Garfield, Deconstructed

My friend Gregg posted about this a while back so I thought I would share it here (Gregg posts a lot of good stuff on art!). It's called Garfield minus Garfield. Basically, they drop the last frame of the comic strip.

You can check the website out here, but here's the blurb anyways:

"Garfield Minus Garfield is a site dedicated to removing Garfield from the Garfield comic strips in order to reveal the existential angst of a certain young Mr. Jon Arbuckle. It is a journey deep into the mind of an isolated young everyman as he fights a losing battle against loneliness and depression in a quiet American suburb." 

Below is the most recent one on the site. This made me laugh as soon as I saw it!

Enjoy!

Astronomical

Not sure what to make of this yet but I'm quite taken by it. Check out more from the Artist Mishka Henner from her website.


ASTRONOMICAL - The Movie from Mishka Henner on Vimeo.

Portlandia

I really gotta watch this show more.

Social Injustice and the Paradox of Industry

A couple of weeks ago I blogged about a radio show I listen to called This American Life. They aired an excerpt from a monologue by a guy named Mike Daisey. You can find it here. The monologue was about his trip to China where he visited a factory that makes Apple products. It was a very interesting and challenging piece as it raised many questions about social justice and the seemingly insurmountable issues we face these days.

Since then I have heard a lot about Apple and China and the injustices that many of these workers face on a daily basis. You can read a couple of articles from the New York Times here and here, one of them about recent suicides from these factory workers.

As I was making my way through my email inbox this morning, I came across an email from the people over at change.org. You may have heard about the lady who started a petition through them to get Bank of American to drop their debit card fee. Well, this petition was to try and get Apple to improve working conditions at the factories where iPhones and iPads are made. Don't worry I am not going to ask you to sign anything, but if you want check it out click here.

It occurred to me that going up against Apple is the sexy way to protest and work for change. And perhaps it is still the best way. I don't know. By going up against the giants of industry, one could force a greater amount of change. Public embarrassment and the possibility of profit loss is a great motivator.

But what about the injustices that we never hear about because they aren't sexy enough?

Going up against these things doesn't get our name in the paper or on the news or a video gone viral on YouTube.

But these things still matter.

So, for example, in the US these people are the working poor, the nameless faceless people who make too much for welfare but not enough to live. They are one paycheck away from the streets, but they live in slum housing.

I've said before that at least in the US we can't live here without participating in the so-called poverty and injustices of the world. Nevertheless, at least for the church, we have to start somewhere.

Lately it seems like I keep hearing something I heard back when I was in college from a guy named Dana Walling. "Everyday find out what you can do for Jesus and do it."

At least for the church (I don't know about everyone else), we have to resist the urge to always go for the big win and instead give ourselves over to that gospel movement that has been going for thousands of years.

The big wins come accidentally and only because we have dared to look our neighbor in the eye and see the face of Christ.

If all we ever do is go for the big win then our neighbors who are about to hit the streets will remain anonymous to us and that would be a damn shame.

More on Mark Driscoll

The old adage is that there's no such thing as bad publicity, the idea being that it's all good as long as people are talking about you, no matter what you are saying or doing.

That's true to an extent, but even for Hollywood stars, who seem to receive more grace than anyone else, the bell will toll.

I tend not to play that angry critic game.

I'm not out to get anyone.

If I criticize, I hope it is always for the sake of something constructive. Even as the best construction is good deconstruction, they must be in the right order, if can say it that way.

Enough throat clearing.

Mark Driscoll (I won't link to him, go find him yourself) has been in the news lately, a little more so than usual, and not in a good way. He's the pastor of a church in Seattle, decisively Neo-Reformed (of the John Piper flavor), and brutish as many have criticized his male chauvinism, machismo, version of Christianity that puts men on a pedestal and views woman as inferior, to say the least.

There's a lot of speculation out there.

No one really gets all up in arms about differing version of the Christian tradition (except for maybe the Reformed folk, but then that's pretty telling). Anymore there is very generous conversation happening about what it means to be the church.

Driscoll's Neo-Reformed version of Christianity, as such, does not bother me. I have some issues with it that I would gladly discuss, but I'm not mad at anyone.

