I've been feeling well for a while now, quite good in fact. From a distance, things look so different..

Just came across a wonderful column by Dick Cavett on his personal journey with depression. Recommended reading - both insightful and witty.

Best quote:

[...] once at Oxford a languid Brit part-time professor (and full-time fop) was cooing to me at an academic cocktail party about what he called " this depression business."

"Depression," he announced, "is for sniveling little neurotics."

"How, then," I asked, "have you escaped it?"

I have no memory of what happened next.

Today and tomorrow I'm in Clearwater Beach, Florida. The beach really looked great as we drove along it. Too bad there was no time to enjoy it.

Beats Minnesota, which has been cool and rainy lately.

The New York Times Magazine has an interesting article on the social effects of pervasive internet contact of the sort created by Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Millions of young people (in the affluent west, at least) have grown up in the last decade without ever knowing a world with no internet. Tools like Facebook enable them to remain in constant interaction with hundreds, or even thousands, of 'friends'.

It's changing the people relate to each other, as well as how they think of themselves. Social scientists call the phenomenon of incessant online contact 'ambient awareness'. And as people share more of their innermost thoughts and feelings online, traditional understandings of privacy take on new meanings or evaporate entirely.

Is this the dawn of a new age of global connectedness, or a foray into technology-fueled narcissism? Read the article and decide for yourself. 

British psychiatrists claim to have discovered three particularly (post)modern forms of 'culture-bound delusion' at the intersection of mental illness, culture and society. They have termed these psychoses 'Truman syndrome', 'internet delusion' and 'climate change delusion':

Psychosis in the 21st century looks something like this: You think your every move is being filmed for a reality television show starring you, and that everyone in your life is an actor.

Or you think you are under intense surveillance by an army of spies, whom you refer to as the "www people," as in the World Wide Web, and they wiretap your furniture and appliances. 

Or else you refuse to drink water because you fear that another cup drawn from your faucet will, once and for all, deplete the world's water supply.

Some psychiatrists say these delusions represent underlying mental disorders that have been influenced by the cultural landscape.

But the obvious counterpoint is this: most of us really are under constant surveillance by cameras wherever we go, and by our web browsers when we're at home, and climate change really is a silent apocalypse unfolding all around us. So how are fears about this anymore delusional than, say, exaggerated fears of spiders and clowns?

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a delusion is a false belief not grounded in reality and held with absolute conviction despite all evidence to the contrary. Conversely, the so-called delusions described in the British report seem to be quite substantially grounded in reality, although undoubtedly exaggerated.

To ask the obvious: Why aren't the Bush administration, who've consistently denied the existence of widespread government surveillance and the reality of global climate change, considered clinically delusional, and the poor subjects of the British study considered at least somewhat sane?

Now that the RNC is over and the riot police have gone home, I guess I can at least stop wearing my tinfoil hat.

After a long pause...

Just returned to Minneapolis from an uneventful overnight trip to Raleigh, NC. Everything is so dry here in Minnesota; must be the driest summer in years.

Last night, alone in the hotel room, I had an exquisite experience of God's presence. I was able to pray, if but haltingly and self-consciously.

On the plane today, I read an article in Harpers Magazine that left me questioning the value of the industry I work in. Food for thought at a later moment, perhaps.

On the way home in a taxi - darkness begins to fall. Looking forward to a couple of hours relaxation with my man.

But first, the thirsty lawn needs watering...

I recently read and was deeply touched by Barbara Brown Taylor's Leaving Church: A Memoir of Faith. Taylor is a pastor's pastor who found herself forced to give up what she loved doing (and thought was God's plan for her life). She had become spiritually exhausted and depressed and desperately in need of renewal. Being a priest was cutting her off from God. In letting go, she released herself to rediscover her faith in God and to become more truly missional in her ministry.

I am someone who seriously considered at various times during the past 25 years entering the professional ministry. I have felt God's call on my life since I was sixteen. At first prevented from realizing my passion because of my youth, and also because I was queer, I embarked more than once on the path only to never quite find the strength (or grace) to see it all the way through.

My most recent adventure with this very compelling sense of calling came to an end last year, when my recent intention to embark on an M. Div. collapsed in a crisis of faith accompanied by a prolonged period of depression. Many a day there is when I know not what I am called to do, or whether there is such a thing as an individual calling at all.

