the parish

Scrooge 1 - Christmas Fans 0

No one ever gets to call me scrooge again. Ever. Just read this. A Wal-Mart employee trampled to death. Other employees hurt trying to help. People stepping over his dead body. People complaining that the store was closing in the wake of his death. Ahh...Advent. Any predictions how long it will take for someone to blame stores for offering big sales on Black Friday? I can hear it; you can, too. "These stores are acting irresponsibly by offering ridiculously low prices right at opening, encouraging grouping, stampeding, and mob mentality." The article said that police are reviewing the tape for possible criminal charges. Somehow, I don't foresee anyone being punished over this, except Wal-Mart. They will certainly be sued, and the fans of Christmas, rushing to get Kendall a talking marmoset or Joshua a new cellphone, will walk away with barely a blight on their conscience. I will spend the next couple days trying to come up with a better alternative to Christmas than Festivus, but I will come up with something.

A Post-Christian Christmas

The insanity has begun. It's that glorious time of year when people stampede to get a toy or a Blueray or a game console, when Bill O'Reilly will talk about the "war on Christmas", when conservatives will boycott stores for saying "Happy Holidays", when Christians will unreflectively mix god and mammon, and when I will be subjected to Christmas music, some good, most bad, until December 26...no matter where I go. Sing it with me now: "It's Christmastime in the city...."

Last week I asked my class of freshmen how many of them were excited about Christmas. Most raised their hands. The emo kids and the less fashionable but equally bitter, cynical kids glared. I then asked how many were Christians. Four hands went up in a class of twenty-one. "Why are the rest of you celebrating Christmas?" I asked. One intrepid student asked a follow-up: "What do you mean?" Silly boy. Most have learned by now that my questions are only a prelude to me torturing them with questions they can't answer and so have wisely shut up. Not so my intrepid young learner.

"Chrismas is a Christian holiday. It celebrates the birth of Jesus as the savior of the world. Do you believe Jesus is the savior of the world?" I asked.

"No." Finally looking leery.

"Then why are you celebrating his birth?"

"I just like the family stuff, the presents, the tradition..." he trailed off.

"So you can't buy gifts for the people you love the rest of the year? You have to have an orgy of consumerism and debt at the end of each year to mark your affection?"

Finally not answering.

I know it's cruel. And I know it's weak. There are plenty of good reasons to continue a tradition, but I've found 18-year olds to be singularly bad at articulating the philosophies that undergird their practices. But for me this has become an important question. Why would I celebrate Christmas?

I was talking to a friend about it yesterday, and she asked a very good question. "Can't you appreciate the joy of Christmas?" I think I can. I'll need to separate the joy from the consumerism and the theological assumptions, but I think she's right. There may come a time when I can break out of the cycle of gift-giving and lights and trappings, but I can still appreciate the joy felt by millions at the prospect of a savior born to save us all. I now believe that savior is our own good sense, laws, hard work, relationships, and compassion, but I'm not sure he said a whole lot different than that, quite frankly. I won't be singing any carols this year, and I'll try not to be a scrooge--the hhdw has already promised a tee shirt if I do act like one--but I also can't honestly participate in something so...well...vulgar, crass, and commercial. Christians could lead the way on this, but I'm betting their going to be in line for the game platforms and clothes instead.

A little help - hold the Jesus.

The hot, compassionate hairdresser wife and I have sponsored a Ugandan girl for several years now. Yesterday we got one of those "emergency" mailers that explain why the agency urgently needs additional money right now. I looked through the photos of poor children from some of the planet's poorest countries, conveniently packaged like a deck of playing cards to more easily spread the sympathy around the room. The children were all beautiful. And I don't mean that as some sort of ontological rumination about the beauty of humanity, nor do I mean it as some faux spiritual critique of the beauty of innocence and/or poverty. I mean they were very literally beautiful, aesthetically so. Surely there are ugly kids who need sponsorship. I've seen some of the disfigured kids from Mexico and Central America whose mothers have no prenatal care and no access to prenatal vitamins and supplements. Not one hairlip in the envelope. No cleft palates. No limbs missing or truncated. Beautiful teeth, perfect smiles. How is that possible in a place of abject poverty?

I knew I was being manipulated. I passed the cards to the parish teenager, telling her she could pick two new kids to sponsor. We've decided we're not being nearly generous enough. Re-evaluating charity post-Christianity has been an interesting experience. For what I spend on wine in a week, I can sponsor about four or five kids. Crazy. Anyway, I'll return to that in a sec. First the stepchild's foray into charity marketing. She looks through the cards and selects two boys, one from Ethiopia and one from the Phillipines. She read the stories on the back of the cards. The Ethiopian boy's story was far more horrific. She chose the Phillipino though as her first choice. At least one choice has to be a girl when we choose two. This process led to two conversations: one, why are you picking the most beautiful child in the deck (because he was certainly that), and two, why are we thinking about sponsoring a child through an explicitly Christian organization?

