A provocative line from David Brooks in The New York Times:
"...we can have a culture war in this country, or we can have a war on poverty, but we can't have both. That is to say, liberals and conservatives can go on bashing each other for being godless hedonists and primitive theocrats, or they can set those differences off to one side and work together to help the needy."
Brooks goes on to suggest what he calls "a natural alliance" between Evangelicals and liberals to end -- or at least ameliorate -- poverty.
Think of it: "The poor you will have with you always -- but it would please me no end if they got harder and harder to find in the course of time."
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
speaking the unspeakable
Not for the first time, Brian McLaren speaks the unspeakable.
"…in a time of war it becomes harder and harder to question the government without being seen as unpatriotic.
I was in the Holocaust Museum the other day and there’s a chilling display of where Hitler's doctor said, in a letter that is displayed, that basically the Fuhrer wants to keep the war effort going, because if it slows down, the churches will start criticizing him over what he’s doing to people with birth defects and the mentally retarded and so forth. The idea that keeping a war effort going inhibits criticism is a very, very old idea."
Not that this is happening today; only that it could. Only that something like this has happened in my lifetime, right here in America. If you want an insider's look, have Netflix send you a copy of Errol Morris' stunning documentary feature The Fog of War.
"…in a time of war it becomes harder and harder to question the government without being seen as unpatriotic.
I was in the Holocaust Museum the other day and there’s a chilling display of where Hitler's doctor said, in a letter that is displayed, that basically the Fuhrer wants to keep the war effort going, because if it slows down, the churches will start criticizing him over what he’s doing to people with birth defects and the mentally retarded and so forth. The idea that keeping a war effort going inhibits criticism is a very, very old idea."
Not that this is happening today; only that it could. Only that something like this has happened in my lifetime, right here in America. If you want an insider's look, have Netflix send you a copy of Errol Morris' stunning documentary feature The Fog of War.
Monday, May 23, 2005
that's some blog entry
An hour or so after my 'don't nuke the senate' post, there are reports that Senate 'moderates' reached a compromise to forestall the "nuclear option."
What, precisely, it means will no doubt become clearer in the light of morning.
For what it's worth, Senator Boxer's speech is nonetheless worth reading.
What, precisely, it means will no doubt become clearer in the light of morning.
For what it's worth, Senator Boxer's speech is nonetheless worth reading.
don't nuke the senate
This may be more than you want to know but here is Senator Boxer's May 17 speech to the U.S. Senate on the subject of the "nuclear option" to outlaw the filibuster of court nominees before the Senate.
I for one am partial to the tradition that Senators who fail to persuade a preponderance of their colleagues are on notice that their position is flawed and not ready to be the law of the land.
If the U.S. Senate ceases to be a deliberative body, all the most important conversations will take place out of sight between individuals who are less accountable for their actions than ever. In my view, that would be a bad thing.
I for one am partial to the tradition that Senators who fail to persuade a preponderance of their colleagues are on notice that their position is flawed and not ready to be the law of the land.
If the U.S. Senate ceases to be a deliberative body, all the most important conversations will take place out of sight between individuals who are less accountable for their actions than ever. In my view, that would be a bad thing.
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
all marketers are liars
I'm reading Seth Godin's new book, All Marketers Are Liars. The first lie, he admits, is in the title.
All marketers are not liars, he says; all consumers are.
This may be his most challenging argument: That marketers tell a story and consumers (all of us) choose the part of the story we want to believe -- or maybe already believe -- and go with that whether it holds water or not.
If he's right about this -- and there's reason to think he is -- we may waste a lot of energy trying to convince people who've already made up their minds for us or against us.
I have to noodle on this some more.
Meanwhile I find myself thinking about what passes for evangelism in most church settings these days, which seems more like shuffling the deck than anything else.
Which reminds me of the first time I made media buys and was assured by a leading Christian magazine that my customers would find nothing to disagree with in their pages. I was 25 years old, give or take, and I remember recoiling from that line in the sales kit. "Then why publish!" I said out loud to nobody but me.
Now I know the answer to that pure, simple question:
For the money.
Excuse me; I think I'm gonna be sick. Again.
All marketers are not liars, he says; all consumers are.
This may be his most challenging argument: That marketers tell a story and consumers (all of us) choose the part of the story we want to believe -- or maybe already believe -- and go with that whether it holds water or not.
