A Sense of Place?

R.R. Reno has an excellent essay over at First Things. It's one of those essays that reminds you that while an argument seems to be over and done, there are still some very smart people pulling you back to the table, presenting things in an old (but not stale) and penetrating way. The debate? Patriotism.

As Reno mentions, much more profoundly than I ever could, it's chic right now to criticize nationalism, especially American patriotism. I have made such critiques on this blog and in my sermons. But Reno reminds us--quite well--that there is something true and beautiful in every culture--which is why the kings of the earth bring their splendour into the New Jerusalem--and so there is something that is worth loving in every culture, as well. Because of this, there is something worth fighting for in every culture. I can agree with Reno up to this point.

However, the beginning of Reno's essay makes me uneasy and its conclusion confirms this uneasiness. Reno says that G.K. Chesterton was a sucker for "romantic" images, like soldiers with swords crossed and flags rippling in the wind. Indeed, who has seen battle scenes from Lord of the Rings and not been moved? But what Reno cites approvingly gives me chills, because the images he mentions are people against people, not Elves against Orcs. They are people against people, not good vs. evil. Tolkien's pictures can be moving, inspiring even, precisely because they are fantasy. When it becomes all too real it ceases being romantic and becomes something brutal, awful, and destructive--even if one believes, as I do, one can engage in war Christianly. If one can see this image as romantic, then one has been lured, I think, into seeing why war is so seductive.

My uneasiness as Reno concludes, "In genuine patriotism, we give ourselves away to our roots—not unequivocally, not uncritically, not without reserve, but really and without hedging our bets. All our flags are corrupted by sin, but when we salute them, we prepare the heart for a deeper, life-abandoning salute to the cross and abandonment to God." Once Reno has described abandonment to God as "deeper" than patriotism, he has put them in the same category, just a different levels. Abandonment to God is what allows me to re-categorize all other commitments. It is not devotion to country that prepares my devotion to God; it is my devotion to God that enables proper devotion to country. It is loving God *before* any and all else--country, family, self--that enables proper loving of self, family, country possible, even responsible. Loyalty to God makes any kind of loyalty to country Christian because it means that the one to whom my first allegiance is given constructs and enables any and all other expressions of loyalty.

Priesthood of All Believers?

A couple asked if I would perform their marriage. I have never met them and I doubt I will get a shot to meet them, certainly not to get to know them in any kind of significant way. I typed out an email explaining some of my concerns in performing their marriage, offering a reflection from my own wedding. You see, I did not know what I was doing when I said, "I do." [Can anyone who hasn't been married know what life-long fidelity (in the most robust sense for all three of those words) means until they've lived an entire life full faith to one person?] But when this concerns me a little bit (and it has only concerned me in small increments thus far) I am able to think of those who stood with me--brothers, all--who either knew me, knew marriage, or both better than me and still supported the decision Heather and I were making. Beyond these brothers, I thought of Daryl, my pastor, and his act of seeing us into marriage and presenting us married. His addition is not encouragement and support, like that of my brothers, but of confidence in God and his grace. You see, none of my friends know what life-long fidelity is like either. But Daryl stood in for Jesus, who does know life-long faithfulness--to his Father and his Father's world--and Daryl affirmed for Jesus that his Spirit is available to us, enabling Heather and me to live out a faithful marriage for life, however imperfectly it reflects the Triune God's commitment to his creation. Daryl could not have done this for us without knowing me; more importantly, Daryl could not have done this for us without knowing Jesus. I wouldn't want just anyone standing in for Jesus. Perhaps I am seeing just a little bit of what my brother Tim is seeing more clearly regarding the sacrament power of the priesthood, even as I see just a little bit of the hardship his family is facing.

Very cool video

Very cool video.

Beware the slope....

I find myself agnostic on a certain issue now, whereas about 6 months ago I disagreed with my brother Tim on it.

