Early Seventies SFF Book Covers

Does anyone else recall the era when book covers looked like this one by Fred Winowski:

Dispossessed Book Cover

Dispossessed Book Cover by Fred Winowski – Source ISFDB.org

Here are a couple more examples that I remember from my childhood.  I always loved this cover:

Pavane Book Cover

Pavane Book Cover – Source: http://people.uncw.edu/smithms

and it’s very different from the one by Leo and Diane Dillon.

This one has a similar feel to me.

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4090/5017150353_401b751713_o.jpg

Parsival Book Cover – source: Flickr

as does its sequel, by David McCall Johnston:

Grail War

Grail War Book Cover by David McCall Johnston – Source: Amazon.com

And the classic Earthsea cover by Pauline Ellison also seems related:

http://scv.bu.edu/~aarondf/earthsea/images/esea-pe-woe.jpg

Wizard of Earthsea Book Cover by Pauline Ellison – source: Aaron Douglass Fuegi

I’ve asked around among my colleagues who do cover art, and no one has a name for this style or genre.  I have deeply positive, nostalgic associations with these covers (and these books) – and I’d love to find more covers in the same style.

Does anyone have any relevant information?

In my recollection the style gradually transitioned into work like Yvonne Gilbert’s (which I also love):

http://scv.bu.edu/~aarondf/earthsea/earthsea.html

The Farthest Shore Book Cover by Yvonne Gilbert – Source: Aaron Douglass Fuegi

 

The Perfect Gadget Bag

Like most technology nerds, I have been on a lifelong quest to find the perfect messenger/gadget bag.  For me, it needs the following features:

  • large enough for everything I want to carry, but no larger
  • high durability
  • lots of pockets and organizers
  • convenient access to everything I use often
  • no Velcro (it’s loud, and it wears out)
  • a large water bottle holder
  • an aesthetic that doesn’t look like a purse (even if I use it as one)

I’ve tried bags from Maxpedition, Tom Binh, REI, and several other manufacturers.  Many of them have come close – but none of them have checked off every single box, until now.  After some research I found the Tablet Messenger V.3 by Skooba Design.  Combined with my Surface Pro (reviewed here) as my primary mobile computer, it is the perfect bag!

Here’s the photo from the Skooba website that persuaded me to by the bag:

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Stock Photo

source: skoobadesign.com

 

I like the classic, messenger look of the bag, and the one that arrived look exactly like the picture on the Skooba website.  At 14″L x 11″H x 3″D (manufacturer’s measurements), it’s smaller than it appears in the photos, but that’s exactly what I wanted.

I liked the bag from the moment I opened the box.  It’s surprisingly light (25 oz according to the website), yet the ballistic nylon feels extremely durable.  The stitching feels strong, and the build quality is excellent.  The strap is replaceable, but I can’t think of a reason why I would.  It’s durable, no-slip, and very comfortable.   Overall the Tablet Messenger V.3 has the feel of solid, reliable craftsmanship that I expect from a bag I will carry – and abuse – on a daily basis.

I liked the bag so much that I immediately glued on my favorite Firefly patches so that I’d be able to spot it as mine from a distance and, well, because I’m a nerd and I think they look cool.  My map bag that I carried in the Army had unit and rank patches on it, but I don’t think they would have looked right on the Skooba bag.  The patches from Wash’s jacket seemed just right.

I then crammed all of my everyday stuff into the bag, pleasantly surprised to find that there really were enough pouches and organizational pockets for everything I wanted to carry.  I was even more pleasantly surprised to see that – even with everything I could think of in the bag – its slim profile did not change.  One of my chief complaints with small messengers is that they get distended and bulky when I put all my gadgets in them.

Here’s my bag completely full.   Note that I still haven’t removed the excess glue from the patches.  If only Skooba provided “patch application” as a service!

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - with Firefly Patches

My Bag, Firefly Patches Optional

The water bottle in the photo above is a 500 mL / .5 L Camelbak.  I think a 750 would fit equally well, but my 1000 mL / 1L was just a bit too large.  I wouldn’t mind if they made this pocket just a hair larger, but I think it will already accommodate a more narrow 1L bottle.

One quick note about the closure.  As I mentioned above, I don’t like Velcro.  It’s noisy and inconvenient, and often hard to line up properly.  The Skooba bag uses an innovative magnetic closure that automatically locks when the flap drops down.  To open it, simply give it a twist.

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Magnetic Closure

Magnetic Closure – closed

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Closure

Magnetic Closure – open

If you’re in a hurry, there’s also a partially-hidden zipper across the top that will give you quick access to your ultrabook or tablet.

Here are some more views of the fully-loaded bag.  In keeping with the theme of the patches, I put the Firefly: A Celebration coffee table book next to it.  The book is 8.5″ x 10.8″ x 1.6″.  Here’s what the full bag looks like:

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Full and Closed

Fully Packed

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Full, Side View

Full – from the side (no water bottle)

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Full, from the Top

Full – from the top (no water bottle)

I can’t reiterate enough how much I love the profile of this bag.  It’s full of everything I need on a daily basis, but it’s not over-stuffed.  Nor is it too large and cavernous.  It’s just right.

One of the reasons for the slim profile is how well-organized everything is.  Here’s the computer compartment:

Bag Open - Top

The Main Compartment

The Surface Pro is on the left, inserted vertically.  To its side is the power supply (a small but laptop-sized power brick), which stays perfectly contained in its net pouch.  The netbook/tablet compartment fits the Surface Pro quite well.  It has plenty of padding, and holds the computer snugly.  The only Velcro in the bag is the small tab over the top that secures the slate in place.  That suits me just fine.

The interior of the bag is a bright blue that provides plenty of contrast if you’re looking for small items you may have dropped in there.  In the picture above I have a large, hardbound book and a 7″ Kindle Fire HD.

The gadget compartment on the front shows the same level of clean design and attention to detail as the main section:

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Organizer Compartment

Organizer Compartment

I’m not sure how to describe this, other than to simply say “it’s perfect!”  Too often, the pouches and pockets in the organizer section of a bag are just randomly sewn, with no attention to the actual purposes they might serve.  This bag, however, was either made by fellow nerds or in consultation with a focus group full of my tribe.  There are three mesh pockets – small, medium, and large – each of which perfectly accommodates gizmos of varying sizes.  Likewise the nylon pouches are large enough to actually hold things in a usable fashion.  The thumb drive compartment is a bit tight, but that’s my only quibble.

Here’s a zoomed-out view of the entire bag, fully loaded:

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Open view (full)

Everything in its place

So just how much stuff did I cram into this slim, highly portable, 14″-wide messenger bag?  Here’s the full inventory:

Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 - Contents

Here’s what I mean by “full”

The bag contains:

  • Microsoft Surface Pro with Type Cover
  • 7″ Kindle Fire HD in a Verso case (that looks like a composition book)
  • An over-sized (10.1 x 6.9 x 1) hardcover book
  • An iPhone 4 (a Samsung S4 should fit here as well)
  • A 1TB external drive
  • Two USB thumb drives
  • A Surface Pro digitizer pen
  • Two writing pens
  • A Flatlight (probably to be replaced with a Larrylight)
  • A micro multi-tool
  • Earbuds
  • An Advil bottle (thanks Achilles tendonitis)
  • An iPhone charger (I’ll be glad to get rid of this – when does the S4 ship?)
  • A micro-USB charger
  • An HDMI connector
  • A Microsoft Wedge mouse
  • A Surface Pro power brick
  • A micro-fiber cleaning cloth

There was also a forty-page document in the file-folder sized compartment in the back of the bag (you can see it in some of the earlier shots – I forgot to put it on the pile for the picture).  Also, I sometimes put keys or business cards or other incidentals in the pocket on the front flap.  Keep in mind, what you see here is not with the bag stuffed – you could cram a lot more in if you needed to.  This is with a well-organized, easily-accessible working load in the bag.

