Category Archives: conservatism

Obama’s “Clinging” to Guns and Religion

Leave a reply

President Obama was caught on tape in the 2008 campaign speaking dismissively of those who “cling to guns and religion.” Now that was an impolitic moment for him but I agree that often people do “cling” to things, including guns and religion. I do not think he would disparage anyone for liking guns and certainly not religion. But he recognized that when people “cling” to things…or shall we stay “stuff”…it often impairs their ability to make rational decisions.

“Clinging” often belies an impoverished identity which makes an individual to compulsively place value on “stuff” (including ideas and beliefs) as a way to assuage a gnawing emptiness on the inside.

But how can “clinging” to faith be a problem; or, certainly “clinging” even to Jesus? I think a meaningful faith is very intense and passionate but if it goes beyond the pale, it poses problems and there are always warning signs. For example:

a) If your faith creates an urge to kill people who believe differently than you, I think there is a problem.

b) If your faith creates a need in your heart to intimidate, browbeat, and shame others (certainly children) into believing the way you do, there is a problem.

c) If your faith creates in your heart the belief that you have “got it right” and that everyone should believe just as you do, you have a problem.

d) If your faith creates in you an emphasis on correcting the ills of the world, while totally neglecting the ills of your own heart (which are always wreaking havoc on those nearest and dearest to you), then you have a problem.

Now these are four rules that I’ve created off the top of my head. There could be many more. Violation of these rules almost always comes from a passionate intensity which outruns the Shakespearean “pauser reason”. This is “clinging” to religion rather than having a simple faith which permeates the whole of your being and radiates out to others in your life. This is often an obsessive-compulsive disorder in full sway or even an addiction. This is at best an ersatz religion.

 

Jeremiah 17:9 and Self-deception

Leave a reply

Jeremiah 17:9 tells us, “The heart is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things.” I used to read this verse and cringe…and often in my youth  preached “hell fire and damnation” from it…but now I have the temerity to interpret it myself. I no longer think it means that we are scum buckets but it does mean that the “heart” is problematic and the reason is that it believes, by nature, only what it wants to believe. This verse is telling us that our heart can lead us but we must remember that, without a discerning spirit about us, it will usually mislead us as we are intrinsically wont to interpret things in a self-serving manner. Therefore, we can go ahead and “interpret” and make other judgments, but we just can’t be too smug and even arrogant about wielding our “truth” like a hammer. There is always more to the picture. And that is why we need others, and a spiritual context, to give us feedback about our interpretations.

And we must try to make sure they are not just like ourselves as that is not really feedback. We must think, and live, outside the bubble! Yes, history confirms there have been “desperately wicked” people and suggests there will continue to be from time to time. I suggest they they are those who are most enclosed in some “comfy” bubble, those that W. H. Auden had in mind when he noted, “We have made for ourselves a life safer than we can bear.”

Case in point—the Taliban in Afghanistan. How isolated and insular can you be? But, are we not guilty of the same, to some degree? Is that not the predicament of our two political parties, each dug in at the heels and unwilling to compromise, irresolutely sure of themselves? How insular and self-serving can you be when you make political decisions based primarily, if not wholly, on “Will this help me get re-elected?” There is reality outside of re-electability. There are things more important, such as the welfare of this country. And, the core issue is, “Do I believe in a reality (Reality) outside of myself?” Our culture often does not appear to and our politicians reflect our values.
Excerpt

Father-son Rivalry & the Chas/Andy Stanley Conflict

Leave a reply

Cnn.com had a compelling story yesterday regarding televangelist Charles Stanley and his televangelist son Andy.

The story grabbed me first because it so vividly illustrates the complexity of family dynamics, even in an evangelical faith which has historically not addressed the issue. Andy clearly had…and has…father-son issues and needed to draw boundaries with his prominent and powerful father. He needed to “differentiate”, to use a clinical term. He had to “cut the cord” from his family of origin and as a reward appears that he is being blessed in a ministry that his now his own.

I was also impressed with the humility of both men and the respect that both men maintained for each other even in extremely painful times. Usually in these “father-son” conflicts, one or both parties will dig their hills in and not budge.

