i travel all the way to Cairo and end up being led in worship by a pastor who went to Bexley Lutheran Seminary... located about 2 hours from my hometown in Ohio. go figure. dude was cool, and i was utterly blown away by his ministry. they share the church with 5 other churches (since you can't build new ones in Egypt due to the heavy regulation). he does friday morning service for around 30 people.. if that. the total membership of his church is around 200 give or take. with this limited amount of resource and people, St Andrews puts on education programs for Sudanese refugees.
they're evening starting a hip-hop program to deal with the gangs. two gangs largely, that prey on the refugees. why refugees and not egyptians? cause then there would be a crack down on ALL refugees, and you can't hit the tourists cause they have armed guards with them at all times. so they prey on their own people... but so do many other minority and marginilized people. i remember we poor kids would almost never fight a higher social class kid. it was always same side of the track fighting... very few times i can remember fighting someone from the good side of the tracks. and if i did, it was due to a football dispute taken too far.
but anywho.. Rev Clifford Lewis is really make'n Ohio proud.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Ash Wednesday
HAPPY ASH WEDNESDAY!! oh wait.. tis not the season to be happy... anywho, we're in Lent now.
Here is my art project from last year from the Christianity and the Visual Arts:
i'll have to reconstruct that sometime again at LTS.
There are some traditional practices associated with Lent. The three traditional practices to be taken up during Lent are prayer (justice towards God), fasting (justice towards self), and almsgiving (justice towards neighbor). Some people give up a vice of theirs thus adding something that will bring them closer to God. I haven't given up anything since I gave up Lent in 2001 or so (around the time when i 'officially' broke from Catholicism). but now i feel i should reclaim it.
so i'm going to give up COMPLAINING. there is much to be thankful for! here at seminary we lose sight of this because we're overwhelmed, overworked, under-slept, or whatever the case maybe. wish me luck and call me out if something reeks of complaining on here!
Here is my art project from last year from the Christianity and the Visual Arts:
i'll have to reconstruct that sometime again at LTS.
There are some traditional practices associated with Lent. The three traditional practices to be taken up during Lent are prayer (justice towards God), fasting (justice towards self), and almsgiving (justice towards neighbor). Some people give up a vice of theirs thus adding something that will bring them closer to God. I haven't given up anything since I gave up Lent in 2001 or so (around the time when i 'officially' broke from Catholicism). but now i feel i should reclaim it.
so i'm going to give up COMPLAINING. there is much to be thankful for! here at seminary we lose sight of this because we're overwhelmed, overworked, under-slept, or whatever the case maybe. wish me luck and call me out if something reeks of complaining on here!
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The Pyramids and Sphynx
what most people think of when they think of Egypt. the interesting part was seeing how MASSIVE these things are and then hearing that they have the interior square-footage of a small, 1BR condo. NOT that large.
also, the most touching thing, was afterwards. while waiting for our fellow consumers in the Hard Rock cafe by the 'Mids, we watched a game of soccer being played by tweens and teens, amid the camels they rent out to tourists all day. the big guys watched that they didn't hurt the small guys but really tried to win. the little guys won out and they celebrated by running around. then they hopped on their camels and horses and went home, singing and laughing.
that was an awesome experience.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
What Boogie Gets to Look Forward To
yeah... i'm not ashamed to admit it. i'm not a massive hockey fan, but i think OV is the coolest! and thanks to my buddy Jim, i'm up-to-date on the goings on of my Capitals.
can't wait til that babe comes! 7 more weeks (+/- )!!!!!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Bias & Culture
pulling largely from a lecture given by Nestor Medina here at LTS, i think it's time to talk about Bias and Culture.
lots of talk about culture, but how best can we define it?
there's many ways, i'll attempt to define it here and then discuss what it means to COEXIST.
Culture is 1. a sum total of rules that shape belief, communication, and thinking, 2. refers to particular ways of thinking, acting, and organizing aspects of housing, technology, art, family dynamics, and science, 3. gives coherence and totality in relation to the rest of the world and is transmitted from one generation to the next.
or as my Giradian buddy Bryce would define it: culture is what keeps you from retributively killing people.
example of two cultures coming together: A Danish man and Egyptian man go to play a game of billards. When asked (by a third party) how good they are at billards the Dane replies "I've played before" and the Egyptian replies "I'm very good at this game." Both exhibit their culture... Danish culture values humility where Egyptian culture values embellishment. Imagine the surprise and potential conflict when the Dane throughly thrashes the Egyptian.
now based on these definitions and this understanding of "culture" i would say that one cannot get outside of one's cultural bias. here are some ways of thinking about culture historically in terms of one's "Holy Scriptures" according to the Medina lecture:
Acculturation: Taking a book from another culture and placing it in one's own: i.e. the Bible is Angelo (although it was written by the Hebrews amid their pressures from Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek and Roman Cultures). or as Yael pointed out, the Christians claiming the Torah as THEIRS but largely ignoring and dismissing it.
Enculturation: Our way of thinking is the best! The Qu'ran is Arabic therefore one must be Arabic to be Muslim or the Gospel is Angelo Culture, therefore one must become Angelo to be Christian. This is a false assumption and we've seen the effects on the world in missionaries and Colonial though processes.
Inculturation: Use resonate images to convert other cultures. You guys believe in charity? WE DO TOO! Here's where our scriptures are doing what y'all already are. This is apologetics and falsely thinks that the scripture can be removed from the culture.
Interculturation: Naming own culture specifically and seeing the positives and negatives. i believe this is the best way. when we talk about things, it's best to say "As a white, progressive Christian i see this issue this way" or "As an atheist woman" or "as a Muslim from Egypt" here it helps either party figure out how best to frame the interaction and the friction that occurs from both parties involved.
this is important to do as we're making assumptions about the other... what we should do is to name our assumptions from the get go, question the person we are in dialogue with, and let the "other" fill in their own blanks. for example, when coming to me and knowing that i'm a christian, don't think i'm a creationist, or think the Bible is THE word of GOD, or that i send other faiths to hell. i don't hold either belief as i believe in evolution and that the word of God is in the Bible amid the cultural bias and baggage.
lots of talk about culture, but how best can we define it?
there's many ways, i'll attempt to define it here and then discuss what it means to COEXIST.
Culture is 1. a sum total of rules that shape belief, communication, and thinking, 2. refers to particular ways of thinking, acting, and organizing aspects of housing, technology, art, family dynamics, and science, 3. gives coherence and totality in relation to the rest of the world and is transmitted from one generation to the next.
or as my Giradian buddy Bryce would define it: culture is what keeps you from retributively killing people.
example of two cultures coming together: A Danish man and Egyptian man go to play a game of billards. When asked (by a third party) how good they are at billards the Dane replies "I've played before" and the Egyptian replies "I'm very good at this game." Both exhibit their culture... Danish culture values humility where Egyptian culture values embellishment. Imagine the surprise and potential conflict when the Dane throughly thrashes the Egyptian.
now based on these definitions and this understanding of "culture" i would say that one cannot get outside of one's cultural bias. here are some ways of thinking about culture historically in terms of one's "Holy Scriptures" according to the Medina lecture:
Acculturation: Taking a book from another culture and placing it in one's own: i.e. the Bible is Angelo (although it was written by the Hebrews amid their pressures from Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek and Roman Cultures). or as Yael pointed out, the Christians claiming the Torah as THEIRS but largely ignoring and dismissing it.