But there's more: while I have counted numerous ordained and semi-ordained individuals among my friends (and boyfriends) I have never been able to shake a quite anti-institutional bias. I don't have much faith these days that the visible, organized church or the professional career ministry are (or really can be) agents of profound spiritual transformation in this world. The church envisioned by Jesus and proclaimed by Paul is not its clergy or other leaders and even less its buildings, operations and ministries.

Where is transformation going to come from then? Perhaps part of the answer is provided in Bill Kinnon's recent blog entry, The People Formerly Known As Congregation.

Let me introduce you to The People formerly known as The Congregation. There are millions of us.

We are people - flesh and blood - image bearers of the Creator - eikons, if you will. We are not numbers.

We are the eikons who once sat in the uncomfortable pews or plush theatre seating of your preaching venues. We sat passively while you proof-texted your way through 3, 4, 5 or no point sermons - attempting to tell us how you and your reading of The Bible had a plan for our lives. Perhaps God does have a plan for us - it just doesn't seem to jive with yours.

This position comes not from a sense of bitterness but from a grasp of a calling to the universal priesthood of believers far from realized. Apparently the post created quite a wave in the post-evangelical and emergent blogosphere. It is not long, and worth reading in full.

One blogger noted that the reason Bill's post 'hit the blogosphere with such a splash is because there are so many people who sense the validity of the issues he addresses in his post.'

There is a path of detox and deconstruction that leads to an understanding of the underlying problems in the system of church that Christianity has functioned in for many years. Most who follow this path still have an appreciation for the traditional church although they can no longer wholeheartedly embrace the packaged religious experience.

John Frye adds to the conversation with his own interesting insights on the people, like Barbara Brown Taylor and himself, formerly known as Pastor.

Gay and Dissident Bishops Excluded From ’08 Meeting

The direction the Anglican communion is taking is saddening. Bishops whose appointment, actions or 'manner of life' are considered divisive or scandalous have been excluded from invitation to the 2008 Lambeth Conference. According to the NY Times,

The archbishop of Canterbury sent out more than 800 invitations yesterday to a once-a-decade global gathering of Anglican bishops. But he did not invite the openly gay Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire and the bishop in Virginia who heads a conservative cluster of disaffected American churches affiliated with the archbishop of Nigeria. 

Openly gay bishop Gene Robinson might be at the center of this firestorm, but he is not the one responsible for sowing division and scandal in the worldwide Anglican communion. The responsibility for that lies squarely at the feet of Nigerian Archbishop Akinola and others bent on constraining the historical openness and unity of the Anglican communion by a new form of puritanical fundamentalism.

Bishop Robinson said he was extremely disappointed at his exclusion and asked in a statement, “At a time when the Anglican Communion is calling for a ‘listening process’ on the issue of homosexuality, how does it make sense to exclude gay and lesbian people from the discussion?”

The archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, who has expressed liberal views on homosexuality in the past, has been determined to keep the communion intact. In his invitation letter, Archbishop Williams wrote, “I have to reserve the right to withhold or withdraw invitations from bishops whose appointment, actions or manner of life have caused exceptionally serious division or scandal within the communion.”

How sad that the opportunity to extend grace (to both Robinson and his fundamentalist detractors) has been squandered in favor of political expediency.

Thank God Rowan Williams' ability to extend invitations is limited to ecclesial gatherings. I wonder who would be invited or disinvited to the banquet table of Christ, if invitations were in such mortal hands? As far as I know, the only criteria to get onto that list is to be thirsty for the free gift of the water of life (Rev. 22:17).

I wonder who Jesus would discriminate against?

Many signs point to a growing consciousness among the American people. I trust that this is so. It is useful to remember that history is to the nation as memory is to the individual. As persons deprived of memory become disoriented and lost, not knowing where they have been and where they are going, so a nation denied a conception of the past will be disabled in dealing with its present and its future.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., quoted in this month's Harper's Magazine.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. 

The privacy of ordinary Americans is fiercely protected in all our activities. We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans. Our efforts are focused on links to Al Qaeda and their known affiliates.

President George W. Bush, May 11, 2006, quoted by PBS' Frontline.

General warrants was part of the reason for the American Revolution. It was that the king's agent could go in and search a house everywhere, search a whole neighborhood with one warrant. And the Boston people said: "We don't like that. We'll have a tea party. We'll fight you." We said no.