Finally, I admire the faith of both of these men. Charles has suffered greatly, not just with this conflict with Andy but in the break-up of his marriage. In evangelical culture, persons and families are supposed to be squeaky clean and the Stanleys were not and are not. That is because they are human.

And, as shared in the past, I am an “ex” evangelical. But I appreciate seeing how two men could suffer like they have and maintain their faith. Sure, their faith is defensive, compensatory, and ever has its “denial system” features. So what? So does mine. So does yours. We are human and we “hold this treasure in earthen vessels.”

I encourage you to “cut and paste” the following link into your address bar and read this very moving report of an eternally recurrent tale of “father-son” power struggles.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/17/us/andy-stanley/

 

Paean to Modern Evangelical Faith

Leave a reply

I am an ex-evangelical but one who avoided “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” I am very comfortable with my non-evangelical faith and could never go back. BUT, my heart still lies with evangelical emphases, most specifically an appreciation for the Bible. And I take great heart to have discovered in the past year or so a lot of evangelicals on the blog-o-sphere who have found that they can make adjustments to the modern world and not jeopardize the basics of their faith. God does not need any of his followers to bury their head in the sand, refuse to approach the scripture and faith with intelligence and critical thought, and rely with hackneyed bromides like, “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.”

Here I share from one of these bloggers who this morning was high-lighted by Cnn.com, and you might have to “cut and paste” into your browser:

My Take: The danger of calling behavior ‘biblical’

“Our Long National Nightmare is Over”

Leave a reply

These were the words of President Gerald Ford in his speech after Richard Nixon stepped down from the Presidency in 1973  These same words come to my mind yesterday morning after the election tumult had ended, though I do not think the “nightmare” is completely over.

I am so very relieved with O’Bama’s win and with some other causes that I was in favor of around the country. And part of me wants to gloat, I guess, but I’m glad that I’m mature enough to not even really want to. The issues the we face as a culture just do not permit childish behavior such as gloating, even for “no-bodies” like myself. I think it is very important that we “no-bodies” realize that our behavior and attitude are very important just as it is with the “some-bodies” of our world. For even we “no-bodies” must realize that ultimately we too are a “Some-body” and that our behavior and attitude contribute to the karma of the world. Let me explain it one other way. I am a “small-fry” in that I’m not important so why would it matter what I think or feel? Well, I think it does. Each of us contributes to a collective consciousness in some infinitesimal way.

I see some evidence that the “Big fries”, the “Some” bodies are responding to this election with graciousness. It is so important that a spirit of consideration and respect begin to take place in our country, especially in its leadership. Romney certainly was gracious in his concession speech and O’Bama indicated a willingness to do the same. I can imagine how devastating this loss was for Romney and I hope he has the courage and humility to go through the grieving process, then get on his feet, and step to the plate and find his place in our country’s political leadership. He is now a national leader and we need him. I fear his party will savage him, blaming him for the loss, when the reason for the loss went far beyond their choice of candidate.

“Just get over yourself” is something I have to tell myself almost daily when often I find myself taking myself too seriously and making poor choices in behavior and attitude. If our political leadership could do this from time to time I think our current political morass could be worked through, that our leaders would be able to make decisions without prostrating themselves to the alter of “electability”.

 

Lessons from the School Yard

Leave a reply

It was a crisp October Monday morning in 1961 in Magnet Cove, Arkansas. The mighty Magnet Cove Panthers had fallen ignominiously (again) the previous Friday night en route to another 2-8 season, Orval Faubus was championing our racist raison d’etre each day, and that damn Catholic John F. Kennedy was in the White House. But, it was morning recess time and the BMOC (Big Man on Campus) in the 3rd grade announced to the boys on the playground, “Everybody with high top boots run with me and let’s chase the girls.” Oh, was I so proud! I had high top boots and they were pretty new! Now, I was not used to being in the “in crowd” due in part to my own alienation, certainly not irrelevant to my perception that I was from an impoverished family. But, on this autumn morning, by damn, I HAD HIGH TOP BOOTS! And for a couple of weeks this social agenda predominated in that class of 27 kids and I had the delight of belonging! (By the way, the girls were meeting secretly at the same moment nearby and answering the question, “What are we gonna do today” with, “Well, let’s go out there and be cute and let the guys chase us! You are right. Nothing has changed in fifty years.)