If he's right about this -- and there's reason to think he is -- we may waste a lot of energy trying to convince people who've already made up their minds for us or against us.
I have to noodle on this some more.
Meanwhile I find myself thinking about what passes for evangelism in most church settings these days, which seems more like shuffling the deck than anything else.
Which reminds me of the first time I made media buys and was assured by a leading Christian magazine that my customers would find nothing to disagree with in their pages. I was 25 years old, give or take, and I remember recoiling from that line in the sales kit. "Then why publish!" I said out loud to nobody but me.
Now I know the answer to that pure, simple question:
For the money.
Excuse me; I think I'm gonna be sick. Again.
Monday, May 09, 2005
Saturday, May 07, 2005
insidework
One of my dirty little secrets is…I like working. I like working and I like work.
I'm part of a collective writing about the soul of commerce at a new site called InsideWork. Drop by and see what we're dreaming up to reintegrate work and spirituality.
I'm part of a collective writing about the soul of commerce at a new site called InsideWork. Drop by and see what we're dreaming up to reintegrate work and spirituality.
Friday, April 29, 2005
the opposite of faith
"The opposite of faith is not doubt:" Anne Lamott wrote in Salon.com this week -- "It is certainty. It is madness. You can tell you have created God in your own image when it turns out that he or she hates all the same people you do. The first holy truth in God 101 is that men and women of true faith have always had to accept the mystery of God's identity and love and ways. I hate that, but it's the truth."
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
a ringing in the ears
So I have this odd connection to people whose organizations are dedicated to the notion of Christian evangelism. I say "the notion of Christian evangelism" because I've somehow become a source to a few people who see that the assumptions they've been working under seem to be crumbling and their missions failing -- or at least not succeeding much beyond the appearance of Christian evangelism. In practical terms I suppose that may mean they are able show enough activity to continue raising money from people who have yet to question the assumptions of modern(ist) American evangelical evangelism. But these people who find me from time to time seem to believe that's not good enough to be sustainable and I believe they're right about that.
Yesterday I took a call from a videomaker working on a project for one of these folks. It was obviously an obligatory call because the videomaker made it clear he was trying to finish shooting the project in the next couple of days and his client said he should call me for direction on some things he should steer around in the "Gospel presentation" that is to be included on the DVD. The videomaker let me know he had a guy coming in to "present the Gospel" and the client wanted him to avoid language that would turn people off -- words like 'sin,' you know, because people don't like to be told they're sinners.
My ears were ringing the least bit as I listened to the nice videomaker do his duty and make the call he was asked to make -- reminding me several times that he needed to get this finished up in the next couple of days. I may have made his ears ring when I said none of my friends like being called sinners because they don't particularly believe they are sinners, but they're convinced right to the soles of their feet that they are fucked up.
"Excuse me?" he said from the other end, "did you say messed up?"
"I said, fucked up," I replied.
"Oh, f'd up," he said with a nervous chuckle. "Well, we probably won't go that low."
The ringing in my ears got louder and I said, "No, we wouldn't want to go as low as Jesus would go."
I don't know what was going on at his end of the line. He asked if he could give my number to the guy who was coming in to "give the Gospel."
"Look," I said, "yes; you can give him my number, but I don't have enough context to even know what i'm voting on. In general I think it's a bad idea to try to 'close the deal' on a DVD."
At this point he cut me off: "Yeh, everybody has their opinion about that," and reminded me he was trying to get this project wrapped up in the next couple of days.
I ended the conversation and promised to get back to him. Then I left a terse message on the voice mail of the guy who made the poor videomaker call me.
Turns out they've already had two other guys "give the Gospel," including a reputedly postmodern guy from northern California who turned out to be no less offensive than whoever it was who struck out the first time. Now they've lined up an ethnic guy to deliver the goods and really feel the need to get it right this time because who can afford to just keep shooting and shooting?
The ringing in my ears is driving me out of my mind.
"Which gospel is he going to deliver?" I asked. "The gospel of the kingdom of heaven Jesus came preaching? I doubt it."
"I know," my friend said. "I respect your thinking on that." And he does. But he has a job to do and he doesn't work for me.