Enculturation: Our way of thinking is the best! The Qu'ran is Arabic therefore one must be Arabic to be Muslim or the Gospel is Angelo Culture, therefore one must become Angelo to be Christian. This is a false assumption and we've seen the effects on the world in missionaries and Colonial though processes.
Inculturation: Use resonate images to convert other cultures. You guys believe in charity? WE DO TOO! Here's where our scriptures are doing what y'all already are. This is apologetics and falsely thinks that the scripture can be removed from the culture.
Interculturation: Naming own culture specifically and seeing the positives and negatives. i believe this is the best way. when we talk about things, it's best to say "As a white, progressive Christian i see this issue this way" or "As an atheist woman" or "as a Muslim from Egypt" here it helps either party figure out how best to frame the interaction and the friction that occurs from both parties involved.
this is important to do as we're making assumptions about the other... what we should do is to name our assumptions from the get go, question the person we are in dialogue with, and let the "other" fill in their own blanks. for example, when coming to me and knowing that i'm a christian, don't think i'm a creationist, or think the Bible is THE word of GOD, or that i send other faiths to hell. i don't hold either belief as i believe in evolution and that the word of God is in the Bible amid the cultural bias and baggage.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Coptic Christainty
We visited St Mark's, home of the Coptic Pope, Pope Shenouda III. Who are the Copts and how are the different from Orthodox or Catholic Christianity?
According to ancient tradition, Christianity was introduced to the Egyptians by Saint Mark in Alexandria, shortly after the ascension of Christ and during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius around 42 A.D. Some famous Coptic scholars were Athenagoras, Clement, Didymus, and my favorite, Origen, who is one of the most distinguished of the early fathers of the Christianity.
They also gave Christianity monasticism. the most prominent figures of the monastic movement were Anthony the Great and Paul of Thebes (who we've already talked about), and Macarius the Great (who we WILL talk about!).
The Copts had a HUGE impact on the rest of Christianity but are considered to be different, part of the Oriental Christian Tradition, NOT the Catholic or Greek Orthodox traditions. The Oriental Orthodox communion comprises six groups: Syriac Orthodox,Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox, Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (India) and Armenian Apostolic churches. These churches are different due to a disagreement at the Council of Chalcedon.
Chalcedon declared that Jesus has two complete natures, one human and one divine. The Copts argue that Jesus, though divine as well as human, is only one person. They likened Chalcedon's doctrine to the Nestorian heresy, condemned at Ephesus, which stated that Christ was two distinct persons, one divine and one human. In 2001, the leaders of Oriental Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy concluded that they had always believed in the same Christology, but differed over how this was to be formulated, thus healing has begun between the Orthodox and Catholic churches.
Here's the visit to St Marks:
During the Q&A session with the Pope, two really funny answers that stuck in my head.
Q: I like a girl, but she doesn't like me! I pine and yearn, but to no avail, what should i do?
A: I wish these boys loved God as much as they love these girls.
Q: I recently moved to Cairo from a small village. I'm finding city life has a lot more temptations than the village life. How can i keep from sinning amid all these temptations?
A: No one can make you sin. Your heart has to be open to it in the first place. Pray and go to church, but realize that you are the one making the decision to sin or not.
Both of these responces brought a deafening roar of approval from the crowd. it was like being at a rock concert or sports game. maybe i should do a weekly Q&A from my church or even on the blog... ummm......
According to ancient tradition, Christianity was introduced to the Egyptians by Saint Mark in Alexandria, shortly after the ascension of Christ and during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius around 42 A.D. Some famous Coptic scholars were Athenagoras, Clement, Didymus, and my favorite, Origen, who is one of the most distinguished of the early fathers of the Christianity.
They also gave Christianity monasticism. the most prominent figures of the monastic movement were Anthony the Great and Paul of Thebes (who we've already talked about), and Macarius the Great (who we WILL talk about!).
The Copts had a HUGE impact on the rest of Christianity but are considered to be different, part of the Oriental Christian Tradition, NOT the Catholic or Greek Orthodox traditions. The Oriental Orthodox communion comprises six groups: Syriac Orthodox,Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox, Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (India) and Armenian Apostolic churches. These churches are different due to a disagreement at the Council of Chalcedon.
Chalcedon declared that Jesus has two complete natures, one human and one divine. The Copts argue that Jesus, though divine as well as human, is only one person. They likened Chalcedon's doctrine to the Nestorian heresy, condemned at Ephesus, which stated that Christ was two distinct persons, one divine and one human. In 2001, the leaders of Oriental Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy concluded that they had always believed in the same Christology, but differed over how this was to be formulated, thus healing has begun between the Orthodox and Catholic churches.
Here's the visit to St Marks:
During the Q&A session with the Pope, two really funny answers that stuck in my head.
Q: I like a girl, but she doesn't like me! I pine and yearn, but to no avail, what should i do?
A: I wish these boys loved God as much as they love these girls.
Q: I recently moved to Cairo from a small village. I'm finding city life has a lot more temptations than the village life. How can i keep from sinning amid all these temptations?
A: No one can make you sin. Your heart has to be open to it in the first place. Pray and go to church, but realize that you are the one making the decision to sin or not.
Both of these responces brought a deafening roar of approval from the crowd. it was like being at a rock concert or sports game. maybe i should do a weekly Q&A from my church or even on the blog... ummm......
Sunday, February 15, 2009
A Compassionate Anger
Today’s Scripture lesson is Mark 1:40-45 as found in The Message Bible.
A leper came to him, begging on his knees, "If you want to, you can cleanse me."
Deeply moved, Jesus put out his hand, touched him, and said, "I want to. Be clean." Then and there the leprosy was gone, his skin smooth and healthy. Jesus dismissed him with strict orders: "Say nothing to anyone. Take the offering for cleansing that Moses prescribed and present yourself to the priest. This will validate your healing to the people." But as soon as the man was out of earshot, he told everyone he met what had happened, spreading the news all over town. So Jesus kept to out-of-the-way places, no longer able to move freely in and out of the city. But people found him, and came from all over.
We’re in high school forever. We’ve all had to endure the strange, awkward teenage years and go through this experience. As one person put it, High School is the mouse race that prepares you for the rat race. In fact, every ten years we gather in survivor groups and try to figure out what the heck it was all about!! I will use this shared experience--some of you are still going through this time--to talk about today’s gospel lesson.
I think it’s safe to say that most of us (aside from a lucky few) were literally a sack of hormones and confused emotions. We see in the gospel TEXTS that Jesus had some confused emotions. I say TEXTS with an S, plural, meaning MORE THAN ONE TEXT. If you gather up all the ancient texts of Mark 1:40-45, you’ll discover that they say Jesus had three different reactions to the leper. The text we heard this morning says that Jesus was “moved with compassion”. I would imagine that would sound like this… “Yeah I choose..”
Another text says Jesus was moved with pity. Here I picture Jesus looking at the man, with tears welling up in his eyes saying “Yeah…… I choose.” And the third reaction is Jesus was moved with ANGER. ANGER? “OHHH Yeah… I CHOOSE!” That’s quite a variety of mixed emotions! So which is it? Compassion, pity or anger? What’s at stake?