What concerns me most that leads me to the things that I do get mad over are how theologies play themselves out. For example, Neo-Reformed theologies can lend themselves to forming very angry and closed minded and prideful people who often seem to have more faith in the bible than in Jesus. And really more faith in themselves than whatever god they confess to believe in.

(As an aside, I actually read a blog post comment where someone claimed that Christians need to obey the bible. It is a serious problem if the bible, and not the God spoken of in the bible, is to be obey.)

Case in point - about how our theologies actually play themselves out - is the story I stumbled upon recently. Not long ago I started to wonder when the first-hand stories would start to fly about Mark Driscoll from people who have been involved in his church. You can read the story here.

In short, it's a story about an attempt at how Driscoll's church attempted to "discipline" some guy who was "in sin" that just went seriously bad.

This is the first one of its kind that I've found, but I'm sure there are more out there. It's long, but you got to read it all the way through.

Why mention all of this?

Because in our celebrity culture where people can manipulate any amount of media/social networking with any amount of organizational skill - and Driscoll's Acts 29 Network is extremely organized - people can get away with a lot. I let a lot of stuff slide, but something is happening to Driscoll that just seems vicious to me and if this story is true in any way then there are things rippling out into Driscoll's wider leadership base/influence that are really unhealthy, the second being their abusive use of Scripture. The fist being their misspeaking of the God that has revealed Himself in Jesus.

I hope I'm not misunderstood. I hope this is received generously. I welcome correction and feedback from those who know. I am an outsider, like most of us, looking in. But from what I can tell, there is more damage being done than anything else.

Where am I wrong? What am I missing?

2012 Oscars

It's Oscar time again! I'd love to hear your feedback on what you've seen and how you liked or hated it. I've listed below only the nominees for best picture, but feel free to draw my attention to something else I should be paying attention to.

BEST PICTURE

The Artist
The Descendants
Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close
The Help                                                                  
Hugo
Midnight in Paris
Moneyball
Tree of Life
War Horse

So far, of the best picture films, I've seen The Descendants, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, and Tree of Life. Of what I've seen, my guess is that The Descendants will win best picture. I suspect, though, that others would have something to say about The Artist as the favorite.

I'll try to comment more on these films as I see them.

Rowan Williams to debate Richard Dawkins

I just found out that Rowan Williams will debate Richard Dawkins. Williams is the head of the Anglican Communion and Dawkins is a prominent voice in the so called "new atheist" movement, people like Richard Dawkins, Same Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. The details of the event can be found here.

Any thoughts on how this will turn out? Does anyone know if they will stream this for the rest of us?

 For a sneak peak, check out this exchange between Williams and Dawkins from a few years ago.

You might also check out this audio interview with David Bentley Hart (it's number 12 on the list). Hart is not one to pull punches when it comes to the new atheists, accusing people such as Dawkins as lacking "the training, perhaps the aptitude ... to understand the metaphysical tradition" he critiques, and this interview doesn't disappoint. I haven't read Hart's book on this topic, but I am sure he takes him and others to task there as well. The interview is a little heady because that's how Hart rolls, but nevertheless it's pretty interesting stuff.

Couple of question: (1) If you're an atheist, do you find a person like Dawkins to be someone who speaks for you, who voices your concerns? (2) If you're an atheist, does Williams offer at least a decent take on Christianity that's different from the normal outspoken evangelical right perspective?

I'm just wondering how much I should listen to Dawkins if he's not speaking for a majority of new atheists. I'm also wondering how much Williams is able to offer at least a helpful Christian perspective that takes science seriously.

Let me know what you think!

The Art of Confession

I often feel that I am partly recovering from Evangelicalism, partly rejecting it, and partly redeeming it.

And all at the same time.

In any case, I was glad that yesterday was the first time our church made confession one of the movements of our worship service. And because of my partly-Evangelical existence, I was also glad to stumble across an article by Paul Wilkes about his new book The Art of Confession, who I think is parsing out in a good way what confession is and how it's abused, both by those doing the confessing and the requiring it.

He says, "In my own religious tradition, Catholicism, the word 'Confession' has a very specific meaning. That is not what I'm talking about here ... Confession is first and foremost a conversation with our selves ... When we take an honest look at confession, we quickly see that it is a pillar not only of religious belief, but mental health. It demands something for which there is no substitute: that we be honest with ourselves."