 

Conclusion

I don’t say this lightly:  I think the Skooba Tablet Messenger V.3 is the perfect everyday use bag for someone who wants to travel light and is using a Surface Pro, Ultrabook, or similar device as there commuting computer.  It has room for everything you’re likely to need on a day-to-day basis, and it keeps everything exceptionally well-organized.  The materials and build quality are outstanding, and it’s a bag I plan to use for years to come.

________________________________________________________________

Here’s a gallery of all of the photos included in this article:

 

 

 

Why You Want a Surface Pro

I was an early adopter of the TabletPC platform.  I was using a slate made by Motion Computing over seven years ago when I taught undergraduate classes.  I used it for my lecture notes, my PowerPoint presentations, and for grading.  The digitizer pen meant I could grade and comment on student papers without ever printing them out – I was able to go completely paperless.  I proclaimed it the “future of computing” – but the rest of the market never caught on.

When the iPad came out, I was thrilled that slate computing might actually come into its own, but that obviously wasn’t going to happen on the iOS platform – the device has far too many limitations.  But Apple did their part, convincing people that they might want real computers they could hold in their hands – even if Apple wasn’t going to be the one to provide it.

Which takes us to Spring, 2013 – a wonderful time when multiple Windows 8 tablets and hybrids are on the market.  I chose the Surface Pro because of the build quality, form factor, gorgeous screen, and digitizer pen.  I would have liked a larger hard drive, more battery life, and a discrete GPU – but I wasn’t going to not get the device that did everything I needed because I was pouting over it not doing everything I wanted.

I’ve used it nearly constantly for three weeks (including one travel week), and had a series of epiphanies as I did so:

I Can Expand the Storage?

The first thing I did when I bought the Surface Pro was put a 64GB SD card in it ($55 at Amazon).  It’s ridiculous to me that this seemed like an amazing luxury, but several generations of iPads had conditioned me to expect to pay an obscene premium for extra storage – and then be stuck with what I had until I bought entirely new hardware.  But the Surface Pro is a real computer.  You need more storage?  Put in a larger SD card.

It’s a Real Operating System?

When I booted it up, I logged on using my Microsoft Windows 8 account (I already used Windows 8 on my home computer), and was pleased to see that a significant number of my settings and preferences were already stored by Microsoft in the cloud.  I then immediately went into Control Panel and tweaked the additional settings specific to the Surface Pro to make them run just the way I like.  After years of dealing with the locked-down architecture of iOS, it felt like coming home from a long to my favorite furniture after staying in a long series of generic hotels.

I was also able to organize my thousands of files in my familiar folder/directory hierarchy.  I installed Dropbox, pulled everything down (actually, I cheated – I moved them over using the USB 3.0 port (!!!!!) and an external drive, then let Dropbox verify the download), and Voila! – there was everything I had ever written, created, or archived since I was fifteen.  And it was all organized logically and readily accessible.  I could move it, rename it, or drag-and-drop it onto external media connected by – let me say it again – a real, honest-to-goodness, USB 3.0 port.

I could also listen to my music, without having to route it through iTunes.  I have thousands of DRM-free songs purchased legitimately through Amazon.  Moving them, and then listening to them, was as simple as dragging-and-dropping.  I then had my choice of media players (I still use WinAmp), since the Surface Pro runs the full version of Windows 8.

I Can Run Office and Adobe?

Consequently, WinAmp isn’t the only thing the Surface Pro will run.  I immediately installed Office 2013, Adobe CS6, and GIMP (it’s faster than PhotoShop for basic tasks, in my experience).  I use all these programs daily, and there’s nothing on iOS that comes close to their functionality.  They all run BEAUTIFULLY on the Surface, although I highly recommend using the digitizer pen (which is wicked fun, by-the-way) or an external mouse if you want to create images.

The first thing I tried was to bring up one of the standard Excel spreadsheets that I use constantly.  It makes over 50,000 computations and makes extensive use of conditional formatting.  It has never opened correctly (or even in a usable fashion) in any iOS product I have ever used.  Not only did it open more quickly on my Surface Pro than on my laptop, the spreadsheet looked gorgeous and worked perfectly More importantly, I wasn’t just viewing it.  I could edit it just like I could on any other PC.

I Can Run Anything?

Ultimately, that’s the amazing thing about the Surface Pro.  All tablets are excellent for media consumption – and when using the Metro-style, “Windows Store” apps the Surface Pro is every bit as slick as the iPad for this purpose.  But with a single tap, the Surface Pro gives you the option of having all of the functionality of a full computer at your disposal.  The small screen and touch/pen input can sometimes make using the older, legacy PC programs feel a little kludgy – but the fact that you can do it at all on a device the size of a legal pad is a miracle.  Attach a keyboard cover and connect a bluetooth mouse, and the experience becomes just like using any other touch-enabled, fast PC.  The difference is that when you’re done it becomes a slate again.

I put all of my old, familiar utilities and applications on the Surface Pro, and they all run brilliantly.  To give it a fair shake, though, I also purchased a few of the Metro equivalents and did my best to get proficient with the Metro UI.  It took a couple of days, but for many tasks I eventually concluded that the Metro interface is superior, although I still spend nearly all my time on the Desktop view.

“Anything” Includes Games?

I don’t expect a slate to be a gaming powerhouse – yet (but it better be in the next few years or I will be very disappointed), but the integrated Intel HD 4000 chip is actually surprisingly nimble, even on the 1920×1080 Surface Pro screen.  Civilization V (which is now touch-enabled) is unquestionably the killer app for making all of your gamer friends want to go out and buy a Surface Pro yesterday.  It’s one of the greatest games ever made, and playing it – the full version, not “Revolution” (a great game in its own right) – on a slate feels like stepping into an episode of Star Trek.  Minecraft also played brilliantly, albeit with the mouse and keyboard attached.

But, just to reiterate, that is the beauty of the Surface Pro.  Attach the mouse and keyboard, and it becomes a full computer.  Yes, it has a smaller hard drive and a weaker GPU than I would want in an ideal world, but those are small prices to pay considering all of the amazing utility it provides.

I Can Write On It?

No discussion of that utility is complete without mentioning the digitizer pen.  Combined with One Note, the digitizer pen means I can finally stop carrying a legal pad to meetings.  Digital paper is much better than the real thing – it’s automatically backed up, and you can change it to unlined or graph paper with a touch.  Plus, when I played around with it, Windows 8 has surprisingly good and intuitive handwriting recognition.  I would love to see Microsoft replace every textbook and sheet of paper in a high school somewhere with Surface Pros (and train the teachers and students in the full range of their capabilities), just so everyone can see how versatile and convenient the technology is.