Well, in the following years, the BMOC’s would change, usually with a bloodless coup d’etat, and the agenda would change and even mature with age. But the pattern was set. We boys and girls learned the importance of determining which category we belonged in, where the power lay in the social contract, and hooking our wagons to the one that seemed most palatable and which one was most likely to predominate.

Today I belong to several group (even though I’m still alienated as hell!) For example, I am a Democrat, I’m a heterosexual male, I’m a licensed counselor, and I’m an Episcopalian…to name just a few. But, I’m far removed from the playground and my affiliation has gone far beyond the “high top boots” phenomena. My identity supersedes these superfluous labels. Each of them are important to me, but there is something (might I say Something, or even “Someone”) more important—we are all “one flesh” and…if I might segue…, as Rodney King said, “Why can’t we all get along?” The categories are so ephemeral.

Yes, Chris Christie is Fat!!! So What?

Leave a reply

Chris Christie is Fat!

Yes, he is fat! AND, he has the courage to live with that, hold his head high, do his job to the best of his ability, and be happy with himself. He does not know that his size is supposed to have shamed him into submission and that he is to crawl about meekly on this earth taking whatever scraps are offered him.

And then, he “knocked one out of the park” by “palling” around with the arch enemy of his Republican party, Barack O’Bama, deigning to lay aside political risks and working with the president to help his people deal with this horrible weather tragedy in New Jersey and the Northeast. I personally think he has fatally wounded himself with the conservative extreme as they are enraged that he would break ranks and fraternize with the enemy. Those extremists demand that everyone on their team march lock-step in their pursuit of their raison d’etre—defeat of Barack O’Bama. (If they would lay that aside, and merely promote their very legitimate political agenda and hope to win the election on its merits, they might discover that they could have a life!)

Now I am merely giving credit where credit is due. I’m a liberal Democrat and feel intently about its agenda and Christie is on the other side—he is one of the “bad guys.”! (wink, wink!) But I’m very impressed with his testosterone (I like to call it “male spheroids”), not merely in this example but on other occasions where he has not cow-towed to the party line. We need other people in both parties to demonstrate this kind of courage and merely “do the right thing” at times.

No, I do not think he is being “objective.” He has his motivations, whatever they might be and you can bet they are in part selfish. He is human. “Let him who is without guilt cast the first stone.” But, of course, here lies an essential problem in our political culture, there are so many people who know without a doubt that they are “without guilt” and therefore authorized to “cast the first stone.” Their capacity for self- awareness is greatly diminished, to say the least.

 

Richard Mourdock’s God

1 Reply

Richard Mourdock’s observation about God and rape speaks volumes about himself and the inner machinations of his own heart. I have suggested before that our view of God speaks much more about our own heart than it does about God. Mourdock’s God is confined to time and space and He is meticulously, even mechanically in control. Therefore if conception occurs in rape, then God must will it. His God is a really big guy sitting up on some celestial throne, very far away but definitely “out there” in terms of time and space, and pulling the strings of our day to day life.

I believe strongly in God. But I don’t believe in my belief of God. God is beyond my belief. My belief is a work of faith. My faith has deepened once I came to realize the limitations of my own reason and its ability to grasp and own God. But I must reiterate that I am not disavowing the role and use of reason. It is a gift from God and must be used. But it can easily be misused to contrive a belief system which is actually only a reflection of our childish, self-centered ego. “They call it reason, using light celestial; just to outdo the beasts in being bestial.” (Goethe) Or, another quote the author of which I no longer recall, “Our thinking is the belated rationalization of conclusions to which we have already been led by our desires.”

 

Bonheoffer, the Fall, & Time/Space Continuum

Leave a reply

(I posted this yesteday but forgot to include a title!)

 

Several days ago I discoursed re the time/space continuum and the human dilemma of being trapped (i.e. “lost”) therein. This is a very abstract notion and I recognize it probably sounds like a lot of non-sense to some. But I’d like to refer you to the work of Dietrich Bonheoffer who was one of the noted theologians of the 20th century; I think I could even safely place him in the evangelical pantheon of that era. In his book, Creation and Fall, he interpreted Genesis 1-3 and explained the extent of “the fall” in a similar vein to how I did in the aforementioned posting.

