquer him in new fields. Why should cycling be restricted to men. I don’t see that they have any superior rights in the matter. It is an exercise conducive to good health and good spirits, and certainly there is nothing-improper in it.”
Morality these days? Where’s it going to go next?
Of course, this article was in the New York Times on May 15, 1899. Turn of the century concern.
I make note of it because it so illustrates something that has been on my mind of late and I might want to explore here more, now that I’m back to posting a little.
What matters?
Not only what matters but what should particularly matter to us. The Rev. W.W. Reynolds thought that women riding bikes mattered. It was a gateway hobby, you know. First they get on the bike, then the skirts slip up a little, and then one time upstanding, moral, young women will start associating with all kinds of ne’er-do-wells. Who wouldn’t oppose that?
Well, now that seems a little silly. We have perspective and all that. It’s a great hobby and bike riding is the least of our moral concerns.
I live in California. I know about the pressing moral concerns of our era.
But that’s what gets me to think about what really matters and why it matters. Because this article above is so much a reason why we are in the moral confusion we’re in these days. Christianity became about culture, and morals, and respectable living. It wasn’t as much about Jesus, and serving others, and letting go our demands, and living with love. Morality replaced spirituality.
There’s no real power in morality, however. There’s only power in the Spirit who leads us to morality.
So what should we focus on?
What does Paul emphasize? What did Jesus emphasize?
I think there’s something in that worth considering more.
Proposition 98 and 99
I’ve not done too much politics of late, mostly because it’s not entirely a fruitful discussion. But sometimes I think it’s worthwhile to jump back in and have a little say. Or at least point to someone else’s say.
This June 3rd we in California have a couple of ballot initiatives, both of which are addressing the idea of imminent domain, the issue raised most recently by the utterly execrable Kelo decision.
Both seemed a little suspicious to me, and with these kinds of initiatives deception should be looked for, and the backers analyzed as well as the text of the law.
Ilya Somin has a new op-ed in the Times that clarifies what is happening, and why we should probably vote Yes on 98 and No on 99. ]
Though, honestly, they both have problems and I wish there could be an initiative that is straightforward on this topic. It wouldn’t be that difficult. Though, I suppose it doesn’t really matter how we vote. California voting is more like an opinion poll that gives us something to do while the courts tell us how it’s going to be.
I do suggest voting still, though. Because one never knows what will stay on the books, and if because of this people end up not losing their homes it’s a victory.
House Hippo
For your instruction and edification:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1zgUD1gehQ&hl=en">
property
I am going to speak, as you would have the right to expect me to speak, of what affects us at the present moment here in this State—of one of those problems with which we, who are for the time being your servants and representatives in public life, are trying to deal.
Now, take the very question that you have seen advocated and which you will see advocated some more during the next fen days—the question of the taxation of franchises. On the one hand we have the perfectly simple savage who believes that you should tax franchises to the extent of confiscating them, and that it is the duty of all rail¬road corporations to carry everybody free and give him a chromo. On the other, we have the scarcely less primitive mortal who believes that there is something sacred in a franchise, and that there is no reason why it should pay its share of the burdens at all.
Wow, gentlemen, remember that the man who occupies the last position inevitably tends to produce the man who occupies the first position, and that the worst enemy of property is the man who, whether from unscrupulousness or from mere heedlessness and thoughtlessness, takes the ground that there shall be something sacred about all property—-that the owners of it are to occupy a different position in the community from all others, and are to have their burdens not increased, but diminished, because of their wealth.
~Teddy Roosevelt, 1899.
All That Road Going
For most of my life, as long as I can remember at least, I’ve enjoyed people watching. Airports are great. So are train stations. Sitting on a public bench or at a table looking out at the sidewalk of a busy city also make great spots. What is the fascination? I’m not sure. I think it’s because all these people represent such different stories.
I watch and I ponder and I absorb the different faces and different styles and different postures. Different places offer different casts of characters. Different classes or races or likely histories.
All That Road Going is a book for those of us who people watch, because it’s this treat we are never given in real life. It’s a look into the thoughts and stories of various characters all on their way. That the setting is a Greyhound bus means we are looking at the particular people who would ride a Greyhound bus, not exactly the symbol of roaring success.
The style is literary fiction. Mojtabai is a gifted writer, with a sharp eye for detail and insight about humanity. Her prose is well-crafted, offering both readability and vibrant descriptions of her often bland, maybe even forgettable settings. This is a book about people we might not notice, in places we would likely ignore or dismiss. But instead of dismissing them, Mojtabai dwells, sits with them and encourages us to see real people.
