January 20, 2009

Praise Song for the Day

Elizabeth Alexander



Each day we go about our business,
walking past each other,
catching each other’s eyes
or not
about to speak
or speaking.
All about us is noise.
All about us is noise and bramble,
thorn and din,
each one of our ancestors on our tongues.

Someone is stitching up a hem,
darning a hole in a uniform,
patching a tire,
repairing the things in need of repair.
Someone is trying to make music somewhere
with a pair of wooden spoons on an oil drum,
with cello, boom box, harmonica, voice.

A woman and her son wait for the bus.
A farmer considers the changing sky.
A teacher says, “Take out your pencils. Begin.”

We encounter each other in words
words spiny or smooth,
whispered or declaimed;
words to consider,
reconsider.

We cross dirt roads and highways
that mark the will of someone and then others who said,
“I need to see what’s on the other side.
I know there’s something better down the road.”

We need to find a place where we are safe.
We walk into that which we cannot yet see.

Say it plain, that many have died for this day.
Sing the names of the dead who brought us here,
who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce,
built brick by brick the glittering edifices
they would then keep clean and work inside of.

Praise song for struggle.
Praise song for the day.
Praise song for every hand-lettered sign,
the figuring it out at kitchen tables.

Some live by “love thy neighbor as thyself.”
Others by “first, do no harm” or “take no more than you need.”
What if the mightiest word is “love”
love beyond marital, filial, national;
love that casts a widening pool of light;
love with no need to preempt grievance?

In today’s sharp sparkle, this winter air,
anything can be made,
any sentence begun.
On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp,
praise song for walking forward in that light.

Read after Barack Obama's inaugural address
January 20, 2009

January 15, 2009

Our Culture of Dysphoria

The following post has been brought to you in part by:


Click here to find out if Havidol® is right for you!


What aspects of western dominant culture are the most insidious and pose the greatest challenge to the church? I often hear that it is evolution, gay rights, abortion, and the prevailing doctrine of "tolerance." Someone with more patience than me can wade through the ocean of misconceptions and erroneous interpretations at work in the current debate over these issues. However, I would like to suggest an often overlooked aspect of our culture that seems to be a greater challenge than the above hot-button issues, and that is this this culture's cultivation of dysphoria (A state of unease or generalized dissatisfaction with life. The opposite of euphoria).

In the early years of the church Christians would actually prepare themselves for various kinds torture in order to confess Christ even under the most grueling of circumstances. Such stories of Christians resisting threats of excruciating torture stands in stark contrast to the stories of many western Christians who find it almost unbearable to be in a state of discomfort.

We do not have to look far to find examples of the fact that our current economy is contingent upon a society that is compelled to buy products that avoid discomfort and promise a life of ease, comfort and convenience. This compulsion to buy such things is provoked by the cultivation of dysphoria. Why else would I be compelled to buy a remote control that does much more than merely control my tv from a remote distance?

So what? you might ask. Well, this might sound redundant, but if we continually make choices that avoid discomfort, then it seems to follow that we are going to be predisposed to make choices that avoid discomfort. This cannot be good. Again, this is in stark contrast to early Christians who put themselves in positions that made them endure discomfort, pain, and even the threat of death so as to predispose themselves to not be as influenced by those things. That is to say that while the early Christians were predisposed to resist coercion even under torture, contemporary Christians are predisposed to be persuaded to do some pretty stupid things with nothing but the threat of discomfort.

If western Christians were transported to the time of Nero, what would it take to get us to deny Christ - threaten to withhold a side item from a the menu; threaten to withhold drugs for our attention, mood, or weight disorder; threaten to make us be seen in clothes from 80's?


January 8, 2009

The Truth Project: Simply a Bad Way of Talking

The more I listen to how the Truth Projects talks about truth, the more I come to realize that it seems they have an urge to separate truth from Jesus. Of course they proof-text that Jesus is the way and the truth and the life, but they isolate verses that cast truth in the abstract rather than intimately connected with the incarnation (which in turn is intimately connected with the church). Then they make the declaration, “This scripture reveals that salvation is a result of a person's belief in God's truth claims.” This statement is irksome because scripture doesn't reveal that "salvation is a result of a person's belief in God's truth claims" but a life lived in the fullness of Christ.

It is also interesting that out of all of the proof-texts offered, they leave out Ephesians 4:21, which reads, “that is not the way you learned Christ! For surely you have heard about him and were taught in him, as truth is in Jesus.” It seems that they do not want to associate truth with the living community of Christ, as it is implied in Romans 10:8-10:

‘The word is near you, on your lips and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved.

The problem with how the Truth Projects talks about truth is that the confession that “Jesus is Lord” will no longer suffice. Now, we must confess that this confession is a truth that exist regardless of us and outside of us.

Does Jesus want truth to exist apart from us? It seems that the message of the incarnation is that the truth is near us, that God is wrapping all of creation into Godself. Granted, we need to guard against the danger of making truth whatever we want it to be (which is usually called a lie), but we also must confess that, by the grace of God, truth is with us, and indeed in us. If truth corresponds to God, and hell is separation from God, then why would we want to assert a particular kind of confession that emphasizes the separation of God/truth from humanity rather than a confession that emphasizes Emmanuel, “God with us”?

Other Posts on The Truth Project:
1. The Truth Project?
2.
Wariness of The Truth Project


I also want to include this link to Hackman's Musings. He has honored me with a link to these pages, and I would be remiss not to link back to his thoughts on this topic. He makes numerous spot-on critiques and observations, as well as facilitates a much larger conversation in his comment section.

1. The Truth Project: Part 1

2. The Truth Project: Part 2


Blog Archive