In addition, not only can you “write” on the tablet with the digitizer pen, you can also comfortably compose on it with the type cover.  While travelling, I wrote over eight thousand words – using the familiar, comfortable Word interface – in three days.  I was not even a tiny bit slower than I would have been on my computer at home, and I think the touch interface may have meant that I worked perhaps a little bit more quickly.

When I was done working, I closed up the tablet and slid it into its tiny Skooba Tablet Messenger v.3 bag (which I review here – it’s the perfect to go with the Surface Pro), and carted the Surface Pro to my next meeting.  It took up less space and only slightly more weight than the legal pad I would normally have brought – and had nothing approaching the footprint of the laptop I would have needed to create 8,000 words.

In Conclusion

Throughout my trip I just kept staring at my Surface Pro, in awe that something so tiny could do so much.  Most of the reviews I had read prior to my purchase had complained about the things that the Surface Pro can’t do (run for 10 hours on the battery, play Crysis 3 at max settings, float in your hand like a feather, etc.); but I don’t buy technology for what it can’t do.  I buy technology for what it can – and the Surface Pro’s list of things it can do is astonishing.  It runs every Windows productivity app I could throw at it, along with a number of very good games, all in a solid, beautifully engineered, slate form-factor that can be used as a laptop as necessary.  Oh, and you can add any USB-enabled peripheral without any headaches whatsoever, and the HDMI port is in no way proprietary.  That’s enough of a technology miracle for me, at least until next year.

Easter Wishes

The Empty Tomb by van Eyck

The Empty Tomb by van Eyck

The earliest gospel account closes with the mystery of an empty tomb. The disciples found themselves at a loss to understand how to move forward without the teacher and friend who had claimed to be the Son of God but died the brutal death of an executed criminal.


Later accounts describe the return of Jesus from the dead, offering anecdotes in which his disciples touch him, walk with him, and share meals with him. It is then, when they have encountered Jesus alive and in the flesh, that Jesus’ followers are able to believe.

For those of us who try to follow in their footsteps, we are again faced with the dilemma of the empty tomb. We do not have the luxury of touching his scarred hands or watching as he breaks bread with us. We struggle with doubt. We fear that the time and energy we have put into following this itinerant carpenter were as wastefully spent as the herbs and perfumes that were futilely plied against the pervasive odor of decay in the place where they laid his lifeless body.

The only chance we have for faith in the resurrection is to find hope where the disciples found it: in the living Body of Christ. And therein lies the greatest challenge of Christianity. For us to believe, Jesus must be physically present in the world, but Christ is only present in the world if we are willing to become him.

Even still, for thousands of years the miracle of Easter has repeated itself time and time again. Against all odds, people find ways to rise above their weaknesses, fears, and selfishness to work for a world where the meek, the poor, the merciful, the hungry, and the peacemakers are the blessed, the honored, and the privileged.

We cannot ignore the eternal hope joyfully proclaimed on this day everywhere around the world: “Χριστός ανέστη εκ νεκρών, θανάτω θάνατον πατήσας!” (Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death through death itself.) But we must also honor the miracle that keeps that hope alive and remakes it anew with every generation.

With those who share my religious tradition, I proclaim “Χριστός ανέστη!” – in honor of the risen Son and also in praise of all those who through their faith and sacrifice work to keep the Body of Christ and alive and present in the world.

With those of other traditions, I can understand why today of all days the claims of Christianity seem suspect. Time and again the Church betrays its promise and its potential. Even still, I hope that in each of our journeys we will hear the voices that call us beyond the limitations of fear and death. In this season of Resurrection, may we all find ways to keep alive those things that really matter, that allow us to become more than we are even in our dreams, that draw the presence of divine reality into our everyday lives.

Reflections on Good Friday

Crucifixion - by Grunewald

Crucifixion – by Grunewald

The crucifixion is the most widely-known event in the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, so much so that the instrument of his execution is the primary symbol for the religion established by his followers. For Christians, the moment of Jesus’ agonizing death at the hand of the Roman Empire is the central moment in history. As Frederick Buechner states in Beyond Words, “Jesus Christ is what God does, and the cross is where God did it.”

Knowing the significance of the event, however, is not the same as understanding it. Every era has produced new models for making sense of what took place at Golgotha. For early Christians, this was primarily a model of “ransom,” a concept that was replaced in the medieval era with one of “satisfaction.” For the leaders of the Protestant Reformation, a model of “substitutionary atonement” was the most logical, while more recent thought has applied a number of ideas, like the neo-orthodox one of “restoration” or the “exemplarism” first suggested by Peter Abelard.

Why so many (sometimes conflicting) theories to explain the one event that should be foundational and universal for all Christians? In part, this is simply the natural and necessary process of Christianity re-inventing itself to accommodate paradigm shifts in the culture. But there is a deeper reason. The crucifixion makes no sense.

Here is the most basic statement of the cross: God created a world in which the choices of that world’s inhabitants (who, like everything in that world, were created by God) forced God to brutally torture and murder the innocent and perfect, only, Son of God in the most agonizing and excruciating way possible.

What kind of god would do such a thing? On its surface, the reality of the crucifixion causes us to question either God’s kindness, God’s competence, or both. What sort of god would create a system where the only logical response to sinfulness – cruelty, selfishness, betrayal, and violence – is torture and execution of a kind, innocent man? How omnipotent can a deity be if the best world he or she can create is one in which the inhabitants will descend into a morass of self-indulgent sinfulness such that they will eventually execute the Son of God? To top it off – despite the divine sacrifice – the majority of them will still reject the offer of salvation and perish into eternal damnation.

Most Christians overlook these factors by focusing instead on the tremendous love God must feel toward humanity to be willing to offer up Jesus (and be offered up in the person of Jesus – Trinitarian doctrine is immune to logical contradiction) for the sake of humanity. They address any other logical inconsistencies with the doctrine of “free will” – humans were given the option to choose (or not) the sinfulness that ultimately led to the necessity of Jesus’ execution.

The problem with the doctrine of free will is that it only makes sense if you want to believe you’re one of the people who “chose” the right side, and can therefore be justifiably smug about your choices. Couldn’t a God who knows anything and can do anything have created a world in which everyone would have the experiences and information necessary to make good choices? If so, and God did not, then we are dealing with a cruel god indeed. If not, then God’s power and/or knowledge are seriously questionable.

These are not new questions, and both theologians and philosophers have pondered them – since the dawn of the Enlightenment – through the academic questions of “theodicy.” The classic, modern work on the subject remains John Hick’s Evil and the God of Love, and those wishing to explore these ideas comprehensively might also want to look at The Problem of Evil edited by Marilyn McCord Adams and Robert Merrihew Adams. It would be impossible even to summarize all of the different approaches to theodicy here, much less to resolve them.

So why bring them up at all? For two reasons. First, to point out to my fellow Christians – who are accustomed to taking the necessity of the crucifixion for granted – that the very idea of torturing and executing an innocent (for any reason, even the salvation of the world) is deeply problematic. Secondly, to point out to those outside the Church that Christians are – and have been for some time – keenly aware of the apparently nonsensical incongruity of a loving god who demands the cruel and brutal murder of the most perfect person to ever live before extending mercy to the rest of humanity.