The book itself feels like Mojtabai was interested in doing character sketches, and then found a convenient way to tie these various sketches together. Not only is there no real plot, there isn’t a consistent narrator. Each chapter, for the most part, gives us the perspective from a different seat. The bus driver makes the most appearances as we learn his values and perspectives. Mojtabai crafts her writing to fit each narrator as we go, making the prose itself become insight into the characters, and done so with expertise.
All That Road Going is a very good book. Well written and quite interesting, if you like character studies. Low ratings that I’ve seen seem to be not a reflection about this book as much as they are about the fact some people just don’t like this type of book.
If you are wanting an action packed plot or flowing story this likely isn’t the best book. If you people watch and would love to have just a taste of what it would be like to hear the stories of the people walking by or sitting near then this is a wonderful treat.
proof of God
On a Christian forum recently I asked, “What is your proof of God?” Awhile back, sitting in a friend’s living room before a party, I was asked a similar question. “What is the best proof for God?” I’ve never really been all that into apologetics so I’m not entirely solid on all the popular historic proofs. But, I think a reason for that is they are not personally all that convincing or helpful, to me or to others. The proof of God that matters is the proof that God gives us. And that’s what I answered in that living room before the party. The best proof is God’s Spirit in our lives. It’s the Spirit who proves God to us. Everything else is just commentary.
But the Spirit works in different ways in each of our lives. Not always in ways that would be proof to other people, but are certainly at the root of our own faith and commitment. Having this proof, this personal proof, is I think important. Because when the fire comes, all the rest is often burned away.
Here’s my answer to “What is your proof of God?” It’s my personal answer. Very personal.
I grew up in a Christian home. I remember Easter 1979 (or ‘78) as the day I sat on the lawn of my Wesleyan church and repeated the words of the minister asking Jesus into my heart. I was about 4.
I don’t remember being particularly religious but I was a pretty good church kid.
We moved away from that town and to another one far away when I was in 4th grade. I spent a lot of time alone and that seemed to have awakened something deeper. I remember being about 11 or so and saying to my mom I felt called to be a pastor. I remember speaking in tongues at my pentecostal church and otherwise feeling this deep, deep move of God in my life.
So, I suppose God was always poking at me.
But it’s in college that I found what I consider my personal ‘proof’. And it came in two directions, in two forms, at opposite experiences of life.
The first was my sophomore year. A variety of ups and downs had pushed me into a constant state of prayer and seeking God. This began to open up new experiences. I remember October of 1994 during a 4 day holiday where the campus was almost entirely empty. I read Paradise Lost while sitting int the cool fall weather out on the big lawn of the campus. Something about that awakened me. God visited me, sat with me, enlightened me. I would finish reading and get up to go to lunch or finish for the day and I would be awakened to reality. It was a weekend of epiphanies, in which I felt heaven, felt so much peace and hope and love. I think its why I’ve never been attracted to drugs or drunkenness. Those pale in comparison to the fullness of life I felt during that time with God. I felt him, and all his work, in this amazingly profound way. Again and again through my sophomore year I had these kinds of experiences. God showed me himself and gave me a view into his view. I can’t prove it to someone else, but neither can I deny it to myself. It was profound. And even still, when I don’t have that kind of epiphanies, those moments speak to my heart and say that God is more real than what we think is real. Deeper and farther and more whole and more still and so much everything.
My junior year I returned to the school. But the season had changed. Rather than feeling this immense awareness of God’s presence I experienced the opposite. A debilitating dark night of the soul where God went utterly silent, where no matter what I did I couldn’t feel his presence. My heart and soul emptied. Every spiritual feeling was gone. I was utterly alone–which happened to coincide with a breakdown of my friendships at the time.
The feeling, the awareness, all the mystical or spiritual stuff was gone. I felt totally lost and abandoned. My prayers went to nothingness and returned empty. My soul became emaciated, just when I was pressing way forward in spiritual disciplines. My efforts to reach God returned blank.
I was stuck. How do I have faith when there is nothing there? The emotions and spirituality was utterly empty. I faced a dilemma. God was nowhere.
How do I live?
My whole faith was dismantled. I feel like my sophomore year was the pinnacle of my first faith. I advanced through emotion and spirituality and came into the presence of God. Then he retreated. I was left isolated. Piece by piece everything my religious life depended on was taken apart. The fire came and burned it all away.
