Last week, at the Festival of Faith and Writing I had the privilege of listening to Francisco X. Stork lecture on how he builds the provocative characters in his books. He revealed that that his vocation was “teacher.” The key for the success of his books was to find a way to teach teens life lessons with out being preachy. He told this story to explain how it works:

“Decades ago, a group of scientists were testing the strength of glass windshields for airline jets. The airlines had complained when geese collided with the windshields it would shatter, sending the plane’s passengers to their death. This was not best practice. (more…)

My feeble brain overheated Saturday afternoon at precisely 2:23 PM at the Festival of Faith and Writing. Jonathan Safran Foer philosophized and Marlynee Robinson rhapsodized. I’d taken in sessions on young adult fiction and memoir. Each synapse in my noggin was frayed by the foot traffic of theory, Cafe Americano, and conversation.

I returned to home base– The Burnside Writers’ Booth– for the safety of familiar faces.  Kim Gottschild, a gifted memoirist, was faithfully working the table and I offered to give her a break.

Sitting at an exhibitor’s table at a writing convention at faith-based conference makes one a sitting duck. There’s the potential for being subjected to    having a paranoid from a cabin somewhere on outskirts of St. Paul pitch you his book on Biblical ufology. Or that woman brushing off the hair of seven Angora cats from her Noah’s Ark vest as she explains how Mennonite romance novels are more erotic than their Amish counterparts and still yet remain within the bounds of Christian propriety.

Aware of these risks, I sunk into my folding chair. The ability to sink into a folding chair should be an indicator of my level of exhaustion. My brain was Silly Putty that could not be pressed into newsprint one more time.

Sure enough, writers visited our booth. But good writers. Intelligent, thoughtful, and witty thinkers, each of them.

The conversation swirled from economics to politics to social justice to theology. My tired brain grumbled at first, but found itself sucked into the conversation. I asked several of these thinkers to consider writing for Burnside. Any one of these authors would be a welcome addition to the Burnside team.

After several of these conversations I noticed two things. Each of these writers had a red sticker on their name tag and each was a woman. (more…)

“Double Skinny Cafe Latte– Beetle Juice, please.”

“Sorry, first day. Didn’t quite catch that.”

“No prob. Coffee has its own language.”

“Truth. Don’t drink the stuff, myself. I’m a Mountain Dew man, myself.  Buying is straight forward. Well, except before the releases of Halo. Double Skinny?”

“Double Skinny Soy Cafe Latte– Beetle Juice please.”

“Skinny?”

“Skim Soy Milk please. Every calorie counts.”

“…Beetle Juice?” (more…)

There’s an old song, one that I sang in church during my college years, that went like this:

“Give me Jesus,

Give me Jesus,

You can have this old world,

Just give me Jesus.”

It’s an older tune that seems to get dusted off every ten years or so. It’s the torch song of the soul-weary who long for nothing more than to feel intimacy with their Savior. I appreciate that sentiment and share it often.

It just might not be what Jesus has in mind. He was the one who said, “The meek will inherit the earth.”

Whooda thunk it?All God’s children are at the party and Jesus Christ shows up with the white elephant gift no one wants to go home with. Awkward. (more…)

We’re teaching Cole to ride his bike without training wheels. Last night it clicked and he was able to balance on his own and go. It was absolutely nerve wracking to watch. His ability to ride in a straight line and accelerate outstrips his skills at steering and braking. He’s a missile without a guidance system.

He relied on brick walls, monkey bars, and a bed of wood chips to stop him. When that failed, he slipped on the asphalt.

Again and again.

My attention was fixed on his bird-like frame. Ankles bent bent oddly between pedals and gears. Shins. Tears were well earned but Cole grinned toothy grins. He was riding a bike and he knew it.

There’s a certain age a we get to when there’s a temptation to declare that we’ve felt the bruise and scrapes that accompany failure enough. We trade our bikes in for Barcaloungers (more…)

It’s been a long time since I’ve made an impromptu road trip.  The one I recall was from Chicago to Denver and back, all in a weekend. Three drivers. Mountain Dew. And we drug a muffler the last two hours of the trip.

Over twenty-years and several gray hair later, Amy and I are making a much less ambitious one, but a road trip nonetheless. We’re making a five plus hour to see a movie that doesn’t run two hours.

Middle-age rebels, we are.

So why sink a day into seeing an indie film about a college kid who leaves the Evangelical bubble has his faith shaken in college? Here’s a few quick reasons: (more…)

I wasn’t planning on a follow up post to yesterday’s thoughts on reading the Bible moralistically. However, this question was posed to me on Facebook:

“I must be a bit of a simple guy, but I fail to see the danger in looking to scripture to provide a reliable moral foundation. The bible obviously, speaks to moral issues. If it can’t be trusted to provide an accurate moral foundation, what’s the point? The fact that the desire to find moral truth in scripture has led to extreme views, positions, etc in the past doesn’t mean that the desire is flawed only that it was poorly executed. What’s the alternative? Pick and choose the moral positions in scripture that appeal to our individual sense of right and wrong? Are you suggesting that there are no moral rights and wrongs or simply that we can’t know them or that they can’t be known from scripture. I’ve generally found the position of moral relativism impossible to defend. Is that the position you’re endorsing?”