Peter Swire, former White House Chief Counsel for Privacy, quoted by PBS' Frontline.

The [PBS] documentary is a straightforward indictment of the Bush administration's decision to sacrifice individual liberties for collective defense ... Big Brother is not, as once feared, a giant centralized supercomputer with a massive amount of information about every American; rather, it is a cherry-picking operation in which the government goes looking for what it wants among gargantuan corporate databanks.

Washington Post, May 15.

A hilarious depiction of an ex-gay program on TV's Southpark last night... 

This past week I’ve been reflecting on memory and remembrance. I’ve been thinking about why we remember what we do and why we forget other things. The following is a collection of musings inspired by some of my reading.

We take our memories for granted, but what if they were suddenly gone?

The movie Memento follows the story of Leonard, a man with short-term memory loss – someone for whom each moment, each event is experienced in and as a ‘now’ unconnected with previous instances of himself. He wakes up each day not knowing how previous moments led to the present he is now in. The movie runs backward from the present, each scene leading to the moment before, cause and effect turned upside down. Leonard struggles to communicate with his future self through notes and even tattoos. I can’t imagine what it would be like to suffer that kind of amnesia, not to remember, not to have a past, to only be aware of myself in the present, the here and now.

Memory is important to society as well. If our ability to bring the past to remembrance and consciously organize it into meaningful memories is an integral part of what makes us human, the more so this must be true of societies and cultures.

There are more and more indications, however, that our culture is sliding into a kind of collective amnesia. I think this is very evident in our mass media and entertainment, as well as in our churches. Who wants to hear about the past any more? How many people care whether the past is remembered? How numb are we becoming?

Dennis Patrick Slattery once visited the Terezin Ghetto and concentration camp, 25 miles north of Prague. In the May issue of The Progressive Christian, Dr. Slattery writes about being there and how it impacted him:

A fine museum there is filled with descriptions of the camp—empty suitcases, children’s drawings, musical scores, journals, shaving utensils, clothing—all serving to pull the horrors of the project out of abstraction and into fleshy reality. All of it serves to trigger a single act for those who encounter it: the act of remembering. It was the act of remembering—and forgetting—that framed what happened next.

I once visited the ruins of the Gestapo prison in former East Berlin. The exhibit and tour were entitled ‘Topography of Terror.’ Walking among the ruins and excavations created a palpable sense of the terrors that must have taken place there, of the people that suffered as a result of so great an evil. It had a lasting impact on me.

Caring is not synonymous with a sentimental feeling towards another or others. Caring is metaphysical in its depth and authenticity. If one stops caring for others, or even for one’s self, one may lose the memory of that same self. The Terezin camp is there to be remembered or forgotten. To deny its presence and its history based on feelings of discomfort about how one might respond—that is immoral.

Slattery goes on to make the connection between individual memory, memory of oneself, and collective remembrance:

We each have our own personal memory. But we also are obligated, I sense, to participate in a collective memory that lifts us out of our narcissistic tendencies and places us in a larger vessel of belonging. What an individual, a culture, a people or even a species chooses to remember and forget, where it makes the cut between what will be allowed in and what will remain outside, defines that entity even more than one’s fingerprints or biological heritage. Our identities are bound up with what we—as people and a culture—choose to forget as well as what we select to remember.

Jesus instinctively knew this, it seems. At the last supper he blessed the cup and passed it to his disciples, saying ‘Do this in remembrance of me…’ He draws us into a collective act of remembrance of his life, death and message that draws us into ‘a larger vessel of belonging,’ each time we participate in the Eucharist, and as we participate in the community of faith.

In A Generous Orthodoxy, Brian McLaren describes this deep remembering as:

…the kind of  inwardly formed learning that Jesus, as master, teaches his apprentices; a knowledge about how to live that can’t be reduced to information, words, rules, books or instructions, but rather that must be seen in the words-plus-example of the Master … one learns the way of the master most fully by being in community of other students, including those who can remember and tell the stories about members of the community long departed.

It all seems to tie together in the act of remembrance. Food for thought.

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why

by Bart D. Ehrman

I recently read two wonderful books by Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew and Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why.

