Timber!

He told his next story to some who were complacently pleased with themselves over their moral performance and looked down their noses at the common people: “Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one a Pharisee, the other a tax man. The Pharisee posed and prayed like this: ‘Oh, God, I thank you that I am not like other people--robbers, crooks, adulterers, or, heaven forbid, like this tax man. I fast twice a week and tithe on all my income.’ Meanwhile the tax man, slumped in the shadows, his face in his hands, not daring to look up, said, ‘God, give mercy. Forgive me, a sinner.’ Jesus commented, “This tax man, not the other, went home made right with God. If you walk around with your nose in the air, you're going to end up flat on your face, but if you're content to be simply yourself, you will become more than yourself."
Luke 18:10-14 The Message

Sometimes I think that the folks that need Jesus’ teaching the most are people like me who already claim to be his followers. Ironic? Or have I misunderstood how God’s providence works?

Much of my thoughts lately have concerned how small our (collective) vision of God often is. Thankfully, there are some through history who seem to see things more clearly than us bottom dwellers. I suspect they often just don’t make sense to the rest of us, and their life is only understood after they die – and then only in part.

To continue a theme, I think this leads me to believe that both people inside & outside any given spiritual tradition are just as likely to be “right with God”, assuming they are practicing self-honesty. I just don’t think paradise is guarded by a demand for accurate recitation of a creed. Apologies if I am just repeating myself. I do think this matters.

I don’t think this negates the objective value of true religion or creed as a tutor. And if such a thing as truth exists (and it does), it is likely that some religions are truer than others. Religious practice and belief is to some degree a mirror of the reality it seeks to represent. We can use any good thing toward selfish & destructive end. That is the very definition of sin. Some have decided, either consciously or intuitively, to disregard religion -- or any expression of formalized spirituality -- as a reaction against the negatives that can come with it. Or more practically, because religious folks are regularly twits (see the prior post). That is a classic “baby with the bathwater” shame. Religion doesn’t kill people. People kill people -- no offense to gun-control advocates.

This small-vision thing is so dominant that I’m sure we usually don’t realize it. Western Christians, who to their credit occasionally acknowledge the problem, are a good case in point. We tend to lock in a view, and then patronize those with diverging viewpoints as “lost” or “blinded”, before we understand what the other person really thinks. I know it’s a two way street, but we generate a lot of fine material for satire.

I have this hunch that God will shortly take those of us who look down our snouts at the "heathen", and somehow knock us on our figuratively-lily-white asses. Unless we decide to swallow a healthy dose of humility ourselves. We’ll see.

Effective Life

I must admit that as a group, Christians are often unpleasant to be around. I don’t mean always, or all Christians, but far too much. Many of us are wrapped in our own superior self-righteousness. We are frequently emotionally unbalanced, and our external behavior can easily be a socially-acceptable cover for selfishness.

Notice also, that many people of ambiguous faith, or those without any strong conviction about their own beliefs (let alone the good people of other faiths), can often be not only kind, but also genuinely loving and unselfish.

What of this?

Although for some reason, this does not seem to challenge my own belief about what is true, or who is God, I am gradually persuaded that a truly “effective” life (in the most significant sense) is not necessarily bound to a particular creed. That’s a hard opinion to maintain for someone like myself who not only holds a creed, but my particular selection is rather elaborate and by nature exclusive. But, go figure. That’s what I think.

Papa Ratzi

Ok -- sorry for the lack of new material. No extended pining for the former pope, I've just been busy.

So, the “German Shepherd” is quite the deal. At 78, he won't be around long, but he's obviously interested in doing more that filling a gap. The theological conservatives have spoken, and I’m glad. The RCC remains what it is by its faithfulness to its past. I’m hopeful he’ll continue to build bridges to Orthodox and Protestant Christians, as well as people of other faiths. He seems to be able to adapt and re-align his approach for the new job description.

From this past Wednesday:

I wish to put my ministry at the service of reconciliation and harmony among men and nations ... to hold firm the centrality of Christ.

From Catholic Culture :

"Cardinal Ratzinger served the CDF only at the request of Pope John Paul II and, by all reports, he didn’t particularly like the job ... he was called upon to discipline only rarely, under instructions from the Pope he served ... while head of the CDF, Benedict XVI had his finger on the pulse of many more problems and controversies than those resulting in public discipline. He is certainly well aware of the length and breadth of infidelity within the Church at every level, and his many statements ... make it clear that he theologically opposes all that is unfaithful to the authentic teaching of Christ ... Nor could he have long survived in his previous position without being a man of considerable courage."