I was left with nothing. I couldn’t pray. I couldn’t hope. I couldn’t stand.
So burned away that it exposed the foundation. And, in fact there was a foundation.
That’s my second proof. I realized I absolutely, utterly believed that Jesus walked out of that tomb on Easter morning.
This wasn’t just a faith answer. I had no faith, see. I had studied the Bible and history. I was absolutely convinced that Jesus walked out of that tomb because of how history resonated with that action. I studied the New Testament and studied early church history and saw how much these men and woman lived in a way that reflected a true historic event. There’s not enough room to give the details of why I think this, but there are a lot of details there.
On that foundation, me answering the most basic of Christian questions, I began to rebuild. Because if Jesus walked out of that tomb, then what was taught, what he taught and Scripture taught was real too. That resurrection was the evidence of a greater reality. So instead of rejecting the rest, that I no longer felt, I began to walk a long road back to understanding how to find the answers for my persistent questions. Answers that I knew were there, because Jesus loved me, this I know.
And that ‘proof’ has taken me on a long and winding path, that has changed an immense amount of what I ‘knew’ during my first faith during my first 20 years. But this ’second’ faith, this rebuilt spirituality, is so much more at peace and has so much more real hope and real confidence and real joy, even if I really do miss those epiphanies of my sophomore year. I suspect that there will be a season again of that as I go onward in this rebuilt faith.
Higher up and farther in.
the pledge
It’s tough to run a college these days. It’s tougher still when you set high standards. And it’s toughest of all when those standards reflect an Ozzie and Harriet morality in a Sarah Jessica Parker world.
Just ask the folks at Wheaton College.
My alma mater, Wheaton College, in the news about its community covenant. Or as we called it, ‘the Pledge’.
When I was there, and probably still, the hip, attempting to be chic students (probably now users of Macs–which were pieces of junk then) reveled in breaking the pledge. Go out dancing, drinking, whatever. Go to the most conservative place you can, and break the rules. That’s rebellion!
I never really got that attitude. Freely choosing Wheaton meant freely choosing to live according to certain guidelines. No, they didn’t all match what I saw in Scripture. But they were there, and I signed that I would live by them. It was a matter of my own honor and commitment. A covenant indeed.
I’ve never been a rebellious sort, though I’m certainly not one to walk as everyone else does just because those are the rules. At Wheaton though it did create a certain atmosphere, and one that resulted in profound intellectual and spiritual growth for me.
I didn’t have the typical college experience, but then again, I didn’t have the typical college experience. Meaning I don’t remember all the social adventures or the craziness, but I did get this utterly classic liberal arts education which opened my eyes to the whole world, in depth and breadth. I learned how to think historically and think globally and go beyond the provincial thinking that I saw so limited a good many people I knew… and know. I think big, because of Wheaton, because of the modeling that came from professors who not only knew their subjects but truly and deeply loved God and conveyed that in a powerful way.
Yes, there will be those incidents that seem gray and grate against what seems otherwise entirely fair. But that’s a minor sacrifice in helping to maintain the kind of place where iron is really sharpening iron.
And those who broke the pledge, and celebrate(d) it? They talked a lot about hypocrisy and God’s freedom and such things. Still do. But the fact is that to a person they pushed people away from God and wallowed in their own frenzies. They undercut what could have been not only a profound intellectual experience but also a profound expression of amazing Biblical community.
The Spirit is, after all, the Holy Spirit and leads us towards holiness.
That’s why I really do support, in every way, the kinds of policies that help Wheaton continue to nurture a specific environment. As Bill McGurn says, “Today Wheaton is the counterculture. And the men and women who teach and study there know it.”
For Christ and his Kingdom.
time that blog forgot
Ann Althouse, a law professor at UW Madison, is beginning a very interesting project. Interesting, at least to this one time history major.
She’s started a blog called the Time that Blog Forgot. Each day she is going to go through the New York Times archives on a random year, going back 100 years, and blog about the news of that day.
This is especially fun to me because it is such a more thorough version of what I attempted back in 1994 or so (pre-blogging!). For a history methodology class I went through the microfiche of old New York Times and sought to get a contemporary view of the Civil War.
Here’s that paper.
You’ll need a bit more New York Times online access to read the full articles she is posting, but even the little bits in her post make for a very fascinating journey through history.
Very fun!