I cherry-picked this from an interview with Os Guinness this morning:
"Suffering is uniquely individual, so there are no recipe answers. The first part of reaching out in love is to listen and try to discern where and why the person is hurting, and only then to bring the reassurance that the gospel brings to that particular hurt. We must never forget that listening is love, that comforting someone with an embrace without words is love, and that if we do not know why someone is suffering, to pretend that we do and say what God is doing in his or her life can be insensitive, cruel, and dead wrong—as Job's comforters were. That said, evil can torture the mind just as it can torture the body, and it is wonderful to be able to bring specific, comforting truths of the gospel to bear on specific points of anguish and see them make a difference. For example, I have seen more people helped by coming to appreciate the outrage of Jesus at the tomb of Lazarus—and its significance for the notion that "the world should have been otherwise"—than by a hundred worthy expositions of the Fall."
Even if we reduce the Gospel to individualized cognitive event -- there's that ringing again -- it's still individualized.
I have another friend from another American evangelistic collective with whom I've been hashing this dilemma for a whole decade. He was training the staff of his organization to put the Gospel in terms he could relate to. I pushed him hard on the biblical context of all that and after a series of heated exchanges he went off to do some field research. Everywhere he went for several weeks, he asked self-described Christians what it was that persuaded them to consider the possibility that Jesus was the answer to their most pressing questions.
He came home with a pattern of nine categories including the one that proved persuasive to him. All of a sudden he moves from one reason to believe to nine possible reasons. So how does he teach his organization to choose the appropriate contextualization for the person seated across from them in a given moment? He teaches them to listen. To ask really good questions. To pay attention as if it really mattered because, of course, it really does.
The reason I think it's a bad idea trying to close the deal on a DVD is because I think it's a bad idea trying to close the deal period. There is no deal. That's an unworthy metaphor for an exchange between two human being talking about the unlikely possibility that the good news about God might be even better than the bad news that they are both fucked to hell and back.
The problem is, that particular telling of the Gospel is completely unacceptable to everyone but those who are convinced that what they're doing isn't working. Would Jesus stoop so low? Are you kidding? Go read the stories again and get back to me on that.
Yesterday I took a call from a videomaker working on a project for one of these folks. It was obviously an obligatory call because the videomaker made it clear he was trying to finish shooting the project in the next couple of days and his client said he should call me for direction on some things he should steer around in the "Gospel presentation" that is to be included on the DVD. The videomaker let me know he had a guy coming in to "present the Gospel" and the client wanted him to avoid language that would turn people off -- words like 'sin,' you know, because people don't like to be told they're sinners.
My ears were ringing the least bit as I listened to the nice videomaker do his duty and make the call he was asked to make -- reminding me several times that he needed to get this finished up in the next couple of days. I may have made his ears ring when I said none of my friends like being called sinners because they don't particularly believe they are sinners, but they're convinced right to the soles of their feet that they are fucked up.
"Excuse me?" he said from the other end, "did you say messed up?"
"I said, fucked up," I replied.
"Oh, f'd up," he said with a nervous chuckle. "Well, we probably won't go that low."
The ringing in my ears got louder and I said, "No, we wouldn't want to go as low as Jesus would go."
I don't know what was going on at his end of the line. He asked if he could give my number to the guy who was coming in to "give the Gospel."
"Look," I said, "yes; you can give him my number, but I don't have enough context to even know what i'm voting on. In general I think it's a bad idea to try to 'close the deal' on a DVD."
At this point he cut me off: "Yeh, everybody has their opinion about that," and reminded me he was trying to get this project wrapped up in the next couple of days.
I ended the conversation and promised to get back to him. Then I left a terse message on the voice mail of the guy who made the poor videomaker call me.
Turns out they've already had two other guys "give the Gospel," including a reputedly postmodern guy from northern California who turned out to be no less offensive than whoever it was who struck out the first time. Now they've lined up an ethnic guy to deliver the goods and really feel the need to get it right this time because who can afford to just keep shooting and shooting?
The ringing in my ears is driving me out of my mind.
"Which gospel is he going to deliver?" I asked. "The gospel of the kingdom of heaven Jesus came preaching? I doubt it."
"I know," my friend said. "I respect your thinking on that." And he does. But he has a job to do and he doesn't work for me.