So, if at best the crucifixion is “problematic” and at worst it is “nonsensical,” why will millions of Christians around the world gather tonight in silence for a Good Friday service that – for many of us – will include the ancient tradition of “Veneration of the Cross?” If the central moment of the faith tradition defies logic, why are there still so many of us in the fold? What is the point of Good Friday if it commemorates either a god who is incompetent or one who is malicious and cruel?

We gather because the cross represents the ultimate honesty about the human experience. At the foot of the cross, seeing the suffering that even God could not escape in human form – we come face to face with the harsh reality that to live means to struggle, to face betrayal, to feel hopeless and abandoned, to suffer pain and indignity and, ultimately, to die. Most of us find effective ways to distract ourselves from the consequences of our own mortality, but on Good Friday – contemplating the agony of the Prince of Peace as he is tortured at the cruel hands of empire and greed – the vulnerability of our human lives becomes raw and tender.

But we do not venerate the cross because of some misguided masochism or morbid fascination with death and despair. Because, gathered as a community of faith, we remember – alongside the truths that we would rather forget – the unshakeable reality that we are not alone. As Paul writes, Jesus, “though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death — even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:6-8).

The message of the cross is not one of appeasement for an angry god, no matter how convenient that explanation may seem (assuming we do not stop to ponder what that really says about God). The message of the cross is companionship and compassion. We do not have a Creator who turned us loose into a violent world alone. Instead, our Creator has joined with us in the full experience of our everyday lives. No matter what the struggle, no matter how great the pain, no matter how dark or perilous the horizon – we can have the complete assurance that we are loved and supported by a present God who understands our fear and pain.

Why not instead serve a god who takes the pain away? Why not serve a god who never lets anything unpleasant happen to us? Apparently, that simply isn’t an option. The cross is also a reminder that even the only Son of God, who prayed not to face the suffering that awaited him, was exempt from the pain of human existence. For whatever reason, the world simply does not work that way.

And so, if you are seeking the cross, or seeking simply to understand why Christians seek the cross, do not approach it for fear of an angry god who demands that you accept his sacrifice or be damned for all eternity. Frankly, if the Creator of the universe is that capricious and cruel, we are all damned already. If, however, you suspect that beneath the tortures and imprecations – small and large – of everyday life, there is a source of hope and love and strength reaching out to sustain you – you are welcome to join the followers of Jesus in the shadow of one of the cruelest implements of torture ever known. It is in its shadow, the dark outline of the cross on blood-stained, that we see the arms of God spread wide to gather us in.

Pop Theology from Garfunkel and Oates

Garfunkel and Oates

Garfunkel and Oates (source: YouTube)

I’ve written several times about the hypocrisy, ego-centrism, and inconsistency with which many people interpret the Christian Bible (see also here and here).  Riki Lindhome (Twitter) and Kate Micucci (Twitter) – the geniuses behind Garfunkel and Oates – have written a very, very funny song that communicates many of my critiques, but with considerably more pithy eloquence.

This song is incredibly vulgar, and very much not safe for work or for anyone to whom you would not want to expose a graphic discussion of sexual acts.  It is also brilliant in its biting critique of the fundamentalist obsession with sexuality and purity.  There’s a lot of depth to the lyrics, and it is well worth your time to listen a couple of times through.

Here’s a link to the video.

I’ve done my best to reproduce the lyrics below (with no intent of commercial gain, solely for the purpose of allowing readers to catch the things they might miss because of the speed of their delivery).  Obviously Garfunkel and Oates retain the copyright.

I think my favorite verse is “Let’s cherry-pick the part about losing my cherry….and circumvent any real sacrifice, but still feel pious in my arbitrary parroted positions.”  That is, in fact, exactly my point.

Loophole

by Riki Lindhome and Kate Micucci

All my life, I’ve been good
Do what my mom, and dad, and God say I should.
Go to church, and Bible school,
To live by God’s rule.

So whatever people tell me,
That the Bible tells me,
I will do.

Walk the halls of my school with my purity ring,
Unlike those other girls, I’ve got my morals in check.
It was easy to do until I got a boyfriend,
And pardon my French, but he’s cute as Heck!

And I made a pact
To keep my hymen intact,
And Jesus and I are tight.

I’ve learned about the birds and the bees.
I was taught to keep an aspirin between my knees.
‘Cause the Bible says premarital sex is wrong.
But Jason says that guys can’t wait that long.

I don’t want to lose him
To someone who’ll do him!
I need to figure something out!

Well there’s a loophole in the Scripture that works really well
So I can get him off without going to Hell.
It’s my “Hail Mary, Full of Grace…”
In Jesus’ name we go to fifth base.

Oh thank you for making me holy,
And thank you for giving me holes to choose from.
And since I’m not a godless whore
He’ll have to come in the backdoor.

Therefore…Fuck me in the ass because I love Jesus!
The good Lord would want it that way.
That sweet sensation of a rock-hard rationalization
Is just between you and me,
Because everyone knows it’s the sex
That God can’t see!

It’s hard to be as pure as me
To resist the urge to lose my vaginal virginity.
To wait until my marriage bed
To give my husband my unsullied maidenhead.

So take your cock out
Shove it in my ass
Fuck me until you cum!

Whoops!

I mean…

Let’s find our souls
And unite our bodies
And fly on the wings of love!

Whatever you do don’t touch my clitoris
If you ring Satan’s doorbell God can’t ignore this!
And no prophylactics when you put it in
‘Cause birth control’s for sluts and it’s a sin.

I’ve emptied my bowels
And laid out the towels,
I’m ready for romance.

Now I’m prayin’ to the power that’s the highest,
But of all of my holes, this one’s the driest.
[pause for wincing]
And we can’t procreate, if we anally copulate,
And God’s okay with sodomy, but only if you’re straight.

And I’m staying pure no matter what,
So I’m okay with everything but,
Everything but, everything but…

Whoa, Fuck me in the ass because I love Jesus!
The good Lord would want it that way.
That sweet sensation of a rock-hard rationalization
Is just between you and me,
Because everyone knows it’s the sex
That God can’t see!

I do whatever the Bible tells me to
Except for the parts I choose to ignore
Because they’re unrealistic and inconvenient
But the rest I live by for sure.

So let’s not talk about how the Good Book bans:
Shellfish, polyester, and divorce,
And how it condones slavery and killing gays,
Because those parts don’t count of course.

Let’s cherry-pick the part about losing my cherry,
And line over ambiguities _____
And circumvent any real sacrifice
But still feel pious in my arbitrary parroted positions.

And don’t you dare question my convictions!
And don’t look closely at the contradictions.
Just focus on the sacrificial crucifixion,
And have faith in its complete jurisdiction…
as the only way to measure if you’re good or not.

And when you don’t have faith just say, “Have Faith!”
‘Cause when up against logic it’s the only card you’ve got!

So close youre eyes, take a deep breath, and…

Fuck me in the ass because I love Jesus!
The good Lord would want it that way.
That sweet sensation of a rock-hard rationalization
Is just between you and me,
Because everyone knows it’s the sex
That God can’t see!

Yeah my chastity belt has locks,
So sometimes you have to think…
Outside the box!