These are questions worth addressing.

The quick answer to the question is “am I a moral relativist?” is “no.” I believe in absolute truth. Synthetic a priori knowledge even. I know, I’m a caveman in that regards. I’m not questioning that the Bible is our moral authority. I was trying to address just how the Bible asserts its moral authority over us. I’ve toyed with several approaches to answer this question. Most of the approaches would require multiple posts and technical jargon that would bore even Jesus, I think.

Let me try a story (I’m not sure if this illustration is mine or if I lifted it somewhere. If so, tell me who and I’ll quickly credit the proper person) and see if that helps…

Imagine a father who gathered his family around the table each day and handed down strict marching orders for each family members. The father tells the wife to button that top button and get exactly 1/2″ of hair cut at the salon.

“A tender roast, served promptly at 6 PM this time.”

He tells the son that he must tuck that shirt in and that the B in science was unacceptable. The father hands him a list of approved and unapproved friends.

“I expect you to refer to this list during your lunch period. It’s for your own good.” 

He turns to his preschool aged daughter and scolds her for coloring outside of the lines.

“And for God’s sake, could you use primary colors? Those dark tones are depressing.” 

By now, you’ve (hopefully) developed a negative opinion of that father. “Control freak”, “oppressive”, and “abusive” all come to mind. (more…)

Is it okay for a pastor to wonder if the way we handle the Bible doesn’t make God grind his teeth a bit?

I’ve mentioned in other posts that I’m sorting out my spirituality and trying to work some (much) legalistic thinking out of it. Last week I read A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard and the Christian Life by Don Veinot, Joy Veinot, and Ron Henzel. In my late teen and early college years I worked in at  Christian Camp that prided itself in using Gothard’s Teachings as the guiding principles of their ministry and life. Going back and reading this book reminded me of the relationship they had with the Bible. They read the Bible as if its primary purpose was to serve a highly detailed moral handbook.

Four steps to root out bitterness.

Three steps to anchoring your self worth in Jesus. 

Goals that any one can get behind. Never mind that while the Bible warns about the dangers of unforgiveness and tells us to place our identity in Christ, the book conspicuously lack a by the numbers methodology.

Somewhere along the line, Gothard… and the Ranch…, got lost in their list and began to read the Bible as medical and dietary guide. Gothard started publishing pamphlets about the dangers of the medical establishment. Bill decided that the Bible should be read as a medical handbook. He started finding homeopathic cures in the Bible, mandates about male circumcision, and restrictive guidelines for how often and when married couples could sheet dance. (more…)

I’m getting excited. In one week, I’ll be at the Festival of Faith and Writing at Calvin College. The speaking line up is fantastic and I’m fretting about the tough decisions I’ll be making regarding which workshops I’ll end up at. The caliber of the writers is impressive to the point that I plan on stapling one hand over my mouth so I don’t make a fool of myself.

But I’m mostly excited about meeting a community of writers that I’ve known for years online. For several years, I’ve been a contributing author to The Burnside Writer’s Collective. Burnside is impossible fusion of Christian authors that hail from just about every conceivable wing of the church. The make up of the writers are conservative and liberal, both politically and theologically. There have been days when I’ll read a post from one of my compatriots and have thought “you believe what?”

And somehow we all get along, usually swimmingly, but there’s been the occasional offline squirmish. (more…)

I  read The Hunchback of Notre Dame  few year back and I’m getting the itch to make another lap through Victor Hugo’s masterpiece. The novel is long but well worth the offer. When Hugo wrapped up his novel and doled out justice to his various villains, he assigned radically different judgments. The monstrous arch-deacon is sent falling from the height of the cathedral to his death. Hugo described the long descent in graphic detail, completely with arms flailing and bones breaking against various slopes on the way down.

Hugo handed out his other antagonist, Phœbus de Châteaupers, a far different brand of justice.

Phœbus entered the story as Esmeralda’s rescuer. The story progressed and exposed his moral emptiness.The Gypsy became infatuated with him. Phœbus was engaged to be married but looked for opportunity to lie with the wildly beautiful dancer.  Later, Esmeralda is framed for attempting to murder him. He had opportunity to exonerate her but he displayed criminal indifference. He would have had to admit his own infidelity to prove Esmeralda’s innocence.

Hugo’s pen judges Phœbus de Châteaupers concisely: “Phœbus de Châteaupers also came to a tragic end: he married.”

Hugo sentenced Phœbus to a loveless marriage. He was engaged to a socialite with the goal of using her money and status to cement his position in society. Phœbus get his wish, but there was no love in his marriage. Fluer-de-Lys noticed the attention Phœbus gave Esmeralda and became insecure. Emotional distance sprung from doubt and Fluer-de-Lys became a spiteful wife. Phœbus’ sentence was to live with the woman he hardened.

…

Phœbus is a reminder that we married people live with the spouse that we help mold.   (more…)