There was A LOT at stake, not only for Jesus, but esp. for the leper. You see, people were scared to death of leprosy. And in Jesus’ time, Leprosy just meant Skin Disease. Imagine that, if you had bad acne, warts, goiters, or even what we know as leprosy, you were made into an instant outsider. The law in Leviticus was clear: “The person who has the leprous disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head be disheveled; and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ And he shall live alone, his dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Lev. 13:45-46)
So if you had leprosy you lost everything — job, family, place in the community — everything. The leper who approaches Jesus shows his desperation by breaking the law, by coming into the city, and getting close enough to Jesus that he could talk to him. He’s lucky he wasn’t stoned. I picture that Jesus is just surrounded by people and this leper shows up and the people just part away from him… they can’t believe their eyes! I’m thankful we here in the modern world don’t have any lepers… if someone like that showed up here, right now, we’d all jump up to help them, wouldn’t we? I don’t think we would… and I’m reminded of a similar story from my high school experience.
There are always groups in high school. There are the jocks, the smart kids, the in-crowd who were all beautiful and talented and everyone wanted to be like. I know most of you here were in the in-crowd, right?… lucky dawgs. I wasn’t so special... I was in the class of kids who were the ‘tweeners, those people who were somewhat tolerated by the cool kids, but there was just enough weirdness to keep us in our own separate group. Then there was the untouchable class in high school. Those are the modern day lepers of the high school culture. There was one kid in particular at my high school, his name was Bob.
Bob was from a really poor family. He was working part-time jobs all the time, so his grades suffered. He always had a worn and dirty look. I remember his ears sometimes would just be caked with dirt. He was really asocial. One day Bob is walking the halls with his books in his distracted manner and he trips and spills, books flying out. To make matters worse, it’s in front of the prettiest girl in high school, Katie.
Now Kate (my wife) didn't go to my school, so we had to play the hand we were dealt, and the queen in our deck was Katie.
Katie is surrounded by her friends who upon seeing who is lying at their feet immediately scatter and screech “EEEWW!!” An untouchable is in their midst. But Katie doesn’t flinch. She bends down and starts to collect Bob’s books. He looks around… everyone is watching the situation unfold and everyone is just as shocked as he is. He collects himself and stands up just in time to accept his stack of books from Katie. Just as Katie hands the books to Bob, she reaches out and squeezes his arm and says “It’s gonna be alright Bob.” Then she walks on and a heated discussion follows with Katie yelling at her friends and asking them why they didn’t help her. Bob goes about his day, but I noticed a little spring in his step. Now I wish I could say that there was a great change in Bob’s life from that day forward but this is a true story… and ideal endings are few and far between. Bob ended up going to the public school mid-semester, and I haven’t been in touch.
This is the modern story of what’s going on in our gospel text. Katie felt all of those emotions, I’m sure, Compassion, Pity, and Anger. Compassion at the outcast lying at her feet, pity at his helpless situation and that no one was helping him, and that filled her with anger and she acted! This too must have been Jesus’ feelings… it’s shown in his response.
Jesus’ immediate response—to touch the man and then declare his choice to heal him—reflects his belief of wholeness, embodied in his ministry of good news, hospitality, and inclusion. Jesus’ mission, as noted in John’s gospel, “I have come that they might have life, and have it abundantly” is an explicit challenge to all people who think sickness of mind, body, and spirit results from God’s will and divine punishment. Jesus NEVER blamed the victim for her or his ailment. Illness was an opportunity for healing rather than judgment, guilt, or blame.
Jesus was fully human, he could feel the exact range of complex emotions we do. Jesus felt a compassionate anger. Jesus wasn’t mad at the man or at his request. Maybe he was angry at the social situation the man found himself in. Both anger and compassion are related emotions: both arise from a strong sense of connection with or on behalf of others. Our care for others can inspire righteous anger toward unjust social systems and the ongoing practices of racism, sexism, and all the other –isms. This holy, compassionate anger, can inspire us to imagine and, then, enact alternatives to what’s currently unjust and harmful, whether in a family, congregation, community, or nation.
So if you ever hear or think that someone is suffering because of something they’ve done, or you think that about yourself, I’m here to say that Jesus would disagree with you. You are included as a child of God regardless of the social stigma. The stigmas of sick, poor, widow, orphan, uneducated, or whatever so-called disgrace you or others put upon you has been lifted. Jesus welcomes us all into a new community, smashing down barriers that divide. Let us, as the community of Christ, follow his radical example.
If you see injustice… whether it is starvation, mistreatment on the basis of race, gender, or ANY OTHER DESIGNATION, stand up! In God’s kingdom there are no lepers! If you’re black, white, Hispanic, native, Jew or gentile, you’re welcomed into community! Jesus doesn’t care how the authorities tell you how to act, or how the authorities divide us up. You. Are. Welcomed.
What social laws are dividing us up today? What is keeping us apart? What is holding us back? Let’s get a compassionate anger at these injustices in the world… and let’s do what Jesus would do! Let us take the example of the leper and tell the world! AMEN!
Resources
Anchor Bible Commentary, C.S. Mann “Mark” page 219.
Bruce Epperly’s commentary found at http://www.processandfaith.org/lectionary/YearB/2008-2009/2009-02-15.shtml
Dr Jeffery K London’s sermon “The Laughter Barrel” found at http://www.lectionary.org/Sermons/London/OT/2Kings_5_Laughter.htm
A leper came to him, begging on his knees, "If you want to, you can cleanse me."
Deeply moved, Jesus put out his hand, touched him, and said, "I want to. Be clean." Then and there the leprosy was gone, his skin smooth and healthy. Jesus dismissed him with strict orders: "Say nothing to anyone. Take the offering for cleansing that Moses prescribed and present yourself to the priest. This will validate your healing to the people." But as soon as the man was out of earshot, he told everyone he met what had happened, spreading the news all over town. So Jesus kept to out-of-the-way places, no longer able to move freely in and out of the city. But people found him, and came from all over.
We’re in high school forever. We’ve all had to endure the strange, awkward teenage years and go through this experience. As one person put it, High School is the mouse race that prepares you for the rat race. In fact, every ten years we gather in survivor groups and try to figure out what the heck it was all about!! I will use this shared experience--some of you are still going through this time--to talk about today’s gospel lesson. I think it’s safe to say that most of us (aside from a lucky few) were literally a sack of hormones and confused emotions. We see in the gospel TEXTS that Jesus had some confused emotions. I say TEXTS with an S, plural, meaning MORE THAN ONE TEXT. If you gather up all the ancient texts of Mark 1:40-45, you’ll discover that they say Jesus had three different reactions to the leper. The text we heard this morning says that Jesus was “moved with compassion”. I would imagine that would sound like this… “Yeah I choose..”
Another text says Jesus was moved with pity. Here I picture Jesus looking at the man, with tears welling up in his eyes saying “Yeah…… I choose.” And the third reaction is Jesus was moved with ANGER. ANGER? “OHHH Yeah… I CHOOSE!” That’s quite a variety of mixed emotions! So which is it? Compassion, pity or anger? What’s at stake?