Bryan Fischer Does Not Speak for Christianity

 

Bryan Fischer makes an idiot of himself

Screenshot from YouTube video (links to the video itself)

I haven’t written anything about yesterday’s horrendous events in Newtown, Connecticut because a number of writers with far more skill and wisdom than I continue to produce outstanding, thoughtful, compassionate commentary that I think will be invaluable in guiding our citizens as we grieve.  As a general rule, I try not to write an opinion piece unless I think I have something original to add to the dialogue.  Sometimes, however, when someone says something egregiously stupid, dangerous, or damaging, I feel compelled to respond.

Thanks to Bryan Fischer, Director of Issues Analysis for the despicable American Family Association (the public policy arm of the notorious hate group Focus on the Family), I now have something to say.

Fischer used a little of his broadcast time after the massacre in Connecticut to address the fundamental theological question of theodicy – how do we reconcile the presence of evil with the power of a benevolent God?  There’s nothing wrong with that.  Religious leaders all over the country will be doing the same.  As evidenced by the number of possible answers theologians and philosophers have offered to this question, any honest Christian approach to the topic must begin and end with the limits of human knowledge and experience.  We don’t know why there is evil in the world.

We don’t know why there is evil in the world.  Anyone who offers any other answer as final and absolute is, quite simply, a liar and a charlatan.  Christianity is not about explaining the existence of evil, it is about proclaiming the gracious good news that God is present with us despite the horrifying and sometimes-overwhelming presence of malice, selfishness, violence, and destruction in the world.  Any member of the clergy who answers the question “Why did this child die?” with any answer besides, “I don’t know” should find a new line of work, preferably one where they are never again allowed to talk to people.

Which brings us to Bryan Fischer.  In offering his answer to the question “Where was God when all this went down?” Fischer offered the following:

“Here’s the bottom line.  God is not going to go where He is not wanted.  Now we have spent since 1962, we’re fifty years into this now, we have spent fifty years telling God to get lost, telling God we do not want You in our schools, we don’t want to pray to you in our schools…in 1962 we kicked prayer out of the schools, in 1963 we kicked the Word of God out of the schools…we’ve kicked God out of our public school system.  And I think God would say to us, ‘Hey, I’ll be glad to protect your children but you gotta invite me into your world first.  I am not going to go where I am not wanted.  I am a gentleman.‘”

So where to begin?  Let’s start here – any god who needs a request before he or she will intervene to prevent the massacre of children is not worth worshiping.  If that is genuinely the way the world works, I would rather be damned to Hell along with all those who believe in compassion and empathy than fawn in Heaven alongside those comfortable bowing before an egomaniacal sociopath, no matter how “divine.”  I don’t know for which god Fischer presumes to speak, but it is not the Christian one.  Jesus, when asked about a massacre, clearly says in Luke 13 that death by violence or disaster is not a consequence of sin or rebellion.

Fischer has apparently confused God with the vampires of movies and television, who cannot enter a home unless invited.  (I like Vampire Diaries a lot, but Fischer of all people should look elsewhere for his theological guidance.)  For just a moment, though, let us assume that this absurd claim makes sense.  God – like Dracula or Caroline Forbes – needs an invitation.

With that bizarre rule in mind, I am willing to bet that when the deranged mass-murderer opened fire, someone in that school said a prayer to God for help.  What an opportunity for Fischer’s “gentlemanly” God.  A school full of young, impressionable “atheists” have finally invited Him in – at their time of dire need.  What a great opportunity for an act of divine intervention, one that would almost certainly convert all of those pitiable “atheists” into true believers.  One tiny answer to a whispered invitation, and God suddenly wins over hundreds of previously-unreachable “non-believers” and “heretics” who had previously denied Him access.  If Fischer is right, God was just waiting for a word that almost certainly came.  In Fischer’s bizarre scheme of arbitrary restrictions on God, this was the perfect time for a miracle.

As we know, whatever miracles took place that day, dozens of young lives were still lost, and God (the real one, not Fischer’s) stood weeping alongside the grieving parents and teachers.

Perhaps, though, what Fischer wanted to imply was that – by taking prayer and Christian Bible readings out of public schools – we have removed the influence that would have kept a troubled man from turning into a homicidal maniac.  This claim is almost as stupid as the one Fischer explicitly stated.  If you need state-sponsored, institutional prayers to be told not to shoot a child – your problem is not a lack of religious influence, your problem is that you are a sociopath in need of mental health care.

This is painfully obvious to anyone who has stopped to think about this tragedy, yet common sense and common decency have never been barriers to the AFA, Fischer, and those of their ilk pushing their anti-social agenda.  The things they believe are so ridiculous that the only way they can persuade impressionable people to agree with them is to convince the general public that groups like the AFA are speaking for God.  This means they have to use every opportunity to impose a kind of mindless, irrational pseudo-piety on the general public when people are at their most vulnerable.  Fischer’s comments are one more pathetic attempt to reach out from the outer darkness of irrelevance where his hate speech belongs and grasp at any opportunity to sway a few people to his agenda.

Mr. Fischer, since you felt so comfortable speaking for God, I feel compelled to do the same.  For fifteen years now I have been entrusted with the Scriptures and Tradition of the Church and the obligation to proclaim the gospel.  With all the authority of that call and ordination, let me say very clearly, “You, Bryan Fischer, are a fucking idiot!  You do not speak for God.  You do not speak for the Church.  You do not speak for Christianity or Christians.  You have proclaimed a false gospel of ignorance and hate.  If you wish to continue to teach in the name of this cruel, capricious god – please have the integrity to admit that it is not the God who – incarnate in Jesus – “died for us while we were yet sinners.”

For those of you who came here for more than an excoriation of Bryan Fischer’s heinous heresy – perhaps looking for something to make sense of the tragedy in Connecticut – I hope I provided ample warning early on that I do not have that to offer.  Christianity does not have all the answers, we are just an extended and diverse family of people united in seeking meaning in the ancient teachings of Judaism and the Early Church.  We have come up with many possible explanations for the presence of evil, but on some level they all eventually fall apart.

Where they all collapse is at the foot of the cross, a place that is simultaneously the triumphant cornerstone and the greatest shame of our faith.  Ours is not a religion of a thundering god crashing through the world magically repairing all the brokenness of our lives.  Ours is a faith built on a God who – seeing the pain, fear, and grief inherent in the human condition – joined us on our journey, even though it ultimately meant torture and murder at the hands of the forces of greed and selfishness.

The message of the cross is that the miracle of God is not in saving our lives, the miracle of God is in the purity of a Creator’s love that is so powerful that God is willing to step down from the luxuries of Heaven and take on our suffering.  God did not save the lives of those children because – for whatever reason – the Universe does not work that way.  According to our Scriptures, Jesus begged God, his Father, to save him from being murdered – and God did not do that either.

It sucks.  It makes no sense.  And it causes us all to question why we should bother worshiping such a God in the first place.  If you are looking for a God like Fischer’s, one who can be propitiated to intervene violently in mortal affairs, I recommend Durga.  For better or for worse, the God of Christianity does not consistently act in such a fashion.

Unlike Fischer, I do believe God was present at Sandy Hook Elementary, and that God acted.  I believe that the presence of a God who understands heroism in the face of suffering inspired teachers to risk their lives for their pupils.  I believe that a God who was vulnerable and broken at the hands of vicious killers was there for every excruciating second of that horrible time, and that each one of those children entered into eternity gently cradled in the arms of a loving God who understood what they had endured.

