An Integrated Approach

Leave a comment

on Canto II

“So did that new-formed flock of souls give up
their feast of song, and seek the mountainside,
rushing to find a place they hoped was there” 

Canto II, 129-132.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the future and how the way I conceive of the future affects my understanding of the present; how much of my life I have lived rushing to find a place I hoped was there, instead of acknowledging what is here now.

I do think there are times when it’s ok to rush forward into life rightly hopeful and there are times when we rush into life falsely so. Until recently, false hope has always meant a hope that in hindsight we see had no chance by earthly standards. Now, though, false hope is the belief that holy deliverance will come from a source unrelated to the pain I am fleeing; a hope built on probabilities and events that do not address the root cause of my flight.

The text above is the last full tercet in the second Canto of Dante’s Purgatorio, the second cantica of the Divina Commedia. Most of us are familiar with Inferno, the first cantica, having been assigned it in college English classes or at least heard of it being assigned in college English classes. Purgatorio is less-read, but to me feels more sincerely connected to my experience of this world. I’ve often wondered if this world is actually Purgatory, since it  is the place where we come to terms with how our sins have caused us and others pain, and it incorporates moments of both heaven and hell. In the poem, a group of souls have been delivered to the shores of Mount Purgatory. Upon meeting Dante and his guide, one shade is recognized as a earthly friend with the gift of song. He is entreated by Dante and acquiesces, singing a song that all the crowd beholds. Cato interrupts the reverie and chastens them to get about the business of climbing toward Paradise, they disperse and the poet describes their flight which will directly correspond to and cure their sins.

We all know what it feels like to hope against the facts, to hope in events, situations, people. Hope against facts is not false hope. Only when we hope in the things of this world to distract us, to fill a need that hasn’t been met, can we call it false hope. The only thing that satisfies is the balm of grace, the discovery that God has a father’s lap for us to climb into after our long journey rather than a some newspaper in the shack out back.

That God has saved the world and awaits us with open arms, is a hope with reverence, because it is a hope founded in the holy revelation of Christ. I still can’t quite believe that God is at the top of the mountain waiting to welcome me, but I dearly hope He is. There’s a bravery to that kind of hope, because it’s the hope of a finite being on a cosmic scale. Just like the pardoned souls in Purgatorio, whose race up the mountain is charged with the grandeur of God as Hopkins said, so too are our lives constant practices in cosmic hope. They are electrified and intensified by their desire for the infinite. The climbers have such a lofty hope of the warm welcome of God. The rough and steep climb doesn’t give them any indication that He will be there, but they hope He is. They have been told He will be there. Just so with Lent, there are days when I can’t imagine that Easter will ever come, but then, I see a glimpse of the resurrection, of all that I hope to be true, and I keep climbing.


Leave a comment

on Steve Turner and Philippians 4:8

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.  What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.” Philippians 4:8-9

I’m currently reading Imagine: A Vision for Christians in the Arts by Steve Turner. Many of the ideas are not new to me, mainly because I know some of the people who influenced Steve Turner. While I have had minimal contact with L’Abri, Nigel Goodwin—a voice of permission for Turner—was instrumental in my development as an artist as well (even though I only sat with him twice) and was instrumental in the development of my mentors. Steve and I share a lineage and I love hearing the family stories. It’s always good to re-hear truth in new ways, to be reminded of the things we know; it usually helps us learn something we don’t.

In the third chapter, Turner discusses Philippians 4:8 and how it has often been used to keep Christians away from the arts. Its often regurgitated logic—that many things on stage or in film or in song are not good/true/lovely/noble and therefore should never be experienced by good Christians—pops up in every generation. It’s been part of my own self-censorship as a creator and, for all of my egalitarian ideas, I have often found myself arguing against video games armed with it. Writing out of his experience in 1970s rock-and-roll culture, Turner tries to make it ok to be a Christian surrounded by non-Christians who are talking about their truthful experience of the world. This desire is based on a belief I share with Turner, Christians don’t have exclusive rights to truth. We may claim that right when it comes to the Truth of Christ, but all persons have the authority to explore the truth of their experiences.