There was A LOT at stake, not only for Jesus, but esp. for the leper. You see, people were scared to death of leprosy. And in Jesus’ time, Leprosy just meant Skin Disease. Imagine that, if you had bad acne, warts, goiters, or even what we know as leprosy, you were made into an instant outsider. The law in Leviticus was clear: “The person who has the leprous disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head be disheveled; and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ And he shall live alone, his dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Lev. 13:45-46)
So if you had leprosy you lost everything — job, family, place in the community — everything. The leper who approaches Jesus shows his desperation by breaking the law, by coming into the city, and getting close enough to Jesus that he could talk to him. He’s lucky he wasn’t stoned. I picture that Jesus is just surrounded by people and this leper shows up and the people just part away from him… they can’t believe their eyes! I’m thankful we here in the modern world don’t have any lepers… if someone like that showed up here, right now, we’d all jump up to help them, wouldn’t we? I don’t think we would… and I’m reminded of a similar story from my high school experience.
There are always groups in high school. There are the jocks, the smart kids, the in-crowd who were all beautiful and talented and everyone wanted to be like. I know most of you here were in the in-crowd, right?… lucky dawgs. I wasn’t so special... I was in the class of kids who were the ‘tweeners, those people who were somewhat tolerated by the cool kids, but there was just enough weirdness to keep us in our own separate group. Then there was the untouchable class in high school. Those are the modern day lepers of the high school culture. There was one kid in particular at my high school, his name was Bob.
Bob was from a really poor family. He was working part-time jobs all the time, so his grades suffered. He always had a worn and dirty look. I remember his ears sometimes would just be caked with dirt. He was really asocial. One day Bob is walking the halls with his books in his distracted manner and he trips and spills, books flying out. To make matters worse, it’s in front of the prettiest girl in high school, Katie.
Now Kate (my wife) didn't go to my school, so we had to play the hand we were dealt, and the queen in our deck was Katie.
Katie is surrounded by her friends who upon seeing who is lying at their feet immediately scatter and screech “EEEWW!!” An untouchable is in their midst. But Katie doesn’t flinch. She bends down and starts to collect Bob’s books. He looks around… everyone is watching the situation unfold and everyone is just as shocked as he is. He collects himself and stands up just in time to accept his stack of books from Katie. Just as Katie hands the books to Bob, she reaches out and squeezes his arm and says “It’s gonna be alright Bob.” Then she walks on and a heated discussion follows with Katie yelling at her friends and asking them why they didn’t help her. Bob goes about his day, but I noticed a little spring in his step. Now I wish I could say that there was a great change in Bob’s life from that day forward but this is a true story… and ideal endings are few and far between. Bob ended up going to the public school mid-semester, and I haven’t been in touch.
This is the modern story of what’s going on in our gospel text. Katie felt all of those emotions, I’m sure, Compassion, Pity, and Anger. Compassion at the outcast lying at her feet, pity at his helpless situation and that no one was helping him, and that filled her with anger and she acted! This too must have been Jesus’ feelings… it’s shown in his response.
Jesus’ immediate response—to touch the man and then declare his choice to heal him—reflects his belief of wholeness, embodied in his ministry of good news, hospitality, and inclusion. Jesus’ mission, as noted in John’s gospel, “I have come that they might have life, and have it abundantly” is an explicit challenge to all people who think sickness of mind, body, and spirit results from God’s will and divine punishment. Jesus NEVER blamed the victim for her or his ailment. Illness was an opportunity for healing rather than judgment, guilt, or blame.
Jesus was fully human, he could feel the exact range of complex emotions we do. Jesus felt a compassionate anger. Jesus wasn’t mad at the man or at his request. Maybe he was angry at the social situation the man found himself in. Both anger and compassion are related emotions: both arise from a strong sense of connection with or on behalf of others. Our care for others can inspire righteous anger toward unjust social systems and the ongoing practices of racism, sexism, and all the other –isms. This holy, compassionate anger, can inspire us to imagine and, then, enact alternatives to what’s currently unjust and harmful, whether in a family, congregation, community, or nation.
So if you ever hear or think that someone is suffering because of something they’ve done, or you think that about yourself, I’m here to say that Jesus would disagree with you. You are included as a child of God regardless of the social stigma. The stigmas of sick, poor, widow, orphan, uneducated, or whatever so-called disgrace you or others put upon you has been lifted. Jesus welcomes us all into a new community, smashing down barriers that divide. Let us, as the community of Christ, follow his radical example. If you see injustice… whether it is starvation, mistreatment on the basis of race, gender, or ANY OTHER DESIGNATION, stand up! In God’s kingdom there are no lepers! If you’re black, white, Hispanic, native, Jew or gentile, you’re welcomed into community! Jesus doesn’t care how the authorities tell you how to act, or how the authorities divide us up. You. Are. Welcomed.
What social laws are dividing us up today? What is keeping us apart? What is holding us back? Let’s get a compassionate anger at these injustices in the world… and let’s do what Jesus would do! Let us take the example of the leper and tell the world! AMEN!
Resources
Anchor Bible Commentary, C.S. Mann “Mark” page 219.
Bruce Epperly’s commentary found at http://www.processandfaith.org/lectionary/YearB/2008-2009/2009-02-15.shtml
Dr Jeffery K London’s sermon “The Laughter Barrel” found at http://www.lectionary.org/Sermons/London/OT/2Kings_5_Laughter.htm
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Garbage District
Here's the wiki article on the Legend of St Simon the Cobbler.
This district is named Zabaleen (Garbage collectors in Arabic), so literally, this is "Trash City". There are over forty thousand people living there.It's dusty and has narrow dirt lanes. Here families sort and recycle the garbage produced by Cairo's burgeoning population of around 25 million (which goes up 1 million every 6 months!). There is an odor about the village, but because it was mild, it wasn't too bad.
Thinking about our visit, i can't help but think of the criticism of the movie "Slum Dog Millionare" (sent to me by Mr. Chris Eden). The Slate article What, Exactly, Is Slumdog Millionaire? mentions that:
A columnist at the London Times called it "poverty porn," bringing up the question of exploitation that has largely been elided in stateside discussions.
i think it sums up our visit exactly! just like the film, it gave us overtones of a real life situation and context but it never gets into the reality and deeper issues of the context. i'm happy to have gone but realize i must do more work in trying to figure out the reality that i brushed up against.
i think this says alot about ppl's personalities as well. some will go to the movie, see it, be entertained, and then not really think about it. same with the trip. others will go to the movie or on a trip, and then chew on it, get books on the subject, really chase it down.
isn't that what we see in seminary as well? ppl going to class and either not listen, have the info go in one ear and out the other, or actively pursue the info and challenge it and be transformed by it.
some of my fellow classmates had no questions about this part of the trip.. i on the other hand, couldn't let this issue rest. I asked our tour guide, Romani, a million questions about this area, the people, the culture of the neighborhood, whether they had steady electricity (they do), and if they could move out or not (they can!). i'm not saying i'm better, just different in the reaction.
the point of this post is that the last thing we should say is "awww, they live in unhygenic conditions, let's have a pity-party." in fact, i think we should be setting up similar communities in landfills across the US! i marveled at the brilliance and ingenuity of those living in the district. it challenged my assumptions and made me want to dive deeper.
i hope it's done the same for you!