Perhaps that’s not enough.  In the days to come, some of us in our grief and anger will turn away from a God who would not or could not intervene to save the lives of those children.   Others will turn to other faiths or philosophies for answers.  I don’t think God will begrudge us that, after all God knows what it’s like to be forsaken.

And so, for those of you hoping that I could replace an insipid and shameful answer to the “Why?” question with a useful and theologically sound one, I cannot.  I cannot even promise you that if you pray and study and give every second of your life to God you will be spared the grief of another tragedy like this one.  I can only offer you what I have been given, what I believe, that there is more to this world than what we can see and touch, and that beyond the boundaries of our senses is a loving Creator who connects us to each other and to that world of greater meaning in ways that ultimately inspire more questions than answers.

When we seek that Creator, we are seeking to be more than we can be as individuals.  We are seeking to be greater than our limitations, stronger than our brokenness, and more powerful than our flaws and vulnerabilities.  We are seeking to stand in the face of evil, not in the hopes of easy victory, but in the certain confidence that – even in our most shocking  defeats – love, compassion, and grace will ultimately triumph.

We have seen some of that in the aftermath of Newtown, and more examples will certainly be forthcoming as people respond to the acts of one man at his worst by showing what humanity can be at our best.  Even as we join our tears to God’s in memory of those we have lost too soon and too horribly, perhaps we can also see some glimpse of the miracle of a God who knows our struggle and draws us into a people who refuse to be overcome by evil, but who instead will – every time – overcome evil with good.

My Response to Fox News Rhetoric

Fox News - Math you do a a Republican to make yourself feel better

Fox News Logo – Courtesy of the Daily Show

I have a friend who is a bit more conservative than I am.  He recently posted a lengthy critique of my political views using the rhetoric of Fox News.  Normally I don’t respond to those sorts of arguments because I consider them so obviously lacking in merit that I let them fail on their own, but this once I decided to answer them comprehensively in a single post.  Here are his original comments:

Facebook posts from a conservative friend

Source: Facebook (My Timeline)

All of this began because my friend  wanted  to chase these strawmen and ad hominem arguments rather than addressing the issue at hand – the Republican Party has gone so far into extreme nutter land that they won’t even support a treaty that supports human rights and is based on American law.

What follows is my reply.  Although I address his points, in order, I think these comments stand on their own as a critique of the propaganda currently coming from Fox News.

1. Saying it’s “impossible” to seriously consider my critiques because you dislike my other positions is a classic ad hominem attack.  It’s a way of avoiding actually discussing the issue at hand to attack the speaker.  It’s not relevant, and shows the weakness of your argument.

2. I stand by my characterization of the new Republican party.  Their opposition to rights for same-sex couples and their opposition to supporting equal rights for women (e.g. the “Equal Pay Act“) makes them bigots, their alliance with fundamentalist Christianity makes them ignorant and superstitious, their opposition to fair taxation on the wealthy makes them greedy, and their opposition to government regulation of industry and organized labor indicate that they support a corporate hegemony over a representative republic.

3. President Obama is “looting the producers of this country?”  The producers are the people who actually make stuff in this country.  They are easy to spot.  They have dirt on their jeans or grease on their hands.  The mega-corporation CEO’s and hedge fund brokers are not “producers” – they profit off the labor of others.  I’m pretty sure the term for that is “parasites.”  And yet, their salaries – relative to that of their employees – are the highest they have ever been in US history:  by an order of magnitude!

On top of that, they enjoy a tax rate that is roughly 1/3rd of what it was at its highest (when our economy was thriving).  They are not being looted.  They are doing the looting.

4. President Obama is “foolish” and “destructive?”  What, exactly, is he destroying?  Not the environment, he’s increasing regulation there (although not as much as I would like, and he’s still too friendly with the oil companies).  Not healthcare, he’s making sure that tens of millions of people have access to it.  Not the economy, the stock market is making millions for people and unemployment is down.  What is he destroying?

5.  There is no “shame” in the word socialist.  The countries with the highest standard of living, the best healthcare, and the best educational systems all recognize that importance of the social contract and the importance of socialism in protecting the rights and well-being of all citizens.  Without socialism, we have no schools, no public safety departments, and no military.  We need socialism.

6. President Obama is not a “fool” and he is not lacking real-world experience.  He earned a J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard.  His work as a community organizer helped get people jobs and educational training as well as protected their civil rights.  He taught constitutional law while also practicing civil rights law for eleven years.  That made a difference for real people living in the real world.

7. Again, no one’s “responsible efforts to create a good retirement” are being looted.  Trying to bring the tax rate for our wealthiest citizens back up to where it was before their Congressional stooges lowered it is not looting, it’s insisting that they pay a share commensurate with their extreme wealth.

8. The estate tax rate will not go from “0% to 55%.”  It will go from 35% to 55%.  And the first MILLION DOLLARS will be exempt – the levels where they were in 2001.  In a worst case scenario – the expiration of the current deal on estate taxes with no replacement legislation – the only people affected will be millionaires and then only on assets over a million dollars.  President Obama is on record of supporting a 45% tax rate with an exemption on the first 3.5 MILLION dollars.  That’s hardly the position of a “looter” and far more generous than I think we should be.  In the end, very, very few people are affected by the reversion.  Nevertheless, the all-or-nothing tea baggers are so intent on protecting the wealth of the very, very wealthiest that they refuse to compromise.  Regardless of your thoughts on the estate tax, you completely misrepresent the current state of affairs.  For someone who claims your positions are about facts, you use gracious few of them here.

9. Benghazi – Ultimately the buck stops with the President, no doubt about it.  We should have had more assets available to protect the ambassador, and we did not.  State made a mistake, and had/provided bad intel both before and after, and ultimately the President is responsible for the efficiency and effectiveness of the State Department.  This does not, however, mean that the President is unfit to lead or made some catastrophic or unique failure.  Reagan, Both Bushes, and Clinton all experienced embassy attacks – with fatalities – under their presidencies.  No one I know who works for State thinks that this is the smoking gun Fox News wants to claim it is.

In addition, the entire issue is a complex one.  Note Republican Rep. Chaffetz critiquing Benghazi while also talking about his votes to cut embassy security. Democrats were concerned about this before 11 September 2012.

10. Socialism is not “theft.”  It is not theft to recognize that the people who make hundreds of millions of dollars off of the safety, security, and stability of our Republic owe money back into that Republic to continue to sustain it.  This is fairness.  Recognizing that an unregulated, capitalist economy constantly funnels money away from the people who actually make the goods and provide the services is not “theft” – it’s common sense.  The free market does not protect workers on its own; this is self-evident, as is the clear and unequivocal data that shows that protecting the wealth of the 1% does not trickle down into job opportunities for the working and middle classes.  Warren Buffet, arguably the most successful American capitalist in history has pointed this out over and over again.

The “looters” and “thieves” are the venal carrion birds from people like Bain capital who are more concerned with disassembling a functioning business (something that “produces” something – to use your vocabulary) and selling off its assets or outsourcing its labor so they can get even wealthier.  The “looters” and “thieves” are the CEO’s who continue to grant themselves raises and line the pockets of their executives (none of whom actually make anything with their own hands) while denying medical benefits to their workers and paying them a wage upon which those workers cannot even afford safe housing or healthy food.  The “looters” and “thieves” are the corporations that spend millions of dollars lobbying Congress so that they can manufacture their products in ways that destroy our environment or our health.

