Amy and I just returned from seeing the movie Blue Like Jazz. My pragmatic side questioned the wisdom of a five hours trip to see movie that weighs in under two hour long. I’m glad I did.

Blue Like Jazz is the highly fictionalized story of Don Miller’s experience at Reed College, drawing heavily from themes and characters found in Miller’s NYT’s bestselling memoir of the same name. The screen play was written by Miller and Steve Taylor and directed by Taylor himself.

The story begins deep in the heart the Bible Belt. Miller is a pious Southern Baptist who adores his single mother and volunteers as a youth volunteer. However, the youth group “lock-in” scene lets us know that the spiritual of Don’s tribe has its excesses. It’s filled with perfunctory confessions, high levels of sugar, and seventh graders establishing their place in the subculture with inauthentic tales of religious experience.

Don interprets an unforgivable betrayal as hypocrisy and gets himself as far from Texas as possible. He drives is ancient boat of a car to Portland, Oregon and enrolls at Reed College. Reed has the reputation for being “the most godless campus in America.” The campus hosts highly intelligent hipsters, bohemians, and hipster bohemians. Don’s cloistered world is shattered with outspoken lesbians, wacky shenanigans, and a prevailing assumption that religious fundamentalism– particularly that of a Christian stripe– is dangerous to society.

At this point the film stalls a bit, like the clumsy transmission of Don’s ancient car. Don’s worldview is being destabilized and we need the depiction of Reed to understand his culture shock. But compared to the taunt opening of the film, the momentum felt stalled. We drift from high-jinx, to anti-Christian rant, to scenes of alcohol consumption, all the while unsure how the story is supposed to advance. The repeated Rabbit and Sexy Rabbit motif felt like an inside joke for Miller fans.

Gratefully, the movie finds a higher gear and Don is propelled into conflict. Wounded by trusted curators of his own faith, he’s drawn to people that his religious tribe would brand as being sinners and outsiders. He is unable to demonize his new friends and finds himself doubting what the church taught him. If the church was wrong about his friends, then perhaps it is wrong about God as well. Continue Reading…

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: Continue Reading…

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. Continue Reading…

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. Continue Reading…

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. Continue Reading…

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.   Continue Reading…

I’m reading Victor Hugo’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame in the early mornings on the elliptical machine. The novel centers around the Notre Dame Cathedral. In fact, the church could be considered the central character in the book. The church building marks the passing of time and the tumultuous changes facing Paris. The building is timeless and unchanging, the perfect foil to the unrest that give rise to words like:

“I tell you, sir, this is the end of the world. The students were never so riotous before; it’s the cursed artillery, bombards, serpentines, and particularly printing, that other German pestilence, No more manuscripts, no more books! Printing is the death to bookselling. The end of the world is at hand.” Continue Reading…

One of my favorite childhood memories was reading through an abridged series of classic books that my parents bought me. Editors had pared through Dickens, Mellville, Hawthorne and a host of other classics to produce versions that elementary school students could stomach.

My favorite of all the books was The Count of Monte Cristo. It’s the story of Dante, who is imprisoned on a secure island prison, the Chateau d’If,  after wrongfully being accused of being a traitor. During those long years he befriends the Abbé Faria (“the mad priest”). Abbé Faria earned his name for constantly attempting to bribe the guards. He claimed to have know the where abouts of a secret treasure that he would use to reward any guard willing to risk it all to free him. Naturally, the guards dismissed his claims. So Abbé Faria passed his days secretly digging a tunnel to escape. Dante decides to help him for the lack of a better option.  Continue Reading…

Andy Crouch, author of Culture Making developed five questions that can be asked to apply the significance of any cultural artifact we encounter. I’ve found that these five questions force me to slow my emotional responses and to think more objectively about subjects that are initially alien or even offensive to me.

I thought this morning that I’d apply the five questions to the Biblical Manhood/Womanhood Movements that are currently enjoying popularity within Evangelicalism.  I’ll confess from the start that I have a low appreciation for these movements and that this will certainly color my responses. So by all means, add your perspective in the comments. My only request, besides the basic call to civility is that your responses are in the form an answer to one of the five questions. Of course, these are my responses to the questions and not Andy Crouch’s.

What do the Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Movements assume about the way the world is? 

• That God has designed set roles for men and women that are not bound by culture.
• That these roles are knowable through a careful study of the Bible.
• That the Bible was intended to provide humanity with a comprehensive moral code.
• That many of the problems in our workplace and marriages are a result of society ignoring these roles.
• Moral knowledge is clear and self-evident.

2. What does the Biblical Manhood/Womanhood Movements assume about the way the world should be?

• Men and women should be eager to subscribe to the prescribed roles.
• Christians everywhere should read the Bible and agree that there are prescribed roles for gender and agree to what those roles are.
• The Bible should be read moralistically. Continue Reading…

This morning I worked out with a good friend. Somehow, at 5 AM, the conversation turned to God. My friend has an awareness of God and Christ, but he wouldn’t call himself a Christian, I don’t think. He is aware, however, of a lot of the weirdness in our subculture. We both agreed that much of Christian music is just hard to take. In his words, there’s this false earnestness in the vocals, like the singer is trying to convince the audience of his passion. Gungor calls this zombie music. There’s something fake about the vocals. It resembles human emotion, but its not quite believable.

He’s also a therapist. In vague, non-identfying terms, he talked about a client who uses a lot of God-talk with him. This client is careful to never own the skill that he is developing. God gets all the credit. My friend’s concern is that the person isn’t going to develop an self-esteem this way. He asked me, “Are you Christians okay with using the tools God gave you to get strong? Do you have to pretend that God’s doing everything for you?”

Great questions. I told him that there’s this intellectual virus in our theology that makes us believe that spirituality is something other than being human before God. It was too early in the morning to reach for the word Gnosticism. But that’s what it is. We have this idea that being a Christian is to renounce, or at least ignore the fact that we were made from the earth.

I had a guy in my office the other week waving the Christian book of the month in his hand, telling me that we need to spend every minute of every day doing kingdom work. I guess it depends how narrow your definition of “Kingdom Work” is. His was narrow. I wasn’t able to get between him and the ideas in that damnable book so I just told him that I played the game his way for the first half of my life and now I’m in therapy.

There’s a conversation killer. Oops.

We Christians rightfully identify Jesus’ Resurrection as the pivotal moment in human history.  C.S. Lewis pointed out that Jesus wasn’t resurrected as a disembodied ghost who finally shed his fleshly corpse. He was bodily resurrected.

Flesh and spirit.

Together.

I’m soul weary of  Christianity’s that are anti-human. Continue Reading…