Wilkes is a Catholic writing about confession in a very catholic way, but that's not what struck me about the article. He seems attune to the pulse of Western (North American) culture and our glib attempts at self-reflection and truth. This is a really keen observation!

"This kind of confession, which demands self-reflection and change, has little to do with the flood of confessional disclosures that characterize our age -- on tell-all TV talk shows and social networking sites, even via an iPhone app for confession. In this time of Internet connectivity, amid the din of oversharing, we mistake spasms of self-revelation for honesty. Our inner voice is not so easily found and cannot be parsed into ten-second bursts. That voice needs time to find the right words to say and the right place to say them."

In our overly fragmented and individualistic world, people are chomping at the bit to be seen and heard and confession is often used in a grotesque way to simply steal the spotlight for a few more minutes.

Wilkes is right that confession, before it is anything, is a conversation you have with yourself behind closed doors. The worse kind of lie is self-deception. Most of what we see in the media are faux confessions - half truths - from people who just want someone to know the truth but just don't know how to say it.

My suggestion: tell one person. After you know the truth, only one other person needs to know it. This is what confession is for the church, or least what it should be. It's not a total share all story on 60 Minutes. It's you and a friend in total disclosure. And only then, maybe, once we have moved beyond the defining Sin that so required our need to confess, will it be possible to share our story with the world, but that is not the norm. 

Speaking Out

Like many of you, I am an avid listener of a radio show called This American Life (TAL). This past week they did a piece called Mr Daisey and the Apple Factory that I thought was one of their better shows of late. The first half of the show is an excerpt from one of Mike Daisey's monologue performances. I first heard of Mike Daisey when I came across this clip of a group of Christians walking out of his show in protest (watch your computer volume, he's a bit colorful). One of them even walked up on stage and dumped a glass of water on his notes. As a Christian myself, I was furious at this kind of ignorance, that those of us who confess to be followers of Jesus could be so hateful at someone like Daisey who seems to be so keenly aware of our culture problems and even ballsy enough to actually go to China and speak out.

Anyways, the excerpt comes from his new monologue called The Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs. In the excerpt from the show he tells of his infatuation with Apple products, his trip to China (Shenzhen to be precise), and the woes of our technological age, not least of which is our ignorance of where the products we buy come from and how it affects the lives of the people in other countries who make them.

What I loved most about the show was how it fairly portrayed the complexity of the issue. Neither Daisey nor This American Life criticize Apple with a holier-than-thou attitude. Daisey is clearly fan and TAL remarked at the end of their show that, as always, the show was produced entirely on Apple products. I myself listened to the show on my Apple iPod and am writing this post on my Apple laptop computer. The show notes that even the people of Shenzhen are conflicted, that while there are a number of problems that need to be addressed regarding the question(s) of justice, these jobs have made possible a certain quality of life that wasn't their before.

I find this kind of critique refreshing. I am not big fan of finger pointing, mostly because I can't extract myself from all of the problems of the world. To throw rocks at others as if it's entirely their fault is unhelpful and ignorant. At least for people in the West, and North American's in particular (my culture and the only culture I can and should speak of with any amount of confidence), we can't even drive on roads without being implicated in the injustices of the world, whether it be oil, deforestation, air pollution, or more. Same goes for politics, but that's another issue.

I recommend we all listen to this show and let it seep into our consciences. And if you just have to finger point, at least confess your own Sins first.

Strategically placed advertising

For those you who ever had a crush on Dolly Parton, I clicked on a link to read an article about Ed Young's new book, "Sexperiment" and I thought the advertisement on the page was kind of funny.

Mount Stupid

If you can't see mount stupid,
you're on it.

For 2012...

Okay, I need your help. What books, film, music, television, and any other art should I partake of in 2012? Could be brand new but also not. I enjoy exploring the depths of the past as well. Come on, give me some good stuff, people!

Signs of hope

Check out a really good post by one of my old college professors, John Wright!

Christmas - To make God come alive

I stumbled upon this gem of quote by Alexander Schmemann that I have to pass on, even if it’s Christmas morning. No one’s up yet, anyways. Here’s the quote:

"The child in that distant Bethlehem cave has no desire that we fear him; he enters our hearts not by frightening us, by proving his power and authority, but by love alone. He is given to us as a child, and only as children can we in turn love him and give ourselves to him. The world is ruled by authority and power, by fear and domination. The child God liberates us from that. All he desires from us is our love, freely given and joyful; all he desires is that we give him our heart. And we give it to a defenseless, endlessly trusting child."