First Sunday in Advent

Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel - Rembrandt

Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel – Rembrandt

It was the First Sunday in Advent and the last in November. We were in the shadow of the end of a millennium, and – unbeknownst to me – the beginning of a seismic change in the direction of my life.  In the Lectionary readings, Isaiah reminded us that – flawed though we are – we are clay in the hands of a loving Potter.  Jesus, speaking in the Gospel of Mark, cried, “Beware, keep alert; for you do not know when the time will come.”  And the Apostle Paul reminded us that we lack for nothing because our Savior strengthens us and God is faithful.

I let their voices roll around in my head as I made my way to Madison, Georgia.  I had time to review my sermon, as it was more than an hour drive from our house in the city to the small, country church where I was the pastor.  I often made that drive alone or in the company of our infant son. My wife Brigit worked most Sundays.  Our son John-Francis heard his first homilies snuggled comfortably in the arms of any number of kind, older Southern ladies more than happy to sit with him on the back pew while I preached.

This Sunday, however, our whole family was together, and we made our way along the highway in the companionable silence of the early morning.  The air had a hint of chill to it, but the sky was a cloudless blue against cleared fields and baled hay that shone a bright gold in the Georgia sun.  If we looked closely, there were signs that winter was on its way, but for the moment we were happy to enjoy the last, gilded days of the South’s mildest season.

Advent, which begins the liturgical year for Christians around the world, is a season of hope.  Often this hope is tied to the memory of the incarnation of Jesus, because the Christmas season is right around the corner, but the hope of Advent is even larger.  In the four weeks before Christmas we remember that everyone and everything we know or value will someday pass away, and at the end of time our hope lies not in our accomplishments, but in the grace of God.

That is a more complex and subtle flavor of hope than the simple message of holiday greeting cards and Christmas carols.  I had struggled with how to convey the texts’ messages of challenge and warning to my congregation, while also making certain to offer the hope that was at the center of the season and the gospel itself.  I was not overly concerned.  They were good sports.  Matriarchs, dairy farmers, mechanics, veterans, professionals – they had helped me grow into my calling while patiently teaching me to do the job for which seminary had given me the tools but not the workshop.

Normally I was the first to arrive, although the wife of one of our deacons would have come a couple hours earlier to turn on the heat.  Today, however, I turned down the gravel drive to see that our aged white steeple presided over a parking lot full of cars.  The congregation was over two hundred years old, and had once overseen a legendary revival that had prompted the citizens of a nearby town to rename their city “Newborn.”  I wondered if a similarly great awakening was about to take place.

Brigit and John-Francis entered with me and found their usual spots for Sunday School while I went to my office to look over my sermon.  I did not have much time to ponder the mystery of our increased church attendance, since the hour for Worship arrived swiftly.  Our lector that day was the Chair of the Deacons, and his rumbling baritone proclaimed, “O that you would tear open the heavens and come down…”

“At least this Sunday,” I thought acerbically, “if you came down you’d find the pews filled.  I wish I knew why.”  Still contemplating the sheer number of freshly-soaped faces staring at me intently, I launched into a lackluster but adequate sermon to begin the new Church Year.

I quickly realized something was very wrong.  Anyone who has had the privilege to preach in a rural, evangelical congregation knows that we are well-trained.  We can tell by the preacher’s inflections and facial expressions when we are supposed to laugh, and so we do – even if the joke is a familiar one or more than a little lame (and further hobbled by the preacher’s delivery).  Church is a place where we remember not to take the world too seriously, and our shared laughter creates its own liturgy, honoring the joy that is at the heart of the gospel.

There was no laughter in the congregation that day.  For twenty minutes I tossed the crumbs of my sermon onto a sea of blank stares, and all that came back was a sense that something was coming and everyone knew it but me.  For the first time I felt the fear that is also a part of the season of Advent.  The axe was at the root of the tree, and I suspected the fire was yet to come.

When it did, it was during the announcements and in the whispered words of the same Deacon who had read from Isaiah, “Pastor, the Deacons would like a word with you if you have the time.”

We met in the Sunday School room that also served as the space for business meetings.  The Chair stood and read a prepared statement which began, “Pastor, this is nothing personal…”

As with “This is not about you, it’s about me,” an introit like this invariably leads to a blow that is both deeply personal and carelessly brutal.  This conversation would prove to be no exception.  I was given the opportunity to tender my resignation (pastors are almost never fired), presented with a minimal severance check, and asked to leave and never return.

The church had called a meeting in the wee hours of the morning prior to my arrival that day.  I was not invited.  There was only one agenda item:  my sermon from the previous Sunday.

On that day, the 21st of November – Reign of Christ Sunday – I had deviated from the Lectionary and preached from a selection of texts I had chosen to address an event on the minds of all our members.  The previous week our state ecclesiastical body had expelled two congregations for the first time in the nearly 200-year-long history of their existence.  The two Atlanta churches – both served by friends of mine – were clear and public in their advocacy for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons.  The rhetoric against those two communities of faith, especially in rural parishes like mine, had grown passionate and vitriolic.

I had entered the pulpit that previous Sunday terrified.  I even brought two sermons with me, one from the lectionary that proclaimed the hope of unity in the reign of Christ, and the other from a collection of epistles and gospel fragments addressing pastorally the issue of homosexuality.  My professional and prayerful opinion – then as now – was that any consistent, faithful approach to Scripture does not allow for the condemnation of homosexuality.

I didn’t want to say that to my congregation.  I told myself that my reluctance was because they would not be able to hear the why of such a sermon because they would not be able to get past the what of it.  Over the course of a sleepless night I realized that my real fear was losing a job I loved, a career path I was quickly ascending, and a paycheck that we desperately needed to pay our mortgage.

The writers in Proverbs remind us that “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,” and ultimately that persuaded me which sermon to preach on the 21st.  To this day, I recall the image that I could not shake – of me, standing before Almighty God, and God asking me why I refused to speak the truth from the pulpit.  If even a single word I had ever proclaimed were true, how could I face my Creator and admit that the one time it really mattered I was more concerned with protecting myself than speaking for those on whom the Church had turned its back?

And so I had ended the previous liturgical year with the proclamation that the gospel included our gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters just as they were.  A week later, I started the season of Advent unemployed and unlikely to find a new congregation.  My church, to its credit, had not been unanimous in their response to my sermon.  Many had argued to keep me, but had ultimately agreed that the loss of an idealistic, big-city pastor was better for the church than the inevitable congregational split.

My colleagues were quick to offer their support.  One – who had prayed during my ordination that God would take me, bless me, break me, and give me away – told me, “You were taken out for offering your very best stuff.  Don’t ever forget that.”  I haven’t.  Another simply told me, “They were wrong.  You were right.”  Less helpfully, a number of them called to tell me “I wish I could have said what you said, but…”  The pastors of both congregations that had been removed from our communion called to tell me I was part of their story too.  I will always be honored that they counted me among their courageous number.

I also heard from a number of people whom I did not know.  They told me how the Church had wounded them.  They told me how painful it was to be told that they had to choose between the God to whom they had given their soul and the person who was their soulmate.  I came to realize what a small price I had paid for the privilege of speaking on their behalf.