Turner attempts to free us from an exclusive list of possible Christian activities and experiences by saying that Paul’s statement to the Philippians has two real implications, neither of them that Christians should stay away from art/culture. The first implication of Phil. 4:8, is that we now have a list of standards by which we should judge all that we think, say and do. Turner uses the example of Macbeth. We hold the characters to our standards and in doing so, the sinfulness of man without God is revealed. And in the end, we see the virtues of God win out. The second implication it that have a list for useful mediation topics. Turner here cites David and Bathsheba, explaining that while David does something ‘wrong’ we come away from the story focused on what he should have done right. We see goodness and truth revealed precisely because David is unable to be good and true. Turner makes excellent points, especially about the necessity of the juxtaposition of sin and virtue, and disarmsPhil. 4:8 in the culture war. However, I think there’s more nuance to Paul’s position if we look at the whole passage, a nuance that allows art redemption even if we don’t come away with a lesson.

If we go back a few verses, starting with Philippians 4:4, Paul tells us to rejoice and not be anxious for the peace of God guards our hearts. If we try to “guard out hearts” like our good youth group leaders told us to, we are destined to fail. It’s not by our own power. Looking back, how much teen suffering could have been avoided if we were told that God was guarding us and we could participate with Him through pryer and our thoughts? Being eternal watchdogs is stressful, it produces anxiety, and when we choose not to engage with someone’s art out of fear we are not trusting the Peace of the Lord to protect us. Through “prayer and supplication”(v6) we quiet fear, and boldly walk through the world in the peace of God, as if nothing can stick to us. I also think the verb in verse 8 is important. We were told to “think on these things”(v8). We weren’t told, “Don’t experience the world”. We have to, we live in it; trying to live a life where we never encounter darker things will create anxiety in the best of us. How little is our faith that the darkness of one movie is stronger than the peace of the Lord? When we are in the dark we need to think about the light. If our experience of the darkness does not carry with it the truth of the light, then of course, listening to a song about lust is going to be really scary because you are unmoored from the peace of God. So how do we make sure that the peace of God is with us, that we aren’t pulled into habitual sin? Verse 9 tells us, by practicing the truth that we have seen and heard. It’s not a big complex mystery. Meditate and live with the truths God has shown and we should have no fear of listening to a hard piece of music or going to a rough piece of theater. Art is relational. If we are scared of how an artist is trying to relate we miss the chance of getting to know their soul. The encouragement and promises of Philippians is much more than a set of standards. When the whole passage is taken together, we see that it is not our experiences that have the final say, but the truths that we practice and what we allow to dwell in us afterwards that truly challenge or sustain the Peace of God.

Leave a comment

on endings and beginnings

2014 is almost here! Finally!

2013 was a beast of a year and I am not sorry to see it end. With a new year, comes a new project (also a new job, a new home in a new state and a new life direction, but that’s beside the point). The fall was not what I expected, and some serious health issues have caused a complete and utter redesign of what I thought I would do with my life.

As I convalesce, not wanting to further rot my brain on TV (though I’ve done a fair bit of that), I have turned once again to books, my first loves and dearest friends. Initially, I found that the fantasy novels of my youth were too intense and ‘getting healthy’ books usually left me with more fear about what could happen rather than encouraging me that I was healing. I craved a meditative existence so I called a friend and asked for a recommendation, “Who’s writing feels prayerful without being about God?”. Enter Annie Dillard. Pilgrim at Tinker Creek was not a peaceful book, it was not the walking through pretty pastures that I thought I wanted. It was, is, an honest look and meditation on the world that the author encountered. It is dark and rough, light-with-the-dark, and as I read, looking despair and gruesome reality in the face, I felt stronger. It took nearly two months to finish, my heart wasn’t always able to go to the dark crags around Tinker Creek in those far east mountains. I immediately wanted to turn it into a play. I wanted to share this treasure, this kindred spirit, this woman’s soul who saw the world in a way that was so hard and so good for me. I still want to adapt the work, inexperienced though I am, so stay tuned.

