January 2008 Archives

The Reagan and Bush era is called in Balmer's book, God in the White House, "Listing Right." I'm not sure about the personal faith of either GHW Bush or Ronald Reagan, but it appears to me that both of them were willing to play the card Jimmy Carter played so well:

The faith card.

Now: a sensitive topic for me, but one I'd like to learn from in conversation. How genuine do you think the faith card is for our political candidates? Avoid words like hypocrisy, jerk, disingenuous ... and instead stick to some facts, appointments, decisions, etc.. What do you think? Do you think the entrance of religious rhetoric into the campaign, especially since Carter, has been good or bad?

Jimmy Carter announced he was a born-again Christian and, though I think he was then more born-again than he is now, his Christian commitments have always been to the front of his statements. He is now a moderate-to-liberal Southern Baptist. As we write this there are plans for the New Baptist Covenant surrounding Carter.

But what about Reagan and GHW Bush? Here are some of Balmer's conclusions:

Reagan experienced a born-again conversion as a child at a Disciples of Christ church; went to a Disciples college (Eureka). These are credible faith elements of his journey to the Presidency. Reagan attracted the conservative evangelical vote in spite of his divorce and re-marriage (which today seems trivial compared to what Balmer had been the status quo -- which in my own experience is about the time the evangelical movement became more tolerant of divorce and remarriage) and in spite of the fact that he and Nancy rarely attended church and in spite of the fact that Nancy consulted an astrologer.

Balmer is keen also to show that the Reagan's own decisions, in spite of appointing some clear evangelicals (Koop, Watts), did not follow through on the expectations of the Religious Right. Balmer has some telling quotes from Paul Weyrich to this effect.

GHW Bush is known for having switched from campaigning against Reagan, where he differed both on abortion and on Reagan's "voodoo politics," to becoming his right-hand man as VP. Part of this switch involved Bush being more vocal about his faith. Bush surrounded himself with conservative evangelicals.

Balmer concludes this chp with a reflection on the need for a common enemy for a movement to gain strength -- when the Iron Curtain collapsed there was the need to find a new enemy. Enter Clinton and Bush.

Out in the City of Rain (Seattle), our friend Eugene Cho at Q Cafe (and pastor at Quest Church), there is a coffee blend you just might want to try. It is called Zoka, 2008 Coffee Roaster of the Year. We are sampling Colonel Fitzroy's Blend ... just the grinding of it gave off an aroma that was delightful and inviting. I'm biased: anything that comes from a cafe called "Q" has something going for it but this coffee is genuinely a great brew. [OK, I think I'm mistaken: Q Cafe is brewing Stumptown. So what's the story with this Zoka that Eugene sent my way? Can you get Zoka at Q?] Big question:

What's the best coffee out there? Here is my list ...

1. Intelligentsia
2. Chestnut Hill Coffee Co
3. Zoka
4. One Village Coffee
5. ???

OK, now stepping up to the plate in the kingdom game is a notoriously disputed text. Here it is in context: 11 I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it. 13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. 15 He who has ears, let him hear..

The Lukan version of this is slightly different and here it is: 16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law..

1. Unquestionably, the kingdom is present in this text.
2. A timeline makes this clear: "from the days of John Baptist until now, the kingdom has been forcefully advancing." That means it has been storming its way along since the days of John. But this means John was not really part of the kingdom since Jesus says that those who are "least" in the kingdom are "greater than he." There is a definite time change, not so much with John -- who is the hinge -- with Jesus. It is with Jesus that kingdom arrives in some sense. (How? we'll get to this below.)
3. Kingdom's arrival means kingdom's opposition. The forceful men, so I think, are best typified by Herod Antipas who put John to death. These folks are trying to stop the kingdom. This means we have a clear shot at Roman empire and complicity with Jewish leaders.