John Paul II

Karol Wojtyla
1920-2005


Well Done Good and Faithful Servant

peacemaker

"It is necessary to awaken again in believers a full relationship with Christ, mankind's only saviour. Only from a personal relationship with Jesus can an effective evangelisation develop."

"The question confronting the Church today is not any longer whether the man in the street can grasp a religious message, but how to employ the communications media so as to let him have the full impact of the Gospel message."

"Anything done for another is done for oneself."

"I hope to have communion with the people, that is the most important thing."

Risen!

Confession

It was about 4PM. As I leaned against the corner of a brick building downtown waiting for the next light rail train, I could see three rough looking young guys walking my direction, passing me on the right. The last one to pass -- a little shorter than me, but very burley -- had a troubling look on his face as if he were up to something. Just after he walked by I heard a “thump”, a squeaky laugh, and some struggle. The burley one had decided to pin an elderly oriental gentleman who was walking in the other direction against the wall, and he was using some force – apparently to impress his friends or something. The old man was obviously in pain.

Absolutely no one paid attention. People (dozens of them) just kept walking by as if nothing were happening. I was stunned. I needed to do something, but I felt frozen. Right before I worked up the nerve to confront him, he walked off, dropping the old man to his knees, “Stupid Chink!”

I helped the old guy up, and he hobbled off back where he had come from. Clearly he had been injured.

I felt ashamed that I had not responded quickly enough.

A few minutes later a younger man, I assume a grandson or relative, came running down toward where all this had happened. He was obviously very upset. I offered that I had seen what happened, and he said that the old guy was pretty badly hurt and an ambulance was on the way. I told him I could identify the burley guy, but as I related more of the story his appreciation turned to disgust, as it became apparent that I had the opportunity to act, but did nothing. This could have just been my impression, but it seemed that way to me at the time.

I realized that this is such a clear picture of so many things I deal with. It’s not so much that I do evil things, but that I fail to do the right thing – out of cowardice or laziness. This is quite a wake up.

I have a good friend that believes the greatest struggle most men deal with is what he calls “the sin of Adam” – failure to take responsibility, failure to act in promotion or defense of those we are responsible for, including our neighbor. It takes many forms. He is right.

Absolutely

All absolutes are false. Except for that one.
All truth is relative. Except for that one.
I am a small-minded dolt. That one just stands on it’s own.

My wife knows I get annoyed when she takes a swig of my beer from the bottle, and leaves it brimming with foam. I don’t know why she does this, but it seems to give her some satisfaction that such a meaningless thing can perturb me. At the same time (no kidding), I interpret this as an oblique form of communication of her love for me. She knows me, and we have this little ritual, our ritual. My annoyance is irrelevant compared to her subtle silent communication: “I know you, and you belong to me as much as I to you.”

Makes me all hot-n-bothered just thinking about it.

Seen Dad?

You just can't make this stuff up. We are a lonely species.

Who Do You Love?

Please fasten your seatbelt, and place your seat in the upright position.

Same-sex marriage appears to be a topic high on a lot of people’s lists. The curious thing is that folks on both sides are incredulous that the other side could have reasoned arguments. Somehow I feel that this issue is central to deeper questions of meaning ... not really sure why.

The obvious irritation for me –- even assuming homosexuality has a sinful character -- is that many religious folk handle this with special zeal. I’ve yapped about that in previous posts. Top executives rob blue-collar workers of their health and retirement, our government finds creative ways to discriminately support genocide, but that’s small potatoes compared to sodomy. I truly think the comparison to racial prejudice is apt.

I have heard people contend that legalization of same-sex marriage implies an endorsement of homosexuality. Of course it does, but that begs the question. At issue is the belief that homosexual unions are wrong. I am personally unable to conclude that certain sexual drives are wrong. They are innate, or at least they can show up without consent. If even the temptation of a man for another man’s wife is not wrong in itself, it hardly seems valid to rearrange this thinking in the context of gender preference. Assuming these drives are at least sometimes innate, why is the natural fulfillment of them considered by some to be wrong?

One interesting idea is “natural function”. Homosexual acts employ the body’s reproductive system in a way that is impossible to fulfill its (arguably) primary function: childbearing. This is simple fact. Homosexuality occurs in the animal kingdom, but the same idea applies there. This doesn’t just refer to the frustration of internal squishy blobs and tubes, but the perpetuation or extinction of species. In spite of this, it seems like a weak argument to say, “If all sexual acts were homosexual, the species would die out.” Duh. If every player were a pitcher, the team would always loose every game. In other areas of life, we don’t justify different expressions using this test. Some heterosexual couples are aware prior to marriage that they are unable to bear children. No one would say their union is invalid.