I enjoy being able to go into public buildings and not breathing in smoke. I like going to restaurants and not seeing a cloud of smoke hanging around the ceiling. However, I don't like that companies feel the need to change their services because it is deemed that some people are being discriminated against. These things seem to me to be related.

Meme me once shame on you. Meme me twice....can't get memed again.

I've been memed by Nate Crawford, a seminary friend who is very smart but whose intelligence doesn't make you feel dumber, but gives you hope that if you are friends with him long enough you will become smart like him. I call this the Joel Green factor.

The rules are as follows:

1. Link to the person who tagged you (done above).
2. Post the rules on your blog (making this line a post within a post).
3. Write six random things about yourself (see below).
4. Tag five people at the end of your post and link to them (further below).
5. Let each person know they've been tagged and leave a comment on their blog.
6. Let the tagger know when your entry is up (if it ever is).

Random things about me:

1. I stole my cousin's Eric Lindros rookie card when I was about 8-9 years old while he played ping-pong with my brother Paul. He found out and I had to return it.

2. I was one of a select few who knew and visited a dummy in the attic of my dorm at BBC. Roger Hunter: We shall not forget you.

3. I was picked up by the police after floating over a mile on a large chunk of ice down the Saint John river that flowed behind Tom Phillippe dorm at BBC. Many good hours were spent chopping large chunks of ice away and many cold returns to the dorm were suffered after we fell in.

4. I once stayed up until 3am reading "A History of Western Philosophy: Kant and the Nineteenth Century" (as part of a quasi-independent study with Nathan Crawford, no less!) This stood as the latest I had stayed up reading until last fall when I stayed up to 3:30am reading the final Harry Potter book.

5. I used to have one of the highest scores for the Windows game Jezzball posted on an internet site.

6. I was ping-pong champion of my college four straight years.

I will tag: Tim Perry, Matthew Rose, Mark Brewer, Dwight Schrute, and Rob Meeks.

Division of America

Peter Leithart over at First Things puts a finger on what I fear will be an element in the coming years of American politics. Just as, in my opinion, disagreement with the policies of Barack Obama during the campaign was taken as a critique of hope, Leithart fears that disagreement with the policies of Barack Obama will be taken as racism. Indeed, if the Obama election was about race--and I don't think it was--then critique of his administration can't help but be about race. (Moreover, if it was about race, then the divisions of race remain, with just a different race ruling. It's only if the election was not about race does it actually reveal an improvement in race relations.)

It seems to me that this political moment--a country whose elite are concerned with racial and economic divisions--is exactly when the Reformed theology and Radical Orthodoxy conversation must take center stage among theologians concerned with cultural commentary and critique. Radical Orthodoxy reminds us that the real divisions between people are not sociological, but theological. It's religion that divides us because it's religion that has been the source of unity of so many groups. This is not a bad thing. There's no such thing as a judgment free zone, nor should there be. The Reformers, on the other hand, must continue to speak to their politicians and to their culture because culture is created by God, as well, and we do well to preserve, promote, and defend aspects of the culture of which Christians can be proud and that will be brought into the Kingdom of our Lord, Jesus (Rev. 21:26).

Obama supporters needed

I, for one, am looking forward to being able to critique a liberal president for the next four years. (Prediction: Obama is not re-elected in 2012. Unless Sarah Palin runs against him. Time for the "high right" to re-engage and get their candidate nominated.)

So, I'm looking for someone to help me understand what the President elect had in mind when he said this:



Um...what? Did I just hear what I thought I heard? A national civilian force that's just as strong and well funded as the US military to engage in national security issues in the US? First, aren't Democrats against such bloated military spending as already exists without funding another force? Second, are you telling me that a government administration that will be tougher on private on gun ownership wants to have a government force just as powerful as its military--i.e., that carries guns? Isn't that what the second amendment was developed to be against?

So, I'd appreciate some Obama supporters to tell me what they think he means. Please.