I’ve often wondered how God can make Himself known to His creation without forcing anyone to believe in Him. I’m that last person in the world that wants to be told what to believe. And yet, I sit here, a lifelong Christian because of my parents and others along the way who helped me stay faithful? Why? Why didn’t I abandon it along the way as childish? I think it’s because the people in the church that I knew understood Christmas and the revelation of God in this tiny baby.

One of my favorite Christmas hymns is “Hark the Herold Angels Sing.” It’s friggin’ brilliant, both lyrically and musically (as far as hymns go, at least). There’s a line that goes like this: “Veiled in flesh that godhead see, Hail the incarnate deity.” It loses impact, of course, when it’s detached from the verse and music, but it’s still good. I think we read these lines and immediate imagine grownup Jesus walking around the dusty roads of the middle east, and maybe even grownup Jesus on the cross. But this verse is not just sung about grownup Jesus, but for baby Jesus as well.

The incarnate deity in this 6 lb 8oz little body (that’s just a guess. I honestly don’t know the precise specs on the kid).

If first impressions are everything, then this Schememann quote reminds me that God’s first impression in the flesh was not His lambasting judgment on our sinfulness. And actually, that’s never been anything God has been about, even in the Old Testament, despite some really tough passages where it seems like God is royally pissed off. It’s still not WHAT He is ABOUT. Catch my drift? Really, God’s not mad at us.

This quote reminds me that God’s first impression in the flesh is helplessness, an urgent appeal to humanity to take care of Him, tend Him, and nurture Him into the world. God comes and says unless you feed me I will die. It seems God has made it so that something is at stake in how we handle Him. It would seem, then, that even those who do not believe in God but love their kids understand Christmas on a very deep and visceral level. And I imagine that their hatred for God is not God’s fault but His church’s fault.

The church that forgets Christmas is the church the judges harshly and fiercely the sins of others.

The church that remembers Christmas remembers that we, like Mary, have been called to “birth” God into the world and those of us with kids, or who know kids, understand that the only way to make a baby come alive is to keep it warm, feed, and dry, and then to look deeply into its eyes and make stupid goofy faces at it until it smiles.

The church that does this is a credible church, for as von Balthasar so poignantly puts its, “Love alone it credible.”

And now my family is up, so, Peace!

Preaching as Performance Art

I got into a conversation today about preaching – the goal of preaching, the various styles of it, and practitioners of it. And it got me thinking about an article that I once read by Clayton Schmidt called “Preaching is Performance Art.”

He says we have all heard preachers who “employ an artificial set of communication skills divorced from ordinary human life. These preachers assume that the purpose of the exegesis they learned in seminary is to spring-load sermons with technical data that will impress and subdue listeners. Or they spend all their time working on what to say and no time at all on how to say it.”

These kinds of preachers, Schmidt says, tempt us NOT to go to church.

The opposite of this is also a problem, people who deliver in order to draw attention to themselves and not God –

“The wannabe comedian,

the preacher obsessed with cultural awareness,

the narrator that strings together poignant but pointless stories,

the media maestro who spends hours mastering digital techniques and only minutes on the message,

the preacher with an affected pulpit tone,

the awkward speaker who has plenty to say but no confidence in delivery,

the masterful presenter whose message is a string of banalities,

the preacher who becomes convinced that personal experience and ‘life message’ are more interesting than the gospel.”

Schmidt ask, “How can preachers present the gospel to their listeners without getting in the way?” His suggestion is to redeem a dirty work. “Preaching,” he says, “is performance.” Preaching is textual exegesis, contextual analysis, and creative writing, but “performance lies at the heart of proclamation.”

“When preaching is done masterfully, the preacher almost disappears.” The preacher isn’t showcasing his mad skills as a communicator for the sake of the notoriety, nor is the preacher performing for the sake of entertainment. When it comes to preaching, performance must point beyond itself or it does not achieve its goal.

So how does this happen?

