I am moving the blog to another site.  Today's entry is the first one on the new site.  Don't forget to change your bookmark for the blog!

Click here to get to the new location.

See you there!

A few weeks ago I mentioned the Saddleback Forum, a televised discussion between popular megachurch pastor and author Rick Warren, and the two presidential candidates.  The idea was that Warren would "interview" each of the candidates separately, ferreting out their views on a range of topics supposedly of interest to the average Christian.  Warren claims he and his church represent the "middle" of Christian perspectives, as opposed to the left or the right.

I did not watch the forum, but judging from the feedback by the editors of The Christian Century, Warren didn't stray very far from the stereotypical issues of evangelical Christians, i.e., gay marriage and abortion.

This seems a little strange to me, given Warren's self-described "middle" role, and the fact that many evangelicals are waking up to the deeper issues facing our nation and the world, and that there are implications of the faith regarding those issues.

But, it was his show to do as he pleased.

I think an interesting observation raised by the editors of the magazine was the issue of the candidates giving credence to Warren and his approach, and what this implies regarding the interplay of religion and politics.

Check out the linked article and see what you think.

There was a funny bit on Saturday Night Live nine or ten years ago in which an actor portraying President Bill Clinton walked into a room where two other men were packing office items into moving boxes.  They were supposed to be the disgraced former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and his would-be successor, Rep. Bob Livingston, who didn’t take over after-all because of personal indiscretions of his own. 

The Clinton character said, “Hi, fellas!  Am I impeached yet?”  Of course, this referred to efforts by Gingrich and others to bring down the Clinton Administration because of his immoral, philandering ways.  It turned out that Gingrich and Livingston were not so pure, themselves.

Liberal Democrat comedian and commentator Al Franken, who now is running for a U.S. Senate seat in Minnesota, appeared on The Late Show with David Letterman a year or two ago to talk about his potential candidacy.  Naturally enough, issues were brought into the discussion.  Gay marriage as a threat to American families was one of them.

Franken went into an amusing bit, which can be found on the video site YouTube.  In the routine, Al Franken said it never occurred to him that he could be walking down the street, observe a gay couple holding hands as they strolled along, and say to his wife, “You know.  That looks good.  I think I’ll try that sometime.”  And then he said that he was discussing this with his “good friend, Newt Gingrich, and I said, ‘Newt, would you deny that couple the same joy you knew with, say, your first wife?  Would you tell that gay couple they had to forego the assurance of a committed relationship like you promised to your second wife?  Newt, would you keep them from sharing in the happiness and fulfillment of marriage, like you have with your third wife?’”

Obviously, Newt Gingrich is not unique in committing adultery and going through numerous marriages and divorces, leaving family wreckage along the way.

But, I just find it odd that as the “values voters” gather in Washington once again for their big right-wing pow-wow, they have this person as a speaker on their program.

I guess they didn’t say their “values” were necessarily positive.

Today many special events are being held to commemorate the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and the aborted attack that led to many people dying in a plane crash in Pennsylvania.  It is difficult to believe it has been seven years since the attack, and the world has changed in profound ways since that terrible day.   

While I certainly recall much of what happened seven years ago, including the sight on live television of the second tower being struck by an airplane and subsequently collapsing, I also associate this tragedy with another that occurred the same week.  It was the untimely death of Barbara Silverman, my co-worker for the first four years I was Executive Director at William Penn House in Washington, DC.                                                                                                            

Barbara was one of three people remaining from a staff upheaval at William Penn House prior to my arrival.  My predecessor dismissed the House Manager, and several others either resigned in protest, or also were dismissed.  (This all led to my predecessor's forced departure.)                                                                                                    

Barbara arrived a couple of months earlier to spend a year at WPH as an intern.  Suddenly, she found herself in the role of Interim House Manager. She, another intern, and the custodian were the staff I inherited when I showed up.  It was a certified mess.  Barbara and I worked well together, and she ended up staying four years.  I wished for more, but knew she had larger fish to fry. 

Following some further specialized education at the University of Pennsylvania after she left WPH, Barbara eventually found her niche.  She became the House Manager at the Ronald McDonald House in Washington.  So, she was back in town.  

I spoke to Barbara and saw her from time to time as we kept in loose contact, and I truly felt she was fulfilled in her roles as head resident, counselor, chaplain, manager and everything else she did for the young patients and their families who spent time at the Ronald McDonald House.  And in a shift for her that I never fully understood, Barbara left the Quakers and converted to Catholicism.              