The wife and I had a talk. Do we really want our money going to proselytize? Do we want part of what we're sending being spent on Christian education? Easy answers. No and no. Then we talked about the actual selection process: how whom we choose is based on some sort of aesthetic or emotional response to beauty or perceived sadness. I ventured into the office to start looking up secular sponsorship organizations: groups that would still focus on health, food, education, and shelter, without tossing in Bible coloring books, youth Bibles, and Sunday school. Then, while the wife and teenager watched Obama on Barbara Walters, I picked two kids from Children International. 

This is not about saying Compassion International doesn't do great work; they most certainly do, and we will fulfill our commitment to Moreen in Uganda while gritting our teeth about the "I greet you in the name of Jesus" letters. Her life is better with Compassion's help, and hearing about Jesus every week probably won't scar her. However, the wife and I have reached a point where we are trying to do what we believe is best in terms of our desire to be redemptive and our antipathy to Christianity. I picked CI because slightly more than 80% of the revenue received goes directly to the program. Only about 7% goes to management, and another 11% to fundraising. Those are damned impressive numbers. The cost for sponsorship is about 30% less than Compassion, which makes me wonder how much of the money that goes to Compassion funds proselytizing work.

For some reason, this seems like a bigger break with our past than actually leaving church or vocalizing for the first time "I am not a Christian." Maybe I'm being melodramatic. Who the hell knows. We're happy with our decision. If you're looking for a good place to give but are troubled by the religious emphasis of some charities, try CI. I'm going to work up a banner ad for the right column soon. Also, CI is in far fewer countries than Compassion so there are fewer kids to choose from, but most of the pictures I saw weren't of beautiful children, just poor kids.

The Return of Dick Rock, or Another Stripper Anthem

Nickelback has always seemed to me to be emblematic of everything that is wrong with mainstream rock: trite, monotonous, cliched--a least common denominator for people who still listen to hair metal stations on satellite radio. I was unfortunate enough to live through the 80's, and even have to admit to seeing Motley Crue, Cinderella, Bon Jovi, and Ratt live. (The Scorpions too, but I won't label them an 80's hair band.) Motley Crue went from edgy dick rock to commercial dick rock: 10 Seconds to Love became Girls, Girls, Girls. That transition led me to the conclusion that songs written about strippers or for strippers are never good. Never.

Witness Nickelback's new, stupid single "Something in Your Mouth." If 80% of the strippers in America haven't ground the pole to this song by the end of the year, I'll buy you a lap dance. And I'm willing to bet half of them will do so with a lollipop and a "pretty pink thong." I'm happy to admit that sex and angst are difficult to write songs about, at least if you want to write good songs. (Two exceptions: Rachael Yamagata's "Don't" and Bell X1's "Reacharound", the latter of which qualifies as mainstream rock.) But I'm equally sure that this new effort from Nickelback is no better than a hormonal poem the average high school freshman could produce. The saddest part of this story is that Nickelback actually utilized Mutt Lange on this project. The sound is different, thanks in part to Lange's input, but the songwriting is still Kroeger's awful work. And I hope that the nod to hip/hop throughout the song was Kroeger's awful idea, not Lange's. Kroeger sounds like he dug out all the Timbaland recordings he could find, assuming there are any available of Timbaland writing and rapping after a six-day mescaline high, and then wrote a cute little three-line rap to change up the band's monotonous sound.

I have another bold prediction regarding this song. People are going to love it. I mean love it. It's catchy. Wall of sound guitars, a throaty growl, a bit of a "white boy drunk on beer beat" to dance badly to, and lyrics about strippers and blowjobs. Oh, I know. The lyrics actually say she's sucking on her thumb, but does anyone actually believe that isn't the most obvious euphemism in the world? Combine paper-thin euphemisms with songwriting that includes the scintillating lyrics "dressed up like a princess, bettin' that her skin smells better than the scent of every flower in the desert, come on!" and you get music for lap dances. It's the only context in which music like this makes sense. Unfortunately, it won't just be played in strip clubs. And equally unfortunately, Nickelback is going to sell millions of copies of this single in various formats which will only encourage more bad music. I am hopeful that new projects like Chinese Democracy can revive mainstream rock, but I'm not all that hopeful. It may be a genre that has exhausted itself in its own vacuity. The fact that Kroeger felt the need to add faux hip/hop to his single signals that even the performers have little confidence in their product standing on its own.

Tony Jones Takes a Stand

Finally. Someone in emergent said something that the conservative side has been waiting to hear. On his beliefnet blog, Tony Jones comes out in favor of the full communion, humanity, and leadership potential (read that ordination) of the lgbt community within the community of the church. Finally. Praise Hanuman. 