I cherry-picked this from an interview with Os Guinness this morning:
"Suffering is uniquely individual, so there are no recipe answers. The first part of reaching out in love is to listen and try to discern where and why the person is hurting, and only then to bring the reassurance that the gospel brings to that particular hurt. We must never forget that listening is love, that comforting someone with an embrace without words is love, and that if we do not know why someone is suffering, to pretend that we do and say what God is doing in his or her life can be insensitive, cruel, and dead wrong—as Job's comforters were. That said, evil can torture the mind just as it can torture the body, and it is wonderful to be able to bring specific, comforting truths of the gospel to bear on specific points of anguish and see them make a difference. For example, I have seen more people helped by coming to appreciate the outrage of Jesus at the tomb of Lazarus—and its significance for the notion that "the world should have been otherwise"—than by a hundred worthy expositions of the Fall."
Even if we reduce the Gospel to individualized cognitive event -- there's that ringing again -- it's still individualized.
I have another friend from another American evangelistic collective with whom I've been hashing this dilemma for a whole decade. He was training the staff of his organization to put the Gospel in terms he could relate to. I pushed him hard on the biblical context of all that and after a series of heated exchanges he went off to do some field research. Everywhere he went for several weeks, he asked self-described Christians what it was that persuaded them to consider the possibility that Jesus was the answer to their most pressing questions.
He came home with a pattern of nine categories including the one that proved persuasive to him. All of a sudden he moves from one reason to believe to nine possible reasons. So how does he teach his organization to choose the appropriate contextualization for the person seated across from them in a given moment? He teaches them to listen. To ask really good questions. To pay attention as if it really mattered because, of course, it really does.
The reason I think it's a bad idea trying to close the deal on a DVD is because I think it's a bad idea trying to close the deal period. There is no deal. That's an unworthy metaphor for an exchange between two human being talking about the unlikely possibility that the good news about God might be even better than the bad news that they are both fucked to hell and back.
The problem is, that particular telling of the Gospel is completely unacceptable to everyone but those who are convinced that what they're doing isn't working. Would Jesus stoop so low? Are you kidding? Go read the stories again and get back to me on that.
Monday, April 25, 2005
the hunger + the thirst
The Los Angeles Times' Janet Kinosian asked legendary cartoonist Stan Lee the big question: If you could have a superpower yourself, what would it be?
Lee was behind the best years of Marvel Comics as the creator of the Incredible Hulk, Spider Man and the X-Men. "If you could have a superpower yourself," Kinosian asked, "what would it be?"
"Immortality;" Lee replied, "I'd hate to think this will end."
Yep.
Lee was behind the best years of Marvel Comics as the creator of the Incredible Hulk, Spider Man and the X-Men. "If you could have a superpower yourself," Kinosian asked, "what would it be?"
"Immortality;" Lee replied, "I'd hate to think this will end."
Yep.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
legacy
Sao Paulo Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns reports that every time he visited John Paul II, the pope had three questions for him:
Are you taking care of the poor?
Are you taking care of the workers?
Are you taking care of the youth?
These are not bad questions for people who wonder how we're doing…
Are you taking care of the poor?
Are you taking care of the workers?
Are you taking care of the youth?
These are not bad questions for people who wonder how we're doing…
Monday, April 04, 2005
enough already
Enough of this ungodly preoccupation with the Ten Commandments.
Anybody as fixated on the Ten Commandments as your run of the mill American Evangelical can't possibly have read the whole book…or Kurt Vonnegut.
" For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that’s Moses, not Jesus. I haven’t heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
“'Blessed are the merciful' in a courtroom? 'Blessed are the peacemakers' in the Pentagon? Give me a break!"+
OK, that hurt a little.
And then some clown says to find out what the Bible says about the Ten Commandments -- as distinct from just reading the list -- I'd have to read the whole thing. Seriously? Are you kidding? I haven't even read the Left Behind books! Enough already!
+ Kurt Vonnegut, "Cold Turkey," May 10, 2004, In These Times.
Anybody as fixated on the Ten Commandments as your run of the mill American Evangelical can't possibly have read the whole book…or Kurt Vonnegut.
" For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that’s Moses, not Jesus. I haven’t heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
“'Blessed are the merciful' in a courtroom? 'Blessed are the peacemakers' in the Pentagon? Give me a break!"+
OK, that hurt a little.
And then some clown says to find out what the Bible says about the Ten Commandments -- as distinct from just reading the list -- I'd have to read the whole thing. Seriously? Are you kidding? I haven't even read the Left Behind books! Enough already!
+ Kurt Vonnegut, "Cold Turkey," May 10, 2004, In These Times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)