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
"Mt. Sinai"
1.12.2009
I'll let these two videos do the talking.. hopefully there'll be much discussion on these two as there's been much talk over whether Exodus factually happened or not. well, much talk among the canon anyways...
and the following thoughts with Mr Dwight and myself.
love to hear your thoughts!
I'll let these two videos do the talking.. hopefully there'll be much discussion on these two as there's been much talk over whether Exodus factually happened or not. well, much talk among the canon anyways...
and the following thoughts with Mr Dwight and myself.
love to hear your thoughts!
Monday, February 09, 2009
St Paul the Monk
Day Two: 1.11.2009
St Paul's monastery was great and we were met by Father Thomas, an archtype of holiness. He was soft-spoken, light-hearted, and genuine.
The legend of St Paul goes like this: His parents die and he's left with all the stuff and his brother. Wondering what to do, he heads to church and gets a message that he should leave it all and head
to the desert for a life of prayer and solitude. He does just that and walks into the desert and is led to a cave right near a spring. Everday a bird drops off half a loaf of bread (a reference to Elijah).
St. Antony goes into the desert and thinks he's the first monk. An angel comes to him and leads Antony 4 days across the desert to meet St Paul. that day the raven brings a whole loaf of bread... When Anthony next visited him, Paul was dead. Anthony clothed him in a tunic which was a present from Saint Athanasius and buried him, with two lions helping to dig the grave.
While St Antony is the more popular monk, Father Thomas had a great metaphor. He said that St Antony is like the body of monasticism, you can see it, but St Paul is the heart! You can't see a heart, but you know everyone that is alive has one. Monasticism is alive and St Paul is the heart of it.
St Paul's monastery was great and we were met by Father Thomas, an archtype of holiness. He was soft-spoken, light-hearted, and genuine.
The legend of St Paul goes like this: His parents die and he's left with all the stuff and his brother. Wondering what to do, he heads to church and gets a message that he should leave it all and head
to the desert for a life of prayer and solitude. He does just that and walks into the desert and is led to a cave right near a spring. Everday a bird drops off half a loaf of bread (a reference to Elijah).
St. Antony goes into the desert and thinks he's the first monk. An angel comes to him and leads Antony 4 days across the desert to meet St Paul. that day the raven brings a whole loaf of bread... When Anthony next visited him, Paul was dead. Anthony clothed him in a tunic which was a present from Saint Athanasius and buried him, with two lions helping to dig the grave.
While St Antony is the more popular monk, Father Thomas had a great metaphor. He said that St Antony is like the body of monasticism, you can see it, but St Paul is the heart! You can't see a heart, but you know everyone that is alive has one. Monasticism is alive and St Paul is the heart of it.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
The Real Red Sea
so while i was in Hurghada, Kate was in the Cayman islands.
hard life, i know.
but it kinda was... even though i was in a wonderful location, snorkeling and seeing new fish and viewing fit europeans in tiny swimwear, i still missed my wife and Boogie (our child that's still in utero). every night i feel Boogie kick, as if he/she is trying to say 'hi'. messages from another world. i missed those. plus my roomate Steve snores. but i had no reason to complain as you'll see in the video:
meanwhile, here's what Kate was doing as evidenced by the pictures her parents took.
it was nice to know that Kate just wasn't at home during this week, it really kept me from worrying too much or fighting to get in contact daily with her.
we had devotions that evening, here's what i wrote:
Praise and thanksgiving, oh God!
I have seen God working in antiquity,
in human history,
in human relationships,
in human culture.
I give thanks to the Creator as I now realize that,
I may only see God in the other,
that I must first go into Egypt,
to be called out of it. (Matt 2:13)
Uncomfort creates growth.
Growth creates understanding.
Understanding, peace.
Praise be to God! Amen
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
HOT CHICKEN SOUP!
Hatshepsut was the fifth pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty of Ancient Egypt. She is generally regarded by Egyptologists as one of the most successful pharaohs, reigning longer than any other woman of an indigenous Egyptian dynasty. She was sucessful in warfare and her trade negotiations ushered in great wealth.
so why then did her ancestors try to remove her from history?
The attempt was made to remove Hatshepsut from certain historical and pharaonic records. This elimination was carried out in the most literal way possible. Her cartouches and images were chiselled off some stone walls, leaving very obvious Hatshepsut-shaped gaps in the artwork.
Amenhotep II would have had a motive because his position in the royal lineage was not so strong to assure his elevation to pharaoh. but one should never mess with a lady as this only ups the value of articles that are in tact carrying her name.
the TEMPLE OF KARNAK was the highlight of the trip. it's the largest ancient temple of the ancient world and many of the pharoah's helped add onto the temp include'n Hatshepsut and Rameses II, my two faves.
as Craig remarked upon leaving Karnak "i will yearn for this place. I'm missing it already and i wonder when i'll be able to visit this again. I had this same feeling when i left the Sistine Chapel."
i couldn't agree with him more.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Egypt for Beginners
I just got back from Egypt for my cross-cultural experience for seminary. 18 women and 4 men, now I understand the concept of fraternity! :-) It's not a mission trip, we go to get a better handle on our culture and Christianity in the larger context of the world. Food was great and I have PLENTY of stories to share.
here are my pix from the trip.. all of them, all at once.
I call Steve "Wadi" (which is a dry river bed that flash floods every now and then) cause it fits his personality. He's an all or nothing kinda guy!
the videos are here on my Youtube channel, but i will be post them on the blog with commentary that will hopefully provide even more insight to those who wanna learn about the Egyptian culture and history. here's the video from the first day:
it's interesting when one hits the ground what initial observations one makes. here i noted that it's interesting to be "different" and stared at by little kids. we were even followed! plus add in the shock of 25 million people in one city with jet lag and holy moly! but that priviledge was with me most of the trip. some people go through their whole lives like that, always in the 'other' category. i only have a vague understanding of this and am no where near understanding what people in this position go through on a regular basis, but the shock of it was interesting and eye opening.
as Peggie McIntosh stated in her article "White Priviledge: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack"
it's one thing to see it, it's a whole other thing to experience it. granted this shock wore off after the first day and once we realized that we were 'safe' and that we were also visiting and would be going back to our culture in two weeks time.
Privilege for me is a double-edged sword. some use it to get others to be aware of it for educational purposes as well as part of a good practice of citizenship. others, however, seem to use it to guilt people and gain the upper-hand. there's a fine line between awareness of privilege and white guilt and being an ex-Catholic, i'm not a believer in guilt.
needless to say i'm aware of it, this trip sure helped that. i hope to make others aware and in this awareness, make the grounds for mutually enriching dialogues. i think this will be a main part of my future ministry, awareness and radical hospitality to all 'others' and hopefully in this dialogue and hospitality we see that there is no 'other' only us and our common humanity.
here are my pix from the trip.. all of them, all at once.