Lost Christianities charts the development of different branches of early Christianity/ies, through an examination of various lost gospels and other early Christian writings. It also presents a framework for understanding the emergence of 'proto-orthodoxy', that stream which eventually triumphed over other versions and established itself (post-Constantine) as orthodox Christian faith.

Misquoting Jesus examines the development and transmission of the canonical New Testament texts, discussing the way in which thousands and thousands of copyist errors and deliberate changes accumulated over time. Ehrman explains how many of the letters traditionally ascribed to Paul are in fact later forgeries, introduced for various theological reasons. He debunks the fundamentalist notion of a received text (textus receptus) and describes the methods used by biblical scholars to reconstruct the earliest versions of the text and thus take us a close as possible to the original meaning of the biblical authors.

Both books are fascinating introductions to New Testament studies. I'd studied the literary and textual development of the Hebrew bible but had never really delved into the New Testament. As a result I've decided to learn Koine Greek, so that I can begin to read the NT in the original language.

I started self-paced lessons a few weeks ago, using Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar. I'm just starting to get into Greek grammar and nouns. I thought it would be impossible to learn a new language at this stage in my life, but it's actually progressing nicely so far. I'm looking forward to being able to perform my own exegesis.

As late fall and winter bore down on the upper Midwest, I began to lose my enthusiasm for maintaining this blog. I began to lose enthusiasm for a lot of things unfortunately. My last posting was over three months ago. I have not had much to say in the interim.

Winter here can be hard on the soul for someone used to the eternal sunshine and warmth of Australia. I don't know if the end of summer was the trigger or whether that was just a coincidence. I have to admit it's been a difficult few months. I struggled with depression and a treatment program that just seemed to keep making things worse, not better. I wrote a little about this here and here.

It seems I am through the worst of it now and regaining a sense of normalcy. I wonder to what extent the diagnosis of my depression (which was based on an 'educated' guess by a physician unsupported by any objective physiological or neurological indicators) was more a less a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once planted in my mind, it somehow tapped into deep seated insecurities or hurts somewhere inside for fuel to grow, until it began to define me. I allowed a measure of self-responsibility and ownership for my feelings to be taken away and replaced by a 'diagnosis', one that I now challenge. I might write about this a little more some time when there is more distance from the events of the past three months.

Getting off the medication was just horrible. I do not recommend ever taking a drug like Effexor; it is nasty to be on and truly brutal to get off of. There is some indication these drugs can be permanently addictive in that some people simply cannot tolerate the terrible withdrawal side effects and therefore cannot stop taking the drug. I was sick for two weeks after gradually titrating the dose, and I still have the occasional shivers as well as the seemingly permanent tinnitus that begun the day I started taking Effexor. I won't even mention the horrible emotional rollercoaster that also ensued. I'm sure we'll eventually learn more about the damaging effects of this and other SSRI drugs, and discover that far from the panacea they are claimed to be they are toxic chemicals that should never be given to humans.

In any case, this blog has been an important vehicle for me to express myself and dialogue with others. I enjoy posting and want to re-engage with the world. If anyone's reading this, take a look at some of my observations on matters spiritual and political. Feel free to add a comment. And thanks for stopping by!

A fundamentalist pastor, Vincent Fields, was invited to give the opening-day invocation before the New Jersey Senate on December 14.

But instead of giving a standard nondenominational blessing he belched forth invective about lawmakers who would dare to show support for same-sex marriage: "We curse the spirit that would come to bring about same-sex marriage. We ask you to just look over this place today, cause them to be shaken in their very heart in uprightness, Lord, to do what is right before you."

Fields said that he did not intend to speak of “gay-marriage” in his invocation.  Initially he started out praying for wisdom and understanding for the lawmakers.  Then, he says, “The Holy Spirit took over, and I had to pray what he said.”  Fields’ wife said to him afterwards, “You were being nice and tiptoeing and all of a sudden, Boom!”

Fields’ invocation caused quite a stir around the Senate.  Invocations are not supposed to be political or divisive according to Senate President Richard Codey.

Codey said that Fields had overstepped boundaries in his invocation and would not be invited back to offer an invocation in the future.

The right-wing Christian Post, whose motto is (interestingly and somewhat ironically) “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32) jumps to Fields’ defense by comparing him to a long line of ‘godly ministers’ extending all the way back to John the Baptist and the Hebrew prophets.