Most importantly, the preacher must internalize his words. “If the preacher writes a meaningful word in the study, the next step is to turn that ink (or those computer pixels) into blood in the pulpit. The blood courses through the entire person of the one called upon to be that moment’s incorporation of the Word of God.” Words must be delivered from within. If they are merely being lifted up off the page in the moment with no thoughtfulness as to how they might be heard in the moment then the magnitude of the spoken word is in jeopardy.

Performance takes practice, it takes a great deal on intention and thoughtfulness to think about what you want to say and then say it in such a way that touches that hearts and minds of those who hear it, but not for the sake of merely experiencing a good performance. In fact, no one wants to merely experience a good performance. People want to be moved and preaching that takes performance seriously has the power to do.

What have I missed here? Does this cause any problems for you

When we say "God"

It's hard out here for a pastor. The tendency towards professional expertise in our cutlure has formed pastors into the kinds of people who separate leadership, spiritual formation, social justice, evangelism, and education (so that we actually know something about the Christian tradition, the bible, and theology) from one another. Go to any church and pastors will embody one of these things more than the others. My problem is that I think that's okay. I think pastoring looks like all of this in a variety of different forms. The Spirit gives different gifts to different people, which means that every pastor has a different mix of what these things look like, which makes for very kinds of pastors.

It doesn't justify that a pastor who is better at leadership should not also read theology or know something about prayer. The problem comes when people push towards one of these aspects as more important than the other. To me, these are the ingredient (and there are probably more) that God uses to shape and form different kinds of pastors for different kinds of work in the world.

We need the leadership pastor that can organize and streamline processes. We need the wise sage who is really good spiritual formation, who knows how to ask the kinds of questions that melt away the resistance. We need the justice oriented person who reads newspaper and listens to politicians and knows when the city council is meeting and organize rallies and protests and shelters. We need deep readers of the faith who know the bible, tradition, and theology. We need these people!

And we need them (me, us) to work together!

But is there a way to bring it all together?

An article by Stanley Hauerwas seems to help me here. In the article he is talking about what it means to be a theologian, but I don't separate very much being a "pastor" from being a "theologian" and vice versa. I think the end is same for both, it just comes in different ways (again, the spirit gives gifts). What Hauerwas says about being a theologian I want to also say about being a pastor:

"It is important to ask some to do nothing with their lives but to think about what we say when we say 'God.'"

What do ya think?

UPDATE: Click here to read the article.

rob bell's "last" sermon

Rob Bell gave his final words at Mars Hill this past Sunday. In an uncharacteristic fashion he read a letter he had composed - in the form of an epistle - rather than his normal extemporaneous style. At the close of this chapter in Bell's life, as well as our experience of him as a pastor, I'm wondering what other people's experience of Rob Bell as been. Do you love him, hate him, nothing him, or anything in between? What drew you to him? His preaching? His books? His tours? Or something else? What were your concerns with him? Bell has been really influential so I'm just curious how far that stretched and what it was exactly. Even for those who were really critical of him, that so many people use him as a reference point means that he was influential (whether you like it or not). So, anyways ... what do you think?????

Click here to read his final sermon. But you should really go find the podcast and hear it live.

(By the way, I say it's his "last" sermon because no one can just give it up like that. Who we kiddin'. Especially when you're that good at talking in public. Say what you want about his theology but he is a good talker.)

Peace.

Savage Xmas 2010

It's a new tradition - my yearly mix. I haven't been around on my own blog lately, partly because I am not really sure what blogging means for me right now. But I thought in the mean time it would fun to post this and see what anyone thinks. These don't necessarily have to be brand new songs in 2010, just songs that I felt kept reoccurring for me or that I kept going back to or became important for me at particular moments. But a lot of them are new. Enjoy!

At the Beach
The Avett Brothers

City with no Children
The Arcade Fire

Take Everything
Greg Laswell

Evening Kitchen
Band of Horses

On the Table
In the Pines

Bakay
John Coltrane

O Holy Night
Mike Crawford and His Secret Siblings

The Underdog
Spoon

Break of Burn
John Mckenna

All the Earth
Redemption Church

Compared to What
John Legend

Angel Dance
Robert Plant

The Woman at the Well
Mike Crawford and His Secret Siblings

Sister Rosetta Goes before Us
Robert Plant and Alison Krauss

Sigh no More
Mumford and Sons

Outfit
Drive-by Truckers

Smile, Smile, Smile
Sam Billen and Josh Atkinson

Holy, Holy, Holy
Sufjan Stevens

Up on a Mountain
The Welcome Wagon

Peace.