However, the real project I want to embark upon is more record-keeping in nature. I’ve long kept a reading list, but I want to expand upon that. I often have very strong feelings/reactions/ideas about someone else’s work and I think it’s time to discipline myself to concisely articulate my feelings/reactions/ideas. This year, since I am such an inconsistent blogger, I have decided to try and write something about most of the books I read. I am aiming for once a month on the hope that I will exceed my expectations.

I am already losing the taste of wonder about Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, and that saddens me. I hope, that by getting some of my thoughts and the authors phrases onto paper or screen, I will be able to carry these found wisdoms with me a bit longer.

Photo from the park where I went to read 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek'

Photo from the park where I went to read ‘Pilgrim at Tinker Creek’


Both photos are taken with a Holga film camera, a present from a dear friend, which has accompanied me on my daily walks for some time now.

Leave a comment

on big changes

It’s been a while. It’s not that I haven’t written anything. I’ve started to write a great many things. But for whatever reason, I have not finished them. Sorry for that.

But, there are some BIG CHANGES headed my way. In 5 days I move to California, and in less than a month, I will start my new job at Raphael House in San Francisco. I am going to try to write something about my time at the shelter and in the city once a month. So follow, subscribe, whatever. I’ll have some thoughts on the move in the next week.

Leave a comment

on letting girls wear less…

“Try ignoring their bodies completely and getting directly to the work of cherishing those minds and those hearts instead. As L.V. Anderson noted here recently, most of them will get tired of playing around with the tacky clothes you hate so much anyway…What girls need to learn is that they count no matter what they wear or who they have sex with, and the best way to send that message is to start acting like you believe it’s true. ”

Amanda Marcotte, The Atlantic


These are deeply flawed, though well-intentioned, statements.

Bodies matter. The real world matters. The physical manifestations (ie clothing, hair, makeup) of a woman-in-training’s inward ideas of herself are by nature public, and they do matter. Her choice matters, and by recognizing that, you have the opportunity to respect her—in light of what she’s wearing.

The issue to be addressed, the one that underlies the “inappropriate clothing” issue discussed above, is not about appropriateness, or prurient sexual deviancy or the moral decay of the American adolescent. The discussion so far is indicative of a lack of understanding and willingness to see and act with nuance, the issue is how can we help move our youth forward, into greater health and maturity, to a place where a flash of underwear from under a pleated skirt does not dictate the events of a classroom? How can we all, (including men and men-in-training) claim the responsibility to accept, process and respect what we see around us before we act?

This is a shared burden of men and women, to teach each other who they are, by figuring out who they are. Girls need the room to experiment, to push the envelop, to explore sexuality in a relatively safe way and they need teachers and parents—mature gendered adults—who can steward them. You cannot dis-acknowledge a huge part of who the other person is in the room by dismissing their bodies and how they choose to display them; even if it is for the sake of cherishing their mind. Taking the sexual potential away from women is not the answer.

How should we approach the fact that all people make choices about their appearance that we do not agree with and that we may find “inappropriate”? Talk to them about why they chose those clothes. And when those people are young and in-process, talk not to shame them, but to help them think through their own choices. When talking to your female student, first, make the conversation about her, not how she is affecting the teenage boy in the back of the class or her male teachers. Help women-in-training decide what they want to say to the world, then help them figure out how their choices can help or hinder them. If a woman-in-training wants to be a sex object, she will be a sex object and she will have a reason for doing it. She might not be aware of her reasons, or she might. However, if we are to believe that life is about coming into a greater awareness (a discussion that I will be glad to articulate at a later time), then we need to accept that these women-in-training (and all people) are in process of figuring out what they want to say.