4. Now Luke's Gospel adjusts this slightly -- and speculating here what the original Q looked like probably will win no converts -- but it is clear that Luke's Gospel presents the advancing of the gospel under the image of evangelizing and preaching the good news.
5. Then Luke changes the response from one of opposition to one of aggressive penetration into that kingdom circle.
6. The kingdom of God here describes the circle around Jesus who are right now responding to his good news (evangelism), following him, growing with him, and adding one person at a time to his circle of followers.

Tom Wright's Surprised by Hope is the closest thing to C.S Lewis' Mere Christianity I have seen. Sure, it's a different kind of book, but it has the same level of immediacy and insight. Chp 4 is called "the strange story of Easter." Here are some highlights:

The lack of consensus in the Gospel accounts ... what do these differences indicate? "Indeed, they are a reasonable indication that something remarkable happened, so remarkable that the first witnesses were bewildered into telling different stories about it" (53).

In other words, the confusion indicates a lack of collusion. How do you deal with the variations in the Gospel accounts: one young man, two young men, one angel or two angels? That sort of thing.

Four strange elements:

1. The strange silence of the Bible in the resurrection accounts. No reflection like this: "See here, this fulfills Isaiah; and see there, that's Hosea." None of this. (By the way, that's not a quote from Tom Wright.)
2. The strange presence of women as the principal witnesses.
3. The strange portrait of Jesus himself. Thus, "... the one thing you would expect to find is the risen Jesus shining like a star" (55).
4. The strange absence of the future Christian hope. Nothing about "So, then, we too will be raised" or "See now, you needn't fear." (My prose, not Tom's.)

Here is where Tom's prose got me: "But this is like what you get when different artists paint portraits of the same person. This painting is certainly a Rembrandt; that is indubitably a Holbein. The touch of the individual artist is unmistakable. And the yet the sitter is fully recognizable" (57).

Tom gives some standard alternative explanations and then launches into a little bit about historiography (and in this book this section stands out as difficult to follow).

At the invitation of Pastor Phil Bauman, pastor of United Church of Christ Medfield MA, Kris and I spent last weekend on Cape Cod -- and loved it! I'd like to start mentioning names, but just can't. Too many to name. But to one and all -- our blessings and gratitude.

My first observation about UCC Medfield: the church group with whom we met, and to whom I spoke, and with whom we conversed for two days, is in every sense of the expression "beyond categories." These folks are Christians -- emerging before emerging, ecumenical and evangelical, exploring, thinking, creating, and serving. We felt like we were at home with these folks -- well, yes, we could have had some disagreements but who needs it?

We met with some of the pastors and leaders of UCC Medfield, including Liz Aguilar -- a North Park grad -- and Susan Holbrook and Wendy Ludwig. Perceptive, solid folk. I really liked the senior pastor, Phil Bauman -- the guy was a linebacker at the Air Force Academy and reads voraciously. We also got to meet his wife, Beth, and their two daughters. (I'd like to say more, but I've already said to Phil.)

Before I say another word, read this: I was part of the team that was the Charades Champs. Saturday night, at the leadership of Mark, we had a riot playing charades. I was with a group held together by two young men -- about 13 -- Ben was one and I think Steve the other. After the first round of competition, we solved every clue. Most of them within 15 seconds!

Our retreat was at Ocean's Edge, just west from Paraclete (my publisher) and Community of Jesus, the community behind Paraclete. We were on the beach, where we encountered ice salt for the first time, and where we encountered Cape Cod Cold ... penetrating cold, chill, to the bone.

It was our first time on the Cape so, of course, we had to ask where Chappaquiddick was -- which wasn't near us. The Cape is lonelier at this time of year, but we heard enough stories about traffic to know our next visit will be in the off season -- maybe next September!

UCC Medfield showed us a generous hospitality and intelligent conversation, wrapped up in Boston humor and -- oh don't forget this -- the chowda. Out of this world.

Hey Shubh: I know business well -- "Buy low, sell high!"