I call Steve "Wadi" (which is a dry river bed that flash floods every now and then) cause it fits his personality. He's an all or nothing kinda guy!
the videos are here on my Youtube channel, but i will be post them on the blog with commentary that will hopefully provide even more insight to those who wanna learn about the Egyptian culture and history. here's the video from the first day:
it's interesting when one hits the ground what initial observations one makes. here i noted that it's interesting to be "different" and stared at by little kids. we were even followed! plus add in the shock of 25 million people in one city with jet lag and holy moly! but that priviledge was with me most of the trip. some people go through their whole lives like that, always in the 'other' category. i only have a vague understanding of this and am no where near understanding what people in this position go through on a regular basis, but the shock of it was interesting and eye opening.
as Peggie McIntosh stated in her article "White Priviledge: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack"
I realized that, since hierarchies in our society are interlocking, there was most likely a phenomenon of while privilege that was similarly denied and protected. As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage.
it's one thing to see it, it's a whole other thing to experience it. granted this shock wore off after the first day and once we realized that we were 'safe' and that we were also visiting and would be going back to our culture in two weeks time.
Privilege for me is a double-edged sword. some use it to get others to be aware of it for educational purposes as well as part of a good practice of citizenship. others, however, seem to use it to guilt people and gain the upper-hand. there's a fine line between awareness of privilege and white guilt and being an ex-Catholic, i'm not a believer in guilt.
needless to say i'm aware of it, this trip sure helped that. i hope to make others aware and in this awareness, make the grounds for mutually enriching dialogues. i think this will be a main part of my future ministry, awareness and radical hospitality to all 'others' and hopefully in this dialogue and hospitality we see that there is no 'other' only us and our common humanity.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Feb is Egypt Month!
I will be posting videos and pix on here from my egypt trip. i hope that these will do it justice and provide some insight to an amazing country.
I hope to uncover the mysteries of Eygpt, including (but not limited to):
RAWK!
I hope to uncover the mysteries of Eygpt, including (but not limited to):
-How to walk like an Egyptian
-Who are the Copts and why do they matter
-Why you shouldn't mess with women
-Symbols and archtypes in human history
-What I look and soundlike (eek!) in video blog segments
-Why Interfaith dialogue is key to our future
-And maybe a little bit about Dino-Theology
RAWK!
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Works Cited: Books you need to read!
Thanks for sticking with me and commenting on this paper. We may not agree, and that's fine, but you know where i'm coming from here.
For the citations and futher information on this subject, check out the following resources:
Works Cited
“Arsenokoites” Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. Ed. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989. CD-ROM. Vers. 7.0. BibleWorks, 2006.
Balch, Carolyn Osiek and David L. "Families in the New Testament World." Carey, Greg. NT 113 Paul and the Early Church Course Pack. Lancaster Pa: Grade A Notes, 2008. 1-12.
Bassler, Jouette M. Navigating Paul. Louisvill KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.
Bull, John Gallagher and Chris. Perfect Enemies: the Battle Between the Religious Right and the Gay Movement. New York: Madison Books, 2001.
Campolo, Tony. Speaking My Mind. Nashville TN: W Publishing Group, 2004.
Capon, Robert. Hunting the Divine Fox. London: Seabury Press, 1977.
Crompton, Louis. Homosexuality and Civilization. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Freickson, David E. "Natural and Unnatural Use in Romans 1:24-27." Balch, David L. Homosexuality, Science, and The "Plain Sense" Of Scripture. Grand Rapids Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. 177-196.
Furnish, Victor Paul. The Moral Teachings of Paul Selected Issues. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985.
Gomes, Peter J. The Good Book, Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart. New York: Avon Books Incorporated, 1996.
Hearon, Holly E. "First Corinthians." al., Deryn Guest et. The Queer Bible Commentary. London: SCM Canterbury Press, 2006.
Martin, Dale B. Sex and the Single Savior, Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
Sampley, J. Paul. "First Corinthians." The New Interpreters Bible. Nashville TN, 2002. Volume X.
Sampley, J. Paul. "First Corinthians." New Interpreters' Bible Commentary. Nashville TN, 2002. Volume X.
Schoedel, William R. "Same-Sex Eros: Paul and the Greco-Roman Tradition." Balch, David L. Homosexuality, Science and the Plain Sense of Scripture. Grand Rapids Michigan: Eerdman's Publishing Company, 2000.
Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther. "First Corinthians." Freedman, William Foxwell Albright and David Noel. The Anchor Bible Commentary. New York: Doubleday, 1976.
For the citations and futher information on this subject, check out the following resources:
Works Cited
“Arsenokoites” Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. Ed. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989. CD-ROM. Vers. 7.0. BibleWorks, 2006.
Balch, Carolyn Osiek and David L. "Families in the New Testament World." Carey, Greg. NT 113 Paul and the Early Church Course Pack. Lancaster Pa: Grade A Notes, 2008. 1-12.
Bassler, Jouette M. Navigating Paul. Louisvill KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.
Bull, John Gallagher and Chris. Perfect Enemies: the Battle Between the Religious Right and the Gay Movement. New York: Madison Books, 2001.
Campolo, Tony. Speaking My Mind. Nashville TN: W Publishing Group, 2004.
Capon, Robert. Hunting the Divine Fox. London: Seabury Press, 1977.
Crompton, Louis. Homosexuality and Civilization. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Freickson, David E. "Natural and Unnatural Use in Romans 1:24-27." Balch, David L. Homosexuality, Science, and The "Plain Sense" Of Scripture. Grand Rapids Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. 177-196.
Furnish, Victor Paul. The Moral Teachings of Paul Selected Issues. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985.
Gomes, Peter J. The Good Book, Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart. New York: Avon Books Incorporated, 1996.
Hearon, Holly E. "First Corinthians." al., Deryn Guest et. The Queer Bible Commentary. London: SCM Canterbury Press, 2006.
Martin, Dale B. Sex and the Single Savior, Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
Sampley, J. Paul. "First Corinthians." The New Interpreters Bible. Nashville TN, 2002. Volume X.
Sampley, J. Paul. "First Corinthians." New Interpreters' Bible Commentary. Nashville TN, 2002. Volume X.
Schoedel, William R. "Same-Sex Eros: Paul and the Greco-Roman Tradition." Balch, David L. Homosexuality, Science and the Plain Sense of Scripture. Grand Rapids Michigan: Eerdman's Publishing Company, 2000.
Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther. "First Corinthians." Freedman, William Foxwell Albright and David Noel. The Anchor Bible Commentary. New York: Doubleday, 1976.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Our Modern Context: The LGBTQ Community and Beyond
Many look to Romans and I Corinthians as evidence that Paul outlaws homosexuality and that is simply not the case. Questions like “should practicing homosexuals be admitted? What responsibilities can they hold?” Paul simply never asks nor answers them. In fact it is doubtful these questions ever occurred to him (Furnish 78).
Science is still struggling as what causes sexual preferences and whether it is genetic or conditioned (Crompton). However, it is clear that homosexuality is not a conscious choice (Freickson 53). The question for our time is not whether homosexuality is “natural or unnatural” nor is it whether homosexuals should be allowed in church (the answer on this is yes) but what behaviors are appropriate in a homosexual lifestyle. There are two possible responses to this question.
A more conservative approach to the acceptance of the LGBTQ community states that they are welcomed but not affirmed. This translates to “you can be a homosexual, but you cannot practice it.” Here the concern about sex is paramount. Tony Campolo is an advocate for this method. He encourages a celibate commitment he interprets Paul as condemning all homosexual eroticism (Campolo 66). He thinks it “arrogant to contradict two millennia of church tradition” and “not to violate biblical admonitions against homosexual eroticism” (Campolo 67-68). I see problems with this interpretation.