Another concern sometimes raised is the idea that permitting same-sex marriage will weaken the family and/or society. In countries where same-sex marriage laws have been passed, marriage in general becomes far less frequent, although one could argue this would be the case anyway in post-religious culture. Instead, people decide to live together more often, and these informal unions -- due to their temporary nature -- break down frequently, often leaving children in their wake. Assuming some cause-effect relationship exists, and it’s mighty hard to argue otherwise, even this seems to be more of a symptom than a root problem.

I think perhaps the implied (if not practiced) permanence of marriage does serve the end of raising children more than it presents the often-proposed converse problem: bad marriages harm children, not to mention the partners. Reason supports the idea that children are best supported by parents in an exclusive, permanent relationship. Are same-sex unions unable to meet this criterion? I would guess that denying a same-sex couple that wishes to raise children the ability to publicly formalize their commitment might add to the problem.

Then we come to biblical condemnations. Some are tied to old-covenant purity laws. Some seem to be clear prohibitions for all people at all times, but so does head-covering and similar practices. I admit that these are different issues, but I wish it was more obvious.

I believe that life -- not to mention marriage, or any relationship – is best lived by sacrificing self for the best interest of others. That’s it. That’s what I know. Sure wish I could just do it well.

Various Random

Out for 32 miles today, halfway through the ride I noticed about 75 yards of audiotape strewn across road, no mind for the wind and trucks blowing by. Disregarded. I couldn’t be sure, but something was telling me it was a recorded song. As if the psychic energy of the dying tape was leaking onto the road …

Heads of state who ride and wrangle
who look at your face from more than one angle
can cut you from their bloated budgets
like sharpened knives through chicken mcnuggets

Couldn’t get that riddim out of my head for the rest of the trip, but it did help on the painful up-hills.

I also caught a “gaggle” of gorgeous Canadian geese just lounging in an unused field. They are amazing creatures. They fly in thier “v” to cut down on energy. The lead bird -- each one rotates to that position -- cuts the wind, and each following uses 40-60% as much energy. When a member gets tired or injured, if they fall away from the group, two strong geese will fall out of formation to bring the weaker bird back to the group. It would not be able to make it back itself. In a bike (road) race, similar ideas apply. Drafting is a critical part of the race. The designated leader rides behind each teammate (“domestique”) in turn, each sacrificing all his energy for the sake of the leader, so he will have more to expend at the end of the contest. In the goosey world, cooperation is necessary for survival, not just an advantage in competition.

I love these images, because they are such a great picture of life. We are built for relationships. No exceptions. We do not survive without them. If we fall (and we do, eh?), it is critical that we have others to bring us back into the race. With them, we don’t just survive, we can flourish, and at times take the lead – and the hard work – on behalf of others.

In rugged contrast (or perhaps not?) I soon afterward rode past a group of aspiring young rednecks on ATV’s. Yeehaw. They actually chased me for about half a mile. Screaming something like “faggot!” or whatever. I don’t know whether to be flattered or offended, but something about the encounter made me grin.

Ok, my impression of the first 5 chapters of Melville’s Moby: Queer eye for the harpoon guy. Not that there’s anything wrong with that …

<< frivolous information section >>

Favorite liquids, in this order:

1. Strong Italian coffee
2. Extra-dry vodka martini up, shaken, olive
3. Pedro’s extra-dry chain lube (I've apparently got a thing for x-dry)
4. Room-temp water
5. Hearty red wine
6. OJ
7. Citrus Cytomax

If I have consumed all in one day, I mark a notch on my bike.

The Cruelty of Life

I heard today that presidents Clinton and GHW Bush became emotional when presented with pictures made by children showing their parents swept away by the tsunami.

Shit.

What are we whining about?

Bookish

I just opened Moby Dick for the first time. I know … I’m a literary loser. I’m only on the 5th chapter (of 134, thank you), but already I am feeling “Ohmygod, this is the best book I have ever read!” I just don’t know why it has taken me 25 years of adult literacy to get around to this work.

I had this sneaky plan this past Christmas. I want my oldest son (and the siblings after him) to read some contemporary classics, so I went on Amazon and bought about a dozen $5 paperback versions of these things “for my kids”. Animal Farm, Of Mice and Men, Lord of the Flies, Fahrenheit 451, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, etc. Stuff that is perhaps over his head right now, but of more substance than Harry Potter. I must admit that the Lemony Snicket books are creative and of surprising quality, but I don’t want him to skip these gems.

I have spent way too much of my post-collegiate reading time with the Christian “challenge and encouragement” genre. Not that this is a bad thing, it’s just like having spinach for every meal for several years. I have tinkered with fiction and such, but my diet is (was) far to unbalanced.

So I am determined to read about the whale. I truly can’t wait.