At the end of the week preceding the September 11 attacks I received word that Barbara was in the hospital.  She had a severe reaction to a prescription medicine and was experiencing kidney failure.  I was taken aback when I first saw her at the hospital, as she was very bloated from her condition.                

I checked on her at the hospital just about every day.  Her condition quickly worsened.  As the news of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon filled the television screen in her hospital room, she barely seemed aware of what was happening.  Each day brought new complications and narrowing hope for recovery.  Her elderly father was in town standing by, as were her brother and family.  I spent time with all of them apart from the hospital.  It was a very intense week, and finally the day we dreaded arrived.  Barbara died.               

I hurried to the place where her family was staying.  When Barbara’s father, a tiny, fragile man with a variety of health issues of his own, finally came into the lobby, he slowly walked over to me, sat down, and simply said, “Today we have fresh evidence that life isn’t fair.”           

Afterwards, I went to her room in the intensive care unit and all of the monitors, intravenous tubes and dialysis machines were gone.  I stood looking at Barbara for a moment trying to make sense in my mind of what my eyes were seeing.  She was just two weeks shy of her 41^st birthday, and a medication error took a caring, helping person from the world.

For over fifty years, tax laws have prohibited tax-exempt churches and their clergy from endorsing political candidates.  It is an expression of the concept of separation of church and state, and it just simply makes sense.  Violators face the loss of their tax-exempt status.

Some push the limits of the law, and there is an initiative in Arizona to mount a big-time challenge.  I guess those making the push would like for the United States to be like Iran or Nazi Germany.  I find it curious that, if they read the Bible, they imagine their insights to outshine all others, placing them on a par with God.

In any case, read the linked article and see what you think.

My time is limited so far this week, preventing much blogging, and next week looks even tighter.

Years ago I de-planed at Des Moines, Iowa, and one of the few things I recall about that trip was a middle-aged woman I saw waiting at the baggage claim area.  She was wearing a t-shirt that declared in large letters, “I’m With Stupid.”  She was standing by herself.

Somewhere along the timeline of our culture’s development and progress, a person figured out how to imprint images and messages on cotton-blend shirts.   Not much of this was happening yet when I was a kid.  Being a baseball-obsessed youngster, I would have been thrilled with what now is common-place:  a shirt with the logo of my favorite team emblazoned across the chest.  (In my case, it was the Washington Senators, who, of course no longer exist – such rare t-shirts now are the stuff of eBay) 

The best I could do was an iron-on patch that was the wrong color and wrong style of script, but at least it said, “Senators.”  I acquired it by taping a quarter to a piece of cardboard and mailing it in with the correct number of Bazooka bubble-gum comics.  (Did I mention that my dentist from those days and a couple of his friends joined together to purchase a private plane?)

When my sons were still around the house they had innumerable t-shirts with scary pictures somehow portraying their favorite bands and recording artists.  One I recall in particular showed a large, pallid face cut, sawn, or otherwise ripped in half from top to bottom, now held together by a row of large staples.   A treasure trove of similar shirts can be found at stores such as Hot Topic where, for the employees, it appears, every day is Halloween.

There is a reported trend, however, toward shirts bearing messages of “peace, love, and recycling.”  Fashionista Eunice Chang suggests, “It’s because of the war.  People need a message, and they want a positive message.”  Chang and others recently pushed their wares (wears?) at the Las Vegas trade show for clothing sellers, known as MAGIC.

Some of the current shirts compare to what was seen on the backs of hippies in the late 1960’s, but we are assured that today’s teen trendies aren’t imitating the Woodstock generation.  Market researcher Kathleen Gasperini explains, “They’re making it their own.  It’s a brighter version.  It’s not as drug-induced.”   (Oh wow…that’s cold, man.)

In my mind, this Sunday’s lectionary texts (Matthew 18:15-20; Romans 13:8-14; Psalm 149; and Exodus 12:1-14) lend themselves to the consideration of “taking on our identity” as people of faith.  Perhaps that involves “wearing” a “positive message,” that can bring hope and promise to people who are filled with doubts, fears, and anxieties.

Of course, this message really can’t be “screen printing-induced,” but rather is a brighter version emanating from the light of a heart committed and connected to Christ.