Since science has stated that homosexuality is not a choice, I feel that Campolo is going with a “if you can’t beat them, let them in under great restrictions” method. Instead, what we should be concerned with as a church is the idea of porneia. Paul is arguing that porneia is idolatry and the sin of desire leads to excess and exploitation. The passion of desire is part of the dirty polluted cosmos in opposition to God (Martin 67). The best way to avoid the pollution is to have committed partners as safe receptacles for their sexual overflow (Martin 67).
Paul wishes all had his gift of celibacy, but it is better to “marry than to burn” (7:9). Sex is a meaningful part of marriage and Paul recognizes the mutual responsibility in matters of sex (7:3-4) (Furnish 34). Paul could not have imagined two members of the same sex entering in a sexual union as equals as his understanding of male/female expressions of gender are not our ideas of gender. I would advocate a full acceptance of LGBTQ members under the same rules that heterosexual couples are called to follow as Christians. This does not go against all of church teachings. The Roman Catholic Church has taught that sexual intercourse has a twofold purpose: for procreation and for unity of two free spirits (Gomes 171).
If Mr. Campolo and the Catholic Church argued that heterosexual couples who can’t conceive must be celibate, I would see his point, but they do not, thus revealing a hetero-bias. I argue that Christian expectations be placed on all couples, namely that married couples are permanent, monogamous, faithful, and intimate. These rules are to be followed and celebrated whether heterosexual or homosexual. This opens the door to a discussion on divorce, as almost 50% of all marriages today end in divorce. Being a child of a divorce, I would say ground this in the same relational framework Paul provides in I Corinthians, namely that relationships are never exploitive or excessive.
Same-sex relationships have the same potential for sacramental meaning and power (Gomes 172). Not all have the gift of Paul’s celibacy, but as the apostle writes to the community at Corinth, this gift should not be elevated over any other gift of God. Love and sex are both gifts from God that we should rejoice in yet are aware of the boundaries of relationships. Any exploitive or excessive actions and behaviors are to be resisted and spoken out against. This does not go against Paul or the Church’s teachings, but fulfills them.
It fulfills them by opening up the gospel to the “other” which fits the goal of Paul’s mission to the Gentiles. We as Christians are called to side with the oppressed, the exploited, and to resist excess. We are called to befriend the stranger as that which we do to the least of these we do unto Christ (Matt 25:45).
What we do have an excess of is God’s grace and love, and we are guilty of the sin of excess if we think God’s love is something we can keep to ourselves and not spread around. We are called to risk everything to gain others, not to bury or hide our gifts (Matt 25: 14-30). For our sake, for Christ’s sake, and for the sake of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, may we respond to this call.
Thanks to RJ for this video
Science is still struggling as what causes sexual preferences and whether it is genetic or conditioned (Crompton). However, it is clear that homosexuality is not a conscious choice (Freickson 53). The question for our time is not whether homosexuality is “natural or unnatural” nor is it whether homosexuals should be allowed in church (the answer on this is yes) but what behaviors are appropriate in a homosexual lifestyle. There are two possible responses to this question.
A more conservative approach to the acceptance of the LGBTQ community states that they are welcomed but not affirmed. This translates to “you can be a homosexual, but you cannot practice it.” Here the concern about sex is paramount. Tony Campolo is an advocate for this method. He encourages a celibate commitment he interprets Paul as condemning all homosexual eroticism (Campolo 66). He thinks it “arrogant to contradict two millennia of church tradition” and “not to violate biblical admonitions against homosexual eroticism” (Campolo 67-68). I see problems with this interpretation.
Since science has stated that homosexuality is not a choice, I feel that Campolo is going with a “if you can’t beat them, let them in under great restrictions” method. Instead, what we should be concerned with as a church is the idea of porneia. Paul is arguing that porneia is idolatry and the sin of desire leads to excess and exploitation. The passion of desire is part of the dirty polluted cosmos in opposition to God (Martin 67). The best way to avoid the pollution is to have committed partners as safe receptacles for their sexual overflow (Martin 67).
Paul wishes all had his gift of celibacy, but it is better to “marry than to burn” (7:9). Sex is a meaningful part of marriage and Paul recognizes the mutual responsibility in matters of sex (7:3-4) (Furnish 34). Paul could not have imagined two members of the same sex entering in a sexual union as equals as his understanding of male/female expressions of gender are not our ideas of gender. I would advocate a full acceptance of LGBTQ members under the same rules that heterosexual couples are called to follow as Christians. This does not go against all of church teachings. The Roman Catholic Church has taught that sexual intercourse has a twofold purpose: for procreation and for unity of two free spirits (Gomes 171).
If Mr. Campolo and the Catholic Church argued that heterosexual couples who can’t conceive must be celibate, I would see his point, but they do not, thus revealing a hetero-bias. I argue that Christian expectations be placed on all couples, namely that married couples are permanent, monogamous, faithful, and intimate. These rules are to be followed and celebrated whether heterosexual or homosexual. This opens the door to a discussion on divorce, as almost 50% of all marriages today end in divorce. Being a child of a divorce, I would say ground this in the same relational framework Paul provides in I Corinthians, namely that relationships are never exploitive or excessive.
Same-sex relationships have the same potential for sacramental meaning and power (Gomes 172). Not all have the gift of Paul’s celibacy, but as the apostle writes to the community at Corinth, this gift should not be elevated over any other gift of God. Love and sex are both gifts from God that we should rejoice in yet are aware of the boundaries of relationships. Any exploitive or excessive actions and behaviors are to be resisted and spoken out against. This does not go against Paul or the Church’s teachings, but fulfills them.
It fulfills them by opening up the gospel to the “other” which fits the goal of Paul’s mission to the Gentiles. We as Christians are called to side with the oppressed, the exploited, and to resist excess. We are called to befriend the stranger as that which we do to the least of these we do unto Christ (Matt 25:45).
What we do have an excess of is God’s grace and love, and we are guilty of the sin of excess if we think God’s love is something we can keep to ourselves and not spread around. We are called to risk everything to gain others, not to bury or hide our gifts (Matt 25: 14-30). For our sake, for Christ’s sake, and for the sake of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, may we respond to this call.
Thanks to RJ for this video
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Socio-Historic Context
The question of sexual ethics is not just a Christian concern. In the 1st and 2nd centuries there was much debate over this topic. What emerged were two schools of thought: Epicurus argued for sexual abstinence while Celsus argued for moderation.
Epicurus stated that “sexual intercourse is never good for the health” (Balch 3). Celsus stated sex should not be “avidly desired or feared very much” (Balch 3). In either case, the sexually ascetic were to be admired and the picture of those seeking a vision of the divine (Balch 5). Paul seems to be arguing for a Celsus view of sexuality for the church in Corinth but follows a Epicurus model. In Chapter 7, Paul speaks on the mutual responsibility in matters of sex in a share relationship between two persons of equal standing (Furnish 34). Sexual abstinence within marriage has a place within marriage but under the conditions of that it is temporary, mutually agreed upon, and for prayer (Furnish 34). Therefore when Paul speaks of what we would call homosexuality, he is speaking of what can be called the “Gentile sin” whose characteristics fit the framework of excess and exploitation and are not exclusively sexual in nature (Gomes 159).