Jones, who took issue with my review of his book a while back, has now done something I'd like to commend him for. There are so many pastors in emergent who believe as Jones does, including McLaren I'd bet, but they've been reluctant to take a stand on what seems an obvious civil rights and theologically critical issue. The trajectory of emergent hermeneutics seems to be toward this sort of openness, but the power structures within the church and the theological ignorance of its members make it difficult for small church or staff pastors to speak out (the fact that they ought to anyway is the subject of a different post). Jones will endure a shitstorm for this, and he'll be called everything you can imagine, but I would like to applaud his courage, the reflection he put into this, and his willingness to embrace the trajectory of his thinking. I am sincerely hopeful that his openness will encourage others in the emervangelical movement to speak out.

One Step Forward Collectively, Two Steps Back Individually

Jason posted this excellent assessment of the Bigot Belt from the freakonomics blog on his facebook. It reminded me of a conversation the hhdw had with a client the other day. I meant to blog about it, but in the insanity which is the last three weeks of a semester, I forgot. So, let me preface this conversational snippet with three facts: 1. The BGCO recently took a step forward in race relations by electing a Native American president (see Credit Where Credit is Due Department); 2. the client in the conversation is a Southern Baptist church planter's wife; 3. she's a white Christian. Here we go.

Client: Did your candidate for president win?

HHDW: Sure did.

Client: You are kidding me!

HHDW: No. I campaigned for him. Passed out fliers. Contributed money.

Client: I just can't stand the thought of all that hair grease in the White House.

I really don't know what to say at this point. The woman's daughter who was present was mortified. The hhdw said she's never been so angry with a client. She said some things that may ensure the woman never returns, and I don't believe she's sad about it. How do you call yourself a Christian? How can you be married to a man that starts churches? How can you draw your family income from a religious organization? The hhdw and I noticed a correlation between the bigots we met during the campaign and the frequency of church attendance. With rare exceptions, the people we talked to who were overt racists or who made racist remarks, even based on ignorance not malice, were church-goers. And they were members of one very large denomination. Care to guess?

The I'm Not Making This Up Department

A recent ad in a weekly paper in Oklahoma City, swear to God (no irony intended):

FEAR, STRESS, RAGE,
PAINFUL MEMORIES, GUILT, DEPRESSION,
PORN, ADDICTIONS,
SUICIDE, HATE,
LYING, OBSESSIONS,

Often set free in one session.
Call for an appt.
###-###-####
Deliverance Ministries, Inc.
Since 1984
"The Jesus way is the easy way."

I actually know this guy. Met him more than 10 years ago. He's been doing this deliverance schtick for a long time. Aside from the fact that the list sounds like a weekend at my house, I have to point out that suicide might not be curable, not if it's successful. And it seems odd that porn and addictions are separated. Can't I have a porn addiction, or is porn a completely different demon? It's good to know that the Jesus way is the easy way, too. He must have been confused with all that "narrow is the way" and "take up your cross" talk. Silly Jesus.

Black and Pink make a striking revolutionary ensemble.

This one came via Adam. Gay revolutionaries. Church invaded. Profanity. Anarchists. Kurt Vonnegut would be proud.

Credit Where Credit is Due Department

The Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma elected the first ever Native American president of their organization at the group's annual meeting in Broken Arrow yesterday. Emerson Falls is the pastor of Glorieta Baptist Church in Oklahoma City, and a member of the Sac and Fox Nation. Since I've said so many critical things about the BGCO over the years, I thought it only fair to give them credit for a progressive move in race relations. Now if we can just get a person with a vagina as a senior pastor, I'll be overwhelmed.

How to be a refundabapticnazarene tool, or my name is Tim...

Friend Jon is under assault in certain corners (dark, smelly, fear-filled, ignorant corners) of the Nazarene church. Unfortunately, Jon has always been a good friend and that is proving to be a liability. What would you expect from church folk like holiness fundangelicals? Come out from among them and all that... Tim Wirth (or Worth, not sure) has a couple websites devoted to the purification of Nazarene doctrine; this despite the fact that he seems not to understand the Wesleyan tradition. Anyway, he's been listening to the old podcasts Jon and I did for Wired Parish, and he quotes one of them extensively in this entry. You'll need to scroll down a ways or just search for Horton. His other site is ConcernedNazarenes. Both are your standard "I want to be Ingrid Schlueter, world famous apologist and champion of Jesus" apologetics sites, and like Ingrid, Tim seems to know almost nothing about scholarship since, oh, I don't know...1850. If you're a Nazarene, read and enjoy. If you're not, read and scratch your head. If you love Jon, as I do, buy him something nice and tell him Tim's a tool. And Tim, if you find your way over here, you really should try to get to know Jon. He's not a tool. He'll even be nice to you. Not sure why. Oh, and Jesus called; he said he's got this. You can go back to working a regular job now.