Dont' Tell

There's a story in the bible about the time when Jesus was on his way to heal the daughter of a man named Jairus. He was on His way when another person, a woman who has been hemorrhaging for twelve years need some help. While Jesus was helping this woman, the little girl died. Of course, this was no big deal for Jesus. He went over to Jairus' house and told the child to arise and she did. Apparently to Jesus was only sleeping.

My question has to do with what Jesus does at the end of this story. He tells them not to tell anyone about what happened. It's likely that they did not listen to Him, although we can't be certain. But by this time there was already a buzz in the air about Jesus and so they would have known that he had come to there house. He couldn't do that quietly. And I'm sure that everyone in Jairus' household had questions once they saw the little girl running around the next day. So, we can be as certain as we can that the word spread about what Jesus did.

So, here's my question. What can we learn from this about how we go about bearing witness to the Kingdom of God?

A Week with Schmemann

Since I get to read Alexander Schmemann's For the Life of the World for a class I am taking, I thought I'd share some of the goods.

"[Humans] understand all this instinctively if not rationally. Centuries of secularism have failed to transform eating into something strictly utilitarian. Food is still treated with reverence. A meal is still a rite--the last 'natural sacrament' of family and friendship, of life that is more than 'eating' and 'drinking.' To eat is still something more than to maintain bodily functions. People may not understand what that 'something more' is, but they nonetheless desire to celebrate it. They are still hungry and thirsty for sacramental life."

Oh, boy ...

I know Hauerwas says that "best" and "worst" are not theological categories but can we make an exception!?

Now more than ever...

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so love us, we also ought to love one another. No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us." -1 John 4:7-12

von Balthsar ... yep

"What is specifically Christian about Christianity? Never in the history of the Church have Christian thinkers thought it ultimately adequate to answer this question by pointing to a series of mysteries one is required to believe; instead, they have always aimed at a point of unity that would serve to provide a justification for the demand for faith. They sought a logos (read "love") that, however particular it might be, nevertheless had the power to persuade, and indeed overwhelm."

Mmmm ... that's good.

Ummm ... yeah, this is a good quote

"The fatal conceit for Judaism is to believe that the market governs the totality of our lives, when it in fact governs only a limited part of it, that which concerns the goods we think of as being subject to production and exchange. There are things fundamental to being human that we do not produce; instead we receive from those who came before us and from God Himself. And there are things that we may not exchange, however high the price." -- Jonathan Sacks

Jenson on the Church

I still not sure what I think about Robert Jenson's words about the church in the second volume of his systematic theology. Any thoughts?

"Christ is personally the second identity of God, and the totus Christus [total Christ, or whole Christ] is Christ with the church; therefore the church is not in the same way an opus ad extra [something extra as in something other than God] as is the creation, even when it [the creation] is perfected in God."

Does he put the church too close to the divine or is he giving a broader understanding of "Christ?"

Power

Thought this was an interesting piece on what happens when people come to a position of power.

Good quote on language

Okay, so this quote kinda came out of left field for me. I was listening to NPR's weekend edition today and they were interviewing Robyn, the Swedish Pop singer who had a few hits in the US back in the day. She is still way popular in Europe. Anyways, she was asked why she writes her songs in English and what she said blew me away.

"When you know a language really well, it's almost like you stop questioning what you're really doing."

It's likely that Robyn doesn't really know the full weight of what she said. When one thinks about "language" and "question" in a theological or philosophical way, this quote gains some momentum.

My first thoughts turned to the reality of Christian worship because that is where I think language and questioning are most valuable. Christian worship poses the question par excellence in the form of a cross (crux probat omnia). The cross is the language of Christian worship. Most of the time we think that worship is about our words to God. It's not. It's about His words to us, although we do speak. We speak in the form of response. We speak when spoken to, in a sense. The other side of this is to say that language without an end (telos) is mere rhetoric (words for words sake). Christian worship is charged with language that is going somewhere. It has an end and it speaks to it. We speak the language of Christian worship (another language, a Kingdom language) so as to not forget what we really doing.