Review: There Will be Blood

While my wife was doing real ministry--pouring her energy and talents out for our teens at the Word of Life "Superbowl"--I did a load of laundry and watched "There Will Be Blood," starring Daniel Day-Lewis. (I find Louis to be a fantastic actor because I hate his characters so much--both in this movie and "Gangs of New York.") I hated this movie and for all the reasons it wanted me to. So, it was really good, but I would never buy it, rent it (again), or recommend it to anyone.

Why this hatred, you ask? Because it tells a story of an oil man, Daniel Plainview, in the late 1800s and early 1900s. It's important to note this is the story of an oil man because they are the first words spoken in the entire movie, coming after about 15 minutes without speech. Plainview finds coal, starts an oil company, and builds his empire. Along the way he uses people, hates people, and kills people. He uses his alleged son, H.W., and his "sweet face," simply to advance his oil business by appearing as a family man. When Plainview takes his son's own business development as competition, he forces his out of his life repeatedly calling him a bastard from a basket.

Plainview kills the man who presents himself as his brother, though he was the only friend Daniel ever had. The movie lets you know that the title is a semi-prophecy because even in this violence there is no blood in the shooting. The death that finally brings blood is that of the false preacher from the church of the Third Revelation, Paul Sunday, who tries to sell Plainview a tract of land that used to belong to a member of his congregation. Plainview's anger rises through this conversation until he finally beats Paul to death with a bowling pin, saying to his approaching, unaware servant what the movie has been affirming all along, "I'm finished!"

The movie is a realist and critical portrayal of our world from a Nietzschean perspective. All of Plainview's life is about his use and manipulation power--figuratively (in his relationships) and literally (with his oil business). Even the one who should reject and reform power, the preacher, uses it to achieve an identity in the town and overpowers his own father during one supper. Indeed, Plainview, during his violent reaction to Sunday's groveling offer, yells over and over, "I am the Third Revelation!" There is no room for religion to transform anyone. All there is in this movie is power--some who live by it and others "too weak to seek it." Barf. (It occurred to me that the phrase, 'too weak to seek it' is one that I've picked up from somewhere before, quite possibly my brother Tim. It should have been quoted from the start, as a result. Sorry 'bout that!)

Workers of Atonement

The Tent of Meeting is foundational to atonement in Exodus. God gave instructions to make atonement for the altar and that what touched it would be pure. Once the tent and the altar were consecrated, God would dwell with the people (Exodus 29:44-46). God gifted people to make the surrounding holiness necessities, like the ark of the covenant, the atonement cover, and the Tent of Meeting itself and its furnishings (Exodus 31:1-11). They were to use gold, silver, bronze, stones, and wood. The connection of the temporal--the materials, and the defiled--the humans, with the eternal and the means of purification is not to be missed. God has ordained that objects fashioned by people are to be holy and sacred and means of atonement that he might dwell.

In 1 Corinthians 3, Paul encourages the church to build on the foundation of Jesus Christ using gold, silver, and costly stones, rather than wood, hay, or straw. Paul says that whatever one builds on this foundation will be found out to be either permanent or temporary--meaningful or meaningless. But this is connected to Paul's statements that the church is God's building and that the church--its people--is God's temple and that God's temple is sacred. Now rather than just a few being gifted to build the sacred building of God, God has equipped the church--people!--to build on the foundation of Christ. And the sacred objects? People!

Look at the progression of God's purifying work. Now rather than setting aside a place where God will dwell, the Word has become flesh and dwelt among us, merging the eternal and the temporal, the pure and the defiled, in Jesus of Nazareth, whose work is the foundation for God's "sacred building." But the work is not God's alone, as he has expanded the grace and gifting to all whom God has brought into this building to be his skilled craftsmen, able to work with gold, silver, and costly stones, pouring into the lives of those God views as sacred, his people.

Another good article from First Things

As is often the case, in my opinion, this article is worth the large amount of mental energy and time it takes to read this article from First Things. It considers the abortion issue, again, from a person who would like to vote Obama.