A part of me had known that a moment like that would come at some point in my ministry, but my ego had assumed that the stage would be larger and the consequences more far-reaching.  A small, inconsequential church in a distant farming community hardly seemed worth the permanent sacrifice of my professional career.

But the gospel does not work that way.  The riddle of Advent is that we are called to hope for a kingdom yet to come, while understanding that it will only arrive if we live as if it were already here.    If we spend our lives waiting for that big chance to live out that hope, the opportunity for us to make a “real” difference, we miss the thousands of moments where we could have taken just a tiny bit of hate, anger, bigotry, or ignorance out of the world and replaced it with a little kindness, grace, or wisdom.  Sometimes, the price we pay for that little bit of faithfulness or courage seems exorbitant, but – as anyone who has faced despair will tell you – that is nonsense.  Hope is priceless.

There Is No “War on Christmas”

 

John Denver and the Muppets

John Denver and the Muppets (photo by djwudi – Flickr)

I don’t know if you believe in Christmas
Or if you have presents underneath the Christmas tree,
But if you believe in love,
That will be more than enough
For you to come and celebrate with me.

- Noted theologian Kermit the Frog
(using the words of Dan Wheetman)

In order to have something to complain about during a season that most people use for generosity and love, some of my fellow Christians are perpetuating the idea that the month before Christmas Day has historically been a sacred, holy time dedicated to celebrating  the birth of Jesus.  This claim has no basis in Christian tradition or history, but the minor inconveniences of facts and historical perspective has not stopped them from fabricating a myth about the Christian origins of this season.

The establishment of this myth is essential to their goal of perpetuating a tale of victimization.  In the tragic story as some Christians tell it, evil forces of secularism are persecuting faithful believers in a “War on Christmas” designed to draw our attention away from the stable-born child who, we are told, is the “reason for the season.”  These claims of religious persecution are all-the-more bizarre considering the fact that seventy-six percent of Americans self-identify as Christians.  It takes a real talent for delusional rhetoric to portray a group that makes up three-fourths of the country as a threatened minority.

Their real complaint, however, is not about holiday observances.  As Ross Douthat recently noted in The New York Times, this is a “Tough Season for Believers.”  While Christianity may continue to enjoy a majority in the U.S., the attitudes and prejudices that some consider inseparable from the tradition are on the wane.  Social conservatives and far-right evangelicals are struggling with their increasing irrelevance in twenty-first century America, and the prominence of both pluralistic observances and secular traditions this time of year draw particular attention to that reality.

Unfortunately for those on the losing side of this culture war, the history of the “Christmas Season” does not make a strong case for their complaints.  The argument from the conservative evangelicals is simple: all of the positive things we associate with this time of year have their origins in traditional, Christian observances of the birth of Christ held during the month leading up to December 25.  This claims has several flaws, most notably the fact that Christians do not celebrate the birth of Jesus at this time of year, and that our “Christmas” traditions far predate Christianity.

The first of these points is perhaps the most important.  The time between Thanksgiving and Christmas day is not, in fact, the “Christmas Season.”  It has become the Christmas Shopping Season, but that is a very different animal.  Identifying this time of year with Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity, Jesus, the Nativity or anything theological.  Instead, advertisers and shopkeepers refer to this time of year as “Christmas” to use the theme as an emotional lure to persuade people to buy more things they do not need.  Even Christian fundamentalists realize this.  Their main complaints in “defense of Christmas” are about the failure of companies to refer to Jesus’ birth in their advertising.  Apparently these defenders of Christmas do not see the irony in pushing for more commercial uses of the image of the man who told a wealthy questioner that the way to salvation is giving away all your  possessions to the poor.

Irony is not all they are ignoring.  In creating this myth that this time of year is intended to commemorate Jesus’ birth, radical conservatives are choosing to draw attention away from the actual theological theme for this time of year.  For Christians, this is the season of Advent – a time when anticipating the celebration of Jesus’ first arrival causes us to focus on the doctrine of his Second Coming.  On the night of December 24 we will focus on the Nativity; but we use the time in the four weeks prior to look toward the distant future and the end of time.  For this reason, the texts read in Christian churches this time of year are about judgment and divine anger.  They mention separating wheat from chaff, and talk about the axe that rests at the root of the tree.  In all of these passages, those who are found wanting perish – usually quite painfully.  A hungover teenager afraid their parents will come home early understands more about the Christian meaning of this season than an indignant suburbanite chewing out a retail clerk for a well-intended wish of “Happy Holidays.”

For Christians, Advent is a time of expectation, of hope tinged with fear and self-evaluation.  The misguided campaign to relocate the Nativity into the retail Christmas shopping season completely ignores this traditional, Christian understanding of the season.

Of course, long before those Christian traditions developed, this was already a special time of year.  People have always gathered together at the time when the nights were at their longest and the weather its most bitter.  Feasting, small gifts of affection, fires and candles, evergreen trees, and all the other hallmarks of “Christmas” find their origins in much older traditions around observance of the winter solstice.  If we want to dig back for the “reason” for this season of decorations, celebration, and goodwill, we find that Jesus has nothing to do with it.  When Christianity rose to prominence in Western Europe, people took their existing festal activities and whitewashed them with a veneer of the gospel.  The origins of those traditions, however, are no more Christian than those of Easter eggs or the Easter Bunny.  This was a time of goodwill and generosity long before anyone heard of a baby born in a stable.

In fact, the most familiar and heartwarming stories we associate with this time of year often have a negligible theological component to them.  Dickens’ A Christmas Carol – which almost singlehandedly brought about the modern observance of the holiday – has nothing to do with Jesus.  Scrooge is not redeemed by the gospel; he is redeemed by his realization that his greed has cost him more than he could ever measure in gold.  Likewise, Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life is not the story of divine incarnation.  It is a celebration of the quiet heroism of those who choose love of their neighbor over love for themselves.  As with the Christmas traditions themselves, these and other stories of this holiday season – from Miracle on 34th Street to Polar Express – are reminders that this is the time of year when we open our homes and our wallets to care for friends, family, and strangers alike – whether or not we (or they) are Christians.

This seems obvious, but apparently it bears repeating: a season of welcome and sharing, regardless of the religious beliefs of those who observe it, is a good thing.  This is why it seems nonsensical that some pugnacious conservatives want to insist that those around them ignore the long history of this season and portray it as explicitly and exclusively Christian.  It is not, and should not be.  Just as Christians need the imperatives of Advent and the joy of Christmastide, all of us need a season of goodwill.  Long before the time of Christ, friends and families gathered to ward off the cold with food, fire, and fellowship.

We need those gifts even more today.  We should commend any attempt that others make to express those positive family values in the most inclusive way possible.  If “Happy Holidays” helps draw more people into the beautiful,  secular meaning of this season – wonderful!  It never was a Christian season in the first place.  Belligerently claiming that we are in “Christmas time” distracts from Advent and undercuts the meaning of the actual Christmas season.  Besides, Christians have enough opportunities to separate ourselves and be exclusive.  We should let this season be what it has been since our ancestors first erected Stonehenge – a time when everyone was invited in from the chill of winter for the warm gifts of hospitality and kindness.