In his article, Mark Creech draws a connection between Fields and historic religious leaders who ‘made a cultural and religious impact’ by improving the plight of women and slaves, protecting defenseless children and providing humane treatment for prisoners and the poor (early Christian martyrs); by opposing indentured servitude, slavery, prisoner abuse and inequity in healthcare and education (John Wesley); and by working to raise the age of consent for women (William Booth).

Well, knock me down! The mean spirited attempts by Fields, Creech and co. to block equal civil protections for GLBT families seems a far cry from the progressive political engagement they claim as their supposed spiritual heritage. If they are the spiritual heirs of Wesley then I'm Barbara Streisand's love-child. Liberal mainstream Christianity, not the religious right, is the heir to the progressive spiritual tradition of the early evangelicals. Where do you see conservative evangelicals working today for universal healthcare, prison reform or women's rights?

Gay-obsessed right-wing activist Peter LaBarbera also jumped in with lavish praise for Fields. (You know you have arrived at a very special place indeed when you have LaBarbera's support.)

Many of us are intimidated against speaking out on God’s behalf, but the “gay” lobby is quite willing to fill the void — “preaching” at us with its slick but morally bankrupt message that “being gay” is naturally “who they are,” and demonizing Christians as “haters.” They can redefine words all they want, but homosexual behavior will always be wrong, and “gay pride” is direct rebellion against God.

In New Jersey, it’s easy to despair as homosexual activists claim yet another court-assisted victory, and all we have for inspiration is Rev. Fields’ Holy Spirit-led prayer. But the faithful pastor actually points the way back for our nation. Secular studies and catchy sound-bites will not bring a return of God’s blessing, but spiritual revival and repentance will — by bringing about godly humility and a desire to obey His moral laws, and creating a newfound wonder at His marvelous creation, including marriage and the family.

There he goes, pointing out the speck of pride in another’s eye while ignoring the veritable lumberyard in his own. And all in the name of ‘godly humility’.

Thus we bask in the self-congratulatory glow of a right wing media that mistakenly equates ignorance and discrimination with godliness and arrogance with humility.

In Camino Real, Tennessee Williams said “Life is an unanswered question, but lets still believe in the dignity and importance of the question.” Dignity is found in the pursuit of the important questions, not in the possession of all the answers. As a corollary, it’s possible (in fact essential) to have faith without relying on certainty as a crutch.

Jim Wallis was recently asked by the Washington Post whether he believed Jesus was the Son of God, and if so, what that means. Here is part of his response:

I believe the things that Jesus says about himself in the New Testament, and affirm what the later Scriptures and church creeds say about Jesus being the Son of God. But, that doesn't mean many of the things that Christians have too often concluded, or how we have acted on the basis of our belief.

Jesus being the Son of God does NOT mean that Christians are better, more right, more righteous, more moral, more blessed, more destined to win battles, or more suited to govern and decide political matters than non-Christians. Instead, believing that Jesus was the Son of God would better mean that people who claim to believe it ought to then live the way Jesus did and taught. And on that one, many of us Christians (who believe the right way) are in serious trouble when it comes to the way we live. Those who believe that Jesus was the Son of God should be the most loving, compassionate, forgiving, welcoming, peaceful, and hungry for justice people around—just like Jesus, right? Well, it's not always exactly so.

What a timely reminder as we enter a new year. Can we have the courage to affirm our faith without damning the beliefs (and souls) of others? Can we have a little less shrill rhetoric in 2007? I’m so tired of Christian arrogance, whether it be from the right or the left.

Jim notes that the famous evangelist Billy Graham exhibited great humility when asked about the fate of non-Christians.

One young believer stood up and asked Dr. Graham, "Since Jesus said 'I am the way, the truth and the life, and no man cometh to the Father but by me,' doesn't that mean people from other religions—Jews and the rest—are going to hell?" Billy replied, "I'm sure glad that God is the judge of people's hearts and not me! And I trust God to decide those questions justly and mercifully." The student was disappointed and pressed further, "Well, what do you think God will decide?" Graham demurred, "Well, God doesn't really ask my advice on those matters."

Maybe we could all apply that maxim. And remember to walk humbly with our God (Micah 6:8).

As my friend Matt points out, if the sin of Sodom was pride (Isaiah 3:9, Ezekiel 16:49-50), then many Christians are indeed Sodomites and should be truly ashamed.