A colleague told me about his experience several years ago when he was on a vacation trip.  During his travels he worshiped at a church in Florida, then later at a Texas church.  He heard the same sermon at both churches.  It wasn’t two sermons on the same topic with similar emphases or conclusions drawn.  It was the same sermon, "preached" by two different ministers.

Perhaps they owned the same book of sermons, or downloaded the text from the Internet.  However it happened, the preachers used the work of someone else without attribution or acknowledgement.  Some would call this stealing, or even lying.  Whatever you call it, the pastors skipped out on their ministries to their congregations. 

Sure, the content or message of the sermon may have been helpful to some of the folks in the pew.  It may have been faithful to the truth of the gospel.  But, the one upon whom the people depended to take seriously the responsibility and calling of studying the scriptures, spending time in prayer, wrestling with the Holy Spirit, all in order to facilitate God’s speaking to the congregation through him or her with a word relevant to their lives as individuals and as a community of faith, failed.  Anyone can read a manuscript written by someone else.  No calling by God, specialized training, or spiritual gifts are necessary.  Perhaps some acting ability would enhance the experience.

David McGrath, now a professor of English at the University of South Alabama, recounts his contributions to the temptations of plagiarism.  When he was a young man, fresh out of college, his first job was to write term papers ordered by college and graduate students.  He contracted with an outfit known as Termpapers, Inc.  Before long, the feds closed down the operation, and investigations into the “fraud, forgery, plagiarism, and subversion of the educational system” ensued.  Threats of lawsuits from universities filled the air.

These days, McGrath is hyper-sensitive to the issue of plagiarism, and contends that politicians presenting speeches written by their staff or others they have hired are plagiarizing and misleading the public.  For instance, he points out what apparently is fairly common knowledge:  the speech presented last night at the Republican National Convention by Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin was written weeks ago by a McCain staffer prior to Palin's selection, who assumed a male nominee.  Tweaking by Gov. Palin and McCain operatives “personalized” the speech as it was presented.

Recently, I read Journals, the diary of the life and career of Arthur Schlesinger, who for some fifty years moved in and around the inner-circle of Democratic Party politics.  In addition to his career as a historian and professor, Schlesinger wrote speeches and suggested wording for passages in speeches for prominent Democrats from Adlai Stevenson to Al Gore.  It was plain from Schlesinger’s account that many others were involved in the process, and there even was competition among speechwriters to have their words spoken by candidates and office-holders.  So, it is a very common practice.

David McGrath maintains that this is plagiarism and that it robs the public of the opportunity to learn what politicians truly think and believe about an issue, which, theoretically, would lead to more informed choices by voters.

Banning political speechwriters also would, in my view, eliminate many candidates from running for political office.  Often candidates without adequate experience, knowledge, or insight are recruited, selected, and marketed by party leaders because of the image he or she presents.  If that gets the person elected, the ones who truly have an agenda then can do their ventriloquism routine.

Recently, I mentioned here that I established my own personal page on Facebook, an online “social network.”  In the weeks since then, I have connected with over twenty “friends.”  Some of them I contacted and asked to be “friended,” and some contacted me.  Included among those on my friends list are at least two people I never met or heard of before.  Why they wanted to add me to their lists is beyond me.  In both cases, we have some friends in common, so I suppose that is how they even found me in the first place.

It has been fun to correspond with long-lost acquaintances.  One person answered my message, we had a happy exchange of three or four additional messages, but he didn’t add me to his friends list!  I found that amusing, but curious.  I suppose since we were out of each other’s lives for over thirty years there was no reason to change now.  If it ain’t broke…

One way a person can connect with others on Facebook is through a listing of people who indicate they graduated from the same high school, even in the same class. When I scroll through that list, most of the names are unfamiliar to me.  Granted, I was in a class of over 600 people, but I probably knew a vast majority of the names.  Not any more!  Who are all those strangers with whom I shared those pivotal four years of my life?

Rachel Beckman writes in the Washington Post of how ads that appear on a person’s Facebook profile page are specifically geared toward that person.  They result from the information entered when the profile was established.  She particularly took umbrage at ads related to weight issues, referred to as “muffin top,” and shows the ad in her Post article.  I found it hilarious, myself.  Perhaps enough people complained about it, because Beckman states that these particular ads now have disappeared.

Other ads showed up on her page that she felt were an attempt to appeal not only to her personal interests, but that hit her at various “psychological soft spots.” This is one of the by-products of the Internet, wherein “data miners” learn what they can about a person and market products and services that fit the profile. 