Epicurus stated that “sexual intercourse is never good for the health” (Balch 3). Celsus stated sex should not be “avidly desired or feared very much” (Balch 3). In either case, the sexually ascetic were to be admired and the picture of those seeking a vision of the divine (Balch 5). Paul seems to be arguing for a Celsus view of sexuality for the church in Corinth but follows a Epicurus model. In Chapter 7, Paul speaks on the mutual responsibility in matters of sex in a share relationship between two persons of equal standing (Furnish 34). Sexual abstinence within marriage has a place within marriage but under the conditions of that it is temporary, mutually agreed upon, and for prayer (Furnish 34). Therefore when Paul speaks of what we would call homosexuality, he is speaking of what can be called the “Gentile sin” whose characteristics fit the framework of excess and exploitation and are not exclusively sexual in nature (Gomes 159).
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Structural Fit
I stated in my stage one essay that I feel that this pericope is not a random addition but contains the entire thematic structure of the letter in miniature. The vice list revolve around behaviors that involve excess and exploitation in action in the church in Corinth. Paul is seeking to show how these behaviors are putting one’s own interests against God’s covenantal relationship with mankind established by Jesus (Hearon 614).
The pericope is framed by Paul’s complaint of lawsuits and prostitutes, and both fall under the heading of excess and exploitation. In ancient Greco-Roman society, only the wealth and very powerful would be able to take people to court (Sampley, First Corinthians 823). This would fall under both categories as the wealthy were seeking to exploit and gain more excess against their fellow Christian. Paul seeks to remind them about what is appropriate within the community and how the church should relate to one another (as God’s chosen people) as well as with the outside world (who are unrighteous and won’t inherent the kingdom) (Sampley, First Corinthians 855). This reflects Paul’s eschatological understanding that Christians are not “of” this world (5:10) and God’s people will in fact judge the world (Furnish 70). Paul even reminds that that soon they will be judging angels (6:3).
The visitation of prostitutes also shows the concern against sexual excess. Paul’s view is that the church is the very body of Christ and in rabbinic thought that any kind of sexual union defiles the temple of God and thus the body of Christ (Furnish 33). Paul’s view is that within the body is the Spirit of Christ which is united to the human spirit so intimately that the two become one spirit just as the two bodies become on in sexual intercourse (Bassler 39). Also in Paul’s culture, the body is subject to demonic invasion and union with unbelievers not only in court but also in sex acts puts the church at risk. Paul’s Christian ethic states that bodily actions count and have relational as well as eschatological meanings for the church (Balch 8).
The structural fit of “excess and exploitation” extends beyond the passages framing the pericope. In talking about the man sleeping with his father’s wife (5:1) Paul doesn’t use purity language as one would expect an ex-Pharisee to do, but instead uses “greed” language (Balch 6). Paul speaks to the excess and exploitation going on in the church at Corinth.
Paul talks about the many diverse kinds of gifts, and that possession of one or another does not take place over another as all are from one Spirit (chapter 12). Any practice of excess and exploitation is not part of the body of Christ. Paul insists that those who are sanctified and justified (6:11) must act that way. This style of indicative/imperative rhetoric is typical language for Paul (Balch 6).
All instances brought up by Paul about what he’s heard about the Corinthians stem from his concern with relations within the community. The eating of meat offered to idols or concern about spiritual gifts or even his famous passage on love (chapter 13) all stem from a concern with exploitation and excess in relationships. Paul sees sin, whether property, sexual, other otherwise, as something that destroys the efficient functioning of the mind and harms relationships between people and God (Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther 203).
The pericope is framed by Paul’s complaint of lawsuits and prostitutes, and both fall under the heading of excess and exploitation. In ancient Greco-Roman society, only the wealth and very powerful would be able to take people to court (Sampley, First Corinthians 823). This would fall under both categories as the wealthy were seeking to exploit and gain more excess against their fellow Christian. Paul seeks to remind them about what is appropriate within the community and how the church should relate to one another (as God’s chosen people) as well as with the outside world (who are unrighteous and won’t inherent the kingdom) (Sampley, First Corinthians 855). This reflects Paul’s eschatological understanding that Christians are not “of” this world (5:10) and God’s people will in fact judge the world (Furnish 70). Paul even reminds that that soon they will be judging angels (6:3).
The visitation of prostitutes also shows the concern against sexual excess. Paul’s view is that the church is the very body of Christ and in rabbinic thought that any kind of sexual union defiles the temple of God and thus the body of Christ (Furnish 33). Paul’s view is that within the body is the Spirit of Christ which is united to the human spirit so intimately that the two become one spirit just as the two bodies become on in sexual intercourse (Bassler 39). Also in Paul’s culture, the body is subject to demonic invasion and union with unbelievers not only in court but also in sex acts puts the church at risk. Paul’s Christian ethic states that bodily actions count and have relational as well as eschatological meanings for the church (Balch 8).
The structural fit of “excess and exploitation” extends beyond the passages framing the pericope. In talking about the man sleeping with his father’s wife (5:1) Paul doesn’t use purity language as one would expect an ex-Pharisee to do, but instead uses “greed” language (Balch 6). Paul speaks to the excess and exploitation going on in the church at Corinth.
Paul talks about the many diverse kinds of gifts, and that possession of one or another does not take place over another as all are from one Spirit (chapter 12). Any practice of excess and exploitation is not part of the body of Christ. Paul insists that those who are sanctified and justified (6:11) must act that way. This style of indicative/imperative rhetoric is typical language for Paul (Balch 6).
All instances brought up by Paul about what he’s heard about the Corinthians stem from his concern with relations within the community. The eating of meat offered to idols or concern about spiritual gifts or even his famous passage on love (chapter 13) all stem from a concern with exploitation and excess in relationships. Paul sees sin, whether property, sexual, other otherwise, as something that destroys the efficient functioning of the mind and harms relationships between people and God (Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther 203).
Monday, January 19, 2009
Seriously?
Greetings from Egypt!!! lots happening and i hope to catch y'all up on it when i get back around the 23rd or so.
all i can say now is, Steelers and Cardinals? seriously?!
what a lame Super Bowl.
i miss my wife and y'all... RAWK ON!
all i can say now is, Steelers and Cardinals? seriously?!
what a lame Super Bowl.
i miss my wife and y'all... RAWK ON!
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Reasons for the Letter
Paul is well aware of the socioeconomic differences among the Corinthians (1:26). He argues that these divisions should be dealt with inside the community; a community that not only has some wealthy members but also some from the must scandalous of sinners (Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther 201). Paul writes to remind the church at Corinth (a city to be compared with our modern day Las Vegas) that they are emancipated from slavery and all things are permissible but not all things are advantageous (Sampley, First Corinthians 854).
Paul is asking the Corinthians to think about their actions and how they affect others in the community. The maintenance of personal freedom involves voluntary self-discipline (Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther 201).
Paul is asking the Corinthians to think about their actions and how they affect others in the community. The maintenance of personal freedom involves voluntary self-discipline (Willam F. Orr and James Arthur Walther 201).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)