Hello, Facebook? This is Blogger

So I figured out how to link my blog to my Facebook page. Please, hold your applause. It's yet to be determined if this means anything. I have been discouraged as of late to do any kind of blogging mostly because blogging is fun when people read it and write comments. I've hear theories on how to increase you blogs traffic but to be honest the suggestions sound exhausting. Basically what it comes down to is that I don't blog frequently enough on my own blog, nor do I get my name out there enough on other blogs so that people can track the link back to my site. I told you--exhausting. Blogging is curious animal. I supposed in the end the reason I still blog is because I hope the people who read it find something helpful in it. I suppose that might be why a lot of other people do it as well. At the very least it can be a good discipline to help spread the word on a good thought or raise awareness on this we need to be thinking about. Sometimes you do it for no other reason than that you are hoping somebody is listening.

Annie Dillard

"Why are we reading if not in hopes that the writer will magnify and dramatize our days, will illuminate and inspire us with wisdom, courage, and the possibility of meaningfulness, and will press upon our minds the deepest mysteries, so we may feel again their majesty and power?"

Yep.

Spiritual Formation : Identity : Vocation

This summer my church is going to be reading Robert Benson's new book The Echo Within. We'll be spending a few weeks on vocation and identity.

I'm wondering what books have been influential for people on this topic? I'm talking about the kind of books that expose you, undo you, take you a part and show you who you really are, and then show you another path to walk. Books that are not theologically formational (I suppose in the proper sense) but formational in more of a personal way.

One book that I want to spend some time with here real soon is Parker Palmer, Let Your Life Speak. Another book I read a while back that I really loved was Frederick Buechner, The Sacred Journey. I think Gilead by Marilynne Robinson might be one of those for me as well.

These are a few of my favorite things...

I thought I might jot down a few of my favorite things to do in KC ... a work in progress (and in no particular order). I should clarify, though, that I am no expert of all things KC. I have only lived here for about five years so my knowledge of the town is relative to that. And I don't make it a priority to "experience" everything. So, there's my disclaimer.

McCoy's Public House and Brew. McCoy's is iconic for me. It was one of the first places I latched on to when we moved to KC in 2005. I enjoy everything about this place.

Blackdog Coffeehouse. I'm actually in Blackdog as I write this. I don't really know what it is about this place but I love it. The coffee is good and inexpensive. There is almost always space to sit. Free internet. There's a good variety of people filtering in and out.

Kansas City Mafia History. Okay this is a little bit of a different "favorite thing." Anybody can read about this, but I mention it here because it was here where I was first exposed and drawn into it. I remember being at work and opening the newspaper on the anniversary of the Union Station Massacre. I was in!

Loose Park. I've walked, read, played ultimate Frisbee, and even almost witnessed a mugging all at this park (we got to lady only seconds after her muggers escaped). But don't let the mugging fool you, it's a great place. It's a big park that let's you forget for a while that you're in the city. There's a play ground, a rose garden, a pond (with ducks) and even some nature tours. And there's enough space to lay a blanket on the ground far enough away from people where you can find some solitude.

Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art. I can't say that I go here a lot nor that I have an extensive knowledge of art. Most of the time I am simply happy that this is here in KC for me to visit whenever I want. I find freedom in knowing that I could escape for a while to a place like this even if I don't do it a lot. However, I have visited it a number of times and love the environment and what it does to me.

Rainy Day Books. I mostly like this book store because they do these author events where we have been able to hear people like Anne Lamott and Frank McCourt. I really enjoy these.

Half Price Books. When it comes to book stores I always begin here. They always have something I want, not that I necessarily buy it. And they have pretty good deals to.

Kansas Skies. One of the things we noticed about life in Kansas is that the skies are beautiful! I can't say they compare to some of the sights I grew up with living in California (ocean sunsets still take the cake). But Kansas skies are right up there. There is something about the way the clouds move and take shape. And the colors! The way the green lights up as the sun reflects on the clouds and illuminates everything. It's awesome!

Romans Resources

Okay ... I'm in the middle of read through Romans with my community group and I am wondering about resources. I'm looking for anything and everything--Books, articles, audio lectures and sermons, etc. I'm particularly interested in the audio stuff. Is there anything out there?