As for me, I couldn’t tell you what ads are on my page, because I pay no attention to them whatsoever.  The data miners are barking up the wrong tree with me. 

Hmmm, perhaps now on my page there will be ads for careers in forestry, or dog products.  Maybe even fire hydrants.

Gordon Atkinson describes a mission trip to the Dominican Republic, during which he and the other volunteers helped address a pressing need in the community where they worked.  They installed two water purification systems in the capital, Santo Domingo, as clean drinking water is not provided by the local government or a utility company.  Those with adequate financial resources drink bottled water, the rest of the population takes its chances with tap water.

Atkinson relates how the mission trip experience changed his life.  He describes it as being “like a child,” as other people – the ones he thought he was going to take care of – took care of him.  His group arrived at night, and after a bus ride into unfamiliar, and dark, territory they had no idea where they were.  The only food available to them was the meals placed before them each day, menus planned and prepared by local hosts with whom there was no consultation.  While Atkinson had money in his pocket, there was no opportunity for conversion to local currency.  He and the others were transported by bus every day to their work site.  Conversations occurred around him, but he was not a part of them, for he didn’t speak Spanish, and decisions were made by others.  Everything about the mission trip was an exercise in total dependence on someone else – like a child’s dependence on a parent or parents.

Gordon Atkinson discovered that he lost several pounds on the trip, since he couldn’t get his hands on between-meal snacks.  He otherwise developed a mindset of dependence, even to the point of forgetting his passport for the trip home, and not having any idea of the phone number or location of the place the group slept while in the Dominican Republic.

It was a strange experience for a North American adult to be so dependent on others, but one in which he discovered that his needs all were met.  Perhaps they were not met in ways he always would choose, and his “wants,” i.e., extra food in particular, simply were not part of the equation.

Upon his return home, Atkinson discovered that his eating habits were affected, and he continued to lose weight.  His mind wouldn’t let go of thoughts of those who took care of him.  His words:

One of the great, enduring mysteries of the Gospels is the command of Jesus that we become like children. He said, "Unless you become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."

"And how shall we become like children?" we ask him, reminiscent of Nicodemus. "Can a grown person become a child again? Can I enter again into my mother's womb?"

I spent a week in the care of brothers and sisters in Christ in Santo Domingo. Yes, you can become a child again. But do not think it is something you will recover from quickly. When you become vulnerable and allow your life to rest in the hands of others, you live only in the present moment. Your eyes are open to the world around you. In that moment you begin to understand what it means to live in the kingdom of heaven.

And you may find, to your joy, that it is hard to find your way back home.

My words:  It is very difficult for all of us -- people of faith, or others -- to embrace dependence upon God who provides abundantly for our needs, because our "wants" get in the way.  And "get in the way" is what they so often do, when it comes to knowing the life God has in mind for us.

As I have mentioned before, I am not comfortable with public prayers being attached to civic or political events.  I feel there is pressure on the person praying to be less than authentic, and possibly co-opted to the cause, party, or outlook of the event sponsors.

Not everyone shares my hesitations, even among clergy.

I learned today that Disciples pastor Cynthia Hale, of the Ray of Hope Christian Church. just outside Atlanta, Georgia, offered an invocation at the opening of Tuesday's session of the Democratic National Convention.

The text of her prayer follows:

    Great and awesome God, as we gather in this place from all across the length and breadth of this nation, we pause to acknowledge you as the one in whom we live and move and have our being. You, oh God, created us in your image and likeness and invited us to partner with you in the stewardship of your world. We are called to be faithful over the earth, its people and resources.

    On this day as we gather to renew America's promise, we are keenly aware of the challenges American families are facing. God, people are being hit hard by the economic downturn, the energy crisis and rising food costs, the mortgage mayhem, as well as the absence of affordable housing and healthcare. Parents desire and deserve to be able to give their children quality and affordable education from pre-school through college.

    Times are tough; people are struggling; some have lost hope. We know, God, that this is not your perfect will for any of your people. It is your desire that all people have these basic human needs met. It is your desire that all would prosper and be in good health. It is your desire that everyone would be treated with dignity and respect.

    As a nation and as a party, we are at a crucial time. We have an
opportunity to not only make history, but to bring about change we can all believe in and restore hope to the hearts of women and men. Unite us as a party, oh God. Let us be one in this common purpose, to renew our promise so that we might live out our creed to be one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.

    In your strong and mighty name, we pray. Amen.