As a member of the public I would rather not be invited into every young person’ ideas about their sexuality, but I must defend their right to be in process, to figure it out, to be mature enough to say, “I see you trying to figure these things out, even if you are not fully conscious of it, and I am not going to overweight your process, to make it more than it is, or less an it is”. I think its also important to consider the value of doing things in front of others. Its why we run a sentence by a co-worker in an email to a boss, why sporting matches are watched and why an actor must have an audience. Wearing clothes, raising a hand in class, dancing on your way to get the mail, makes our ideas real, and only when they are real can we interact with them. The physical world matters.

The balance between “slut-shaming” (an awful term and mentality, but one that comes up too often) and extreme female supremacy is actually a tricky one. How to we bring dignity and humanity to all involved? How to respect the men and women who make choices we don’t agree with and those who receive the results of those choices? There’s a way to do it, to have these actual, verbal conversations—but it involves a lot more time, effort and interaction that an iphone culture is comfortable with; and much more consideration than a 500 word op-ed at the Atlantic or on this blog.

Leave a comment

on “biblical” womanhood

The following is a section of Rachel Held Evans’ response to Kathy Keller’s critique of Evans’ book,  A Year of Biblical Womanhood . I highly advise reading the whole response, what she has to say about being a thinking, teach, speaking, embodied woman is lovely and useful. But her discussion of word biblical and how we use it to justify our own selective readings of scripture is the real meat.  The following chunk discusses so many of my frustrations with this word, especially as I experienced it’s usage in college, the word that could trump anyone’s moral high ground.

“But when we turn the Bible into an adjective and stick it in front of another loaded word (like manhood, womanhood, politics, economics, values, marriage, and even equality), we tend to ignore or downplay the parts of the Bible that don’t fit our presuppositions. In an attempt to simplify, we force the Bible’s cacophony of voices into a single tone, to turn a complicated, beautiful, and diverse holy text into a list of bullet points we can put in a manifesto or creed. And more often than not, we end up more committed to what we want the Bible to say than what it actually says. 

I have been told on more than one occasion that “just because something is in the Bible doesn’t mean it’s biblical.” That’s about as clear as mud, if you ask me! And it shows just how many assumptions go into any claim that this or that is “biblical” in the prescriptive sense. 

What frustrates me the most about complementarian conversations regarding “biblical womanhood” is not the fact that I disagree with a complementarian interpretation of the text but the fact that complementarians consistently insist that they are not, in fact, interpreting the text, but simply reading and applying its clear teachings, and that anyone who might disagree with their conclusions must simply hate the Bible and have no interest in faithfully living by it.  But this idea of a simple, unbiased, and patently obvious hermeneutic is an illusion. It is appealed to, but never explained; cited, but never explored or unpacked. 

…Which one of many reasons why I wrote A Year of Biblical Womanhood. I wanted to unpack that phrase and ask what sort of presuppositions we are bringing to it. ”

Later in the article she continues:

“…this idea of a simple, unbiased, and patently obvious hermeneutic is an illusion. More often than not, appeals to “biblical womanhood”…or “biblical” anything for that matter… represent an oversimplification, a reductive approach to biblical interpretation that fails to at least acknowledge its own hermeneutical biases. We all have these biases. We all have to interpret the text. We’re all selective as a result. That’s not the problem. The problem is denying that this is the case! “

I do not believe that Evans’ is trying to start or fan a debate. Here I think she sets a platform for an honest discussion, involving proper questioning and discourse, where the process of engaging is more important than who becomes what product.  While I have linked Keller’s critique, I have done so for the sake of telling the story of how these paragraphs have come to existence, not to create a dichotomy or even a Hegellian model of thesis-antithesis(synthesis is not the goal here). If you get caught up in taking sides, you’ve missed the point.