He posited the notion that the fall left mankind in this “time-space continuum” and that reason is itself a reflection of this fall and is intrinsically tainted by the experience. But mankind thinks he can “think” his way out of this existential predicament, not realizing that ultimately faith and hope have to have a role in the process if his rational quest is to have any ultimate meaning. Here Bonheoffer describes the circular reasoning that is the essence of this narcissistic endeavor:

…the thinking of fallen man has no beginning because it is a circle. We think in a circle. We feel and will in a circle. We exist in a circle. We might then say that in that case there is a beginning everywhere. We could equally say that there is no beginning at all; the decisive point is that thinking takes this circle for the infinite and original reality and entangles itself in a vicious circle. For where thinking directs itself upon itself as the original reality it sets itself up as an object, as an object of itself, and therefore withdraws itself behind this object again and again—or rather, thinking is antecedent to the object which it sets up.

Now I know this is convoluted. Let me try to interpret what he is saying. Bonheoffer is is echoing the words of Paul Tillich who said that “A religion within the bounds of reason is a mutilated religion.” And neither of them was disavowing reason (thinking); they were merely emphasizing its limitations. As long as mankind can keep his experience “reasonable” then he is safe in his illusion that he is in control. Spiritual teachers over the centuries have taught us that the experience of being “out of control”…momentarily, at least…is redemptive as it is in those moments that we can find an Anchor that transcends the mundane which is paradoxically immanent therein. But it/He is found only when we relinquish control and to the degree that we have done so.

And it is this “out of control” moment that teaches us the presence of a Beyond which graces the whole of our day to day life, a Beyond that gives meaning to all facets of human experience, including reason! Without this knowledge…and experience of this Beyond…we are reminded of the words of Goethe in Faust, “They call it Reason, using light celestial; just to outdo the beasts in being bestial.”

And again I am brought to a perfect object lesson in my country, the United States, and its current political impasse. We have so much confidence in “reason”, in “common sense”, in our political, military, and economic might. But we don’t pay any attention to this “Beyond” to which I make reference. If our leaders would pay the faintest attention to this Ultimate, they would at least be able to cooperate with each other well enough to address our issues like mature adults and not like two school-yard groups of thugs. Ultimately, our national issues…just like our personal issues…are resolved in the realm of the Spirit.

Paul Tillich and “The Courage to Be”

Leave a reply

 

Change is hard. Change is so hard that most people solve the problem by opting
to not change, clinging to the routine of their life even if it is most painful.
People prefer to follow the admonishment of Hamlet and “cling to these ills that
we have than fly to others that we know not of.”

This is true individually and collectively. Social scientists teach us that
during times of social transition anxiety is very intense sometimes the
society’s adaptations are not ideal. Paul Tillich, a noted theologian from the
20th century, declared in The Courage to Be (1952) that the anxiety arises from
the threat of “non-being” and that this threat is found with conservative and
liberal extremes.

It is significant that the three main periods of anxiety appear at the end of an era. The anxiety which, in its different forms, is potentially present in every individual becomes general if the accustomed structures of meaning, power, belief, and order disintegrated. These structures, as long as they are in force, keep anxiety bound within a protective system of courage by participation. The individual who participates in the institutions and ways of life of such a system is not liberated from his personal anxieties but he has means of overcoming them with well-known methods. In periods of great changes these methods no longer work. Conflicts between the old, which tries to maintain itself, often with new means, and the new, which deprives the old of its intrinsic power, produce anxiety in all directions. Nonbeing, in such a situation, has a double face, resembling two types of nightmare (which are perhaps, expressions of an awareness of these two faces). The one type is the anxiety of annihilating narrowness, of the impossibility of escape and the horror of being trapped. The other is the anxiety of annihilating openness, of infinite formless space into which one falls without a place to fall upon. Social situations like those described have the character of both a trap without exit and of an empty, dark, and unknown void. Both faces of the same reality arouse the latent anxiety of every individual who looks at them. Today most of us do look at them.

Non-being is merely the emptiness that we find when we lose the “fig leaf” (or “ego identity”) that we donned in our Garden of Eden.  And those “fig-leaves”, be they conservative or liberal…or at any point between the two extremes…are very difficult to let go.