Leave a comment

on politics and religion

The two things you aren’t supposed to talk about in polite company. I know.

I should probably wait til our deacon/soon-to-be-priest Mike speaks on politics and faith in a couple of weeks, but after a few very interesting conversations this past week, I’m contributing my two cents.

I’m going to first talk about confession, an odd place to start a discussion of politics, yes, but only in the light of confession and the restoration of correct relationship, do I think we, especially as members of the faith, have any business discussing what I will briefly review.  Confession in the Anglican tradition is a wonderful thing. It assumes both that we have failed to fully imitate Christ and that through His power we can attempt again, trusting that He is a good God who loves and delights in us. We communally confess every week before participating in the eucharist. Through confession we clear the air as it were, and come before one another and God in full harmony. It is my belief that only in this attitude of communal submission can we approach the humbleness required to delineate a sensible Christian ethic of political involvement.

A quick anecdote: I have a friend who is very angry with God, in part because he believes that his chronic sin is a gift God has given him, but that scripture very explicitly considers his choices hurtful to others and himself. Every time I talk to this friend and see the amount of pain his self-inflicted conflict causes, can only say softly, lovingly: “But, perhaps, you are wrong”.  Perhaps this thing upon which you are building a mountain against God, is not worthy of founding a mountain at all. And perhaps if you gave up trying to justify your choices and simply accepted the wisdom offered to you by so many of the body, that this specific battle would seem much less important. I have seen in my own life that only when I have tremblingly come with Christ and said to God, “Even though I have ample evidence to the contray, perhaps, I am mistaken? Perhaps I really have built my opinion on something so false?” have I been able to cast off an old way of thinking and embrace a more secure one founded in love. That’s what scares me about politics, about so much of the world, about Westboro Baptist, and any given media pundit, the inability to softly and humbly ask of ourselves, “Perhaps I am mistaken?”

Here are a few things I think I can say, as a person of faith. A person o faith being an individual who believes that the healing of our world and it’s reconciliation to its Creator is found only through the sacrifice and resurrection of Christ and His continued work in the Church.

Our true and primary identity is found in God, the creator of heaven and earth, and the Church.

Government is not His chosen vehicle for healing society.

Government can affect change on the structure and practice of a society.

The American government is not His chosen vehicle for healing American society.

The American government can affect change on the structure of the lives of it’s citizens, but it should not be excepted to carry out the mission of the church.

If the government has more to do with structure and function, then how should a Christian approach elections? Legislation? Judiciary review? What should our over arching goal be? Since the American model of government is responsible for organizing and adjudicating various structures of life, perhaps we should hold it to its most broad convictions, allowing us the space to make our own decisions about how to live and work. What would it look like if we voted with the goal of creating a world were it is easy, not mandatory, to live like a Christian? It seems to me a permissible society that values the traditions and truths of others and restricts little of human dealings except in instances of harm and abuse would be the safest and most conducive place for Christians to live radically according to the love of Christ preserving the mysteries and praying as Christ taught us.

It seems to me that as contemporary, protestant, American Christians we most often abdicate our role as the image-bears of Christ, of those called to heal the world through the power of the Holy Spirit, but then blame a government for not protecting the fantasy of moral purity that so many truly devout people hold. In this we are mistaken. Perhaps if we said, the responsibility of truth, love, wisdom and grace lies in us, not in our laws, perhaps then we could continue the work of healing the world. We will constantly be doing the work, well or not. Let us stop acting as if we can’t live like Christ taught us until we have x, y, or z policiy passed.

Like the reading from James in this morning’s service said, we should be “quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires”. and maybe if we all started our political discussion with a posture of confessionally humbled hearts, with the question: “Perhaps, I am mistaken?” softly on our lips, we would begin the process of true discourse, both to heal our world through the work of the church and to wisely select lawmakers who understand the limitations of government and are not saddled with an issue-centric moral imperative.