"The Righteousness of God"

I've had some recent conversations (and disagreements) with the Mockingbird crowd, about some of their theology - and I'm finding many of the disagreements fruitful.  Even puzzling over the reason that Evangelical Protestants tend to be much, much worse than Catholics (or even the Orthodox) on Topic H has given me a lot to think about.  Of course the "presenting issue" is the Bible, so they say.  But that's not really what's at the core, since Protestants ignore the Bible - erm, "re-evaluate Scripture" - whenever they feel like it,  too, if it suits their fancy.  More on this sometime, I promise!

And of course, along with many other gay people I've been suspicious of evangelical Protestants for a long, long time - and quite manifestly not without reason.   MBird itself, unfortunately, recommends blog posts from evangelicals who take as the default assumption the sinfulness of homosexuality (although they might qualify this by saying that "it's no worse a sin than any other" and/or that "the church should not point to this sin at the expense of others, which it often does").  This is, apparently, what passes for enlightenment on the topic; there's no real discussion of the core issues - and of course, no attempt to deal with the real people involved.   Besides that:  I've heard things from people I trust, about this.  Too bad, too; I hate it when reality loses out to fantasy (which is the very topic of this post!).

I'll probably continue to go over there and talk, because I think they're really onto something theologically (outside of Topic H) - and I do like David very much.  But I'm more ambivalent than ever about it; nobody seems, ever, to want to address the issue directly; "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is obviously still the rule in many places.  I mean, this is one of the big church issues of the moment, yet there is not a peep about it over there.  I'd be happy to talk about it (some more!) myself, if it were ever addressed.  But in fact at present I've completely ended my posting on other blogs and boards, too, because I'm very, very tired of the topic.  At some level, I guess, I can't believe people are simply going to carry on with their "beliefs" in the face of everything that's happened; the whole thing seems so last century at this point.   On one board I used to frequent but do no longer, they're still shunting discussion about the topic onto its own, separate space!  How are we supposed to move on - to grow and learn - when ridiculous things like that are still going on?   People justify this by saying that "the topic overwhelms every discussion" - but that is not our fault at this point, really.  I'm just unwilling to humor people on this subject anymore, I guess.  It's really long past time to move on - and so I'm just going to go ahead and discuss the real issues and leave the other, retro stuff behind at this point.  It's not important anymore.  (Victoria Matthews, (Anglo-Catholic) Bishop of Christchurch, NZ, has just written about her own incredulity and impatience when being asked to "defend" the idea of the Ordination of Women!)

Anyway, the latest disagreement was about this post:  "Beyond Imperatives:  A Must Read on the Law."  So much of what's said in this post - or, rather, the source it's quoting - I find simply incomprehensible.  And not for the first time.  As I wrote over there: 

I can hardly follow what’s being said sometimes – particularly when we get to things like “third use of the Law,” and “unconditional context[s] within which ‘go and sin no more’ is not an ‘if.’”  I just don’t understand what these things mean. Perhaps it’s me, and I’m not constitutionally able to grasp these ideas. But I don’t get it.

So that's to start.  But then we get to another idea:  Pastor Ed, a Lutheran, helpfully tries to explain things to me using this formula:

Luther considered the proper distinction between Law & Gospel to be the highest theological art, and the one who achieved the mark deserved a Doctorate in theology. He knew that our natural human theology is one governed by law and that we will continually gravitate back to it. We learn it as children; good boys and girls are rewarded and bad boys and girls are punished. In other words, “we get what we deserve.” 

When this theology creeps into the church L&G are mixed together and neither is properly understood. When L&G are mixed forgiveness is used like a carrot on a stick, to motivate us to do “good things” or avoid “bad things”. When L&G are mixed assurance is erased because I will never know if I have done enough to deserve forgiveness. But, when L&G are properly distinguished I am see myself for who I am (a wretched sinner without hope – Romans 7:24) and then I am pointed once again to the One who provides hope (Jesus Christ – Romans 7:25). When L&G are properly distinguished assurance is conveyed because it is not about what I have done but what Jesus did and has given to me. Grace is double blessing. Not only do I not get what I deserve (punishment), but I am given what I do not deserve (the righteousness of Jesus). Luther called this the Great Exchange.

 So that sets the scene.  I've heard this before over there:  the discussion of Atonement as a mystical acquisition of a state of "righteousness before God."  And I thought the first time I heard it, and I think now:  "This is really bizarre.  But more than that:  this is a big error, one that creates a disastrous psychological problem."

It's true that Luther did argue this:

“That is the mystery which is rich in divine grace to sinners: wherein by a wonderful exchange our sins are no longer ours but Christ’s and the righteousness of Christ not Christ’s but ours. He has emptied Himself of His righteousness that He might clothe us with it, and fill us with it.

And He has taken our evils upon Himself that He might deliver us from them… in the same manner as He grieved and suffered in our sins, and was confounded, in the same manner we rejoice and glory in His righteousness.”

–Martin Luther, Werke (Weimar, 1883), 5: 608.

Pastor Ed says this argument is Biblical, too; he cites 2 Corinthians 5:21 as the source for this argument:

God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

I'm not sure what Werke is, or how developed this idea is elsewhere in his writings - so I can't say whether Luther above is giving us a bit of one-off rhetoric or a fully-blown and defended theological position.

But I do think that such a position could cause real psychological mischief - and I believe that it has already done so and continues to do so.  This is not a good idea, truly.   It involves, in effect, the adoption of a complete and total fantasy as a principle for living:  that God "sees us as righteous" when we are sinners.  (Why would God need this fantasy, I must also ask?  Doesn't this God seem a bit - well, loopy and pitiful?)

Take it from people who know most of what there is to know about fantasy as a way of life:  A.A. members.  The very first order of business for a recovering alcoholic is to get a small grip on the reality of our situation - and that involves recognizing what sorts of problems we actually do have.    That's the First Step folks:  "We admitted we were powerless over alcohol - that our lives had become unmanageable."

It sure doesn't sound like there's any sort of "righteousness" being "imputed" to us there, does it?   No - and the point gets driven home again and again as the years go on and the Steps continue.  "Ego deflation at depth," is what Bill Wilson called it:  we must let go of our fantasies about what remarkable people we really are, and be simply "one in a family, to be a friend among friends, to be a worker among workers, to be a useful member of society."

James Alison, who came from a Protestant Evangelical background, once said that "Curiously, a strong belief in 'Justification by faith alone' seemed to have as its psychological counterpart an extreme need to justify oneself."  I have no background at all in this, but it certainly seems that this "psychological need" could possibly have its origins in the "wondrous exchange" idea.

I'm not at all saying that this is what people think they are doing at the outset  I'm simply saying that reality is not achieved by pretending that something is true when it manifestly isn't.  I'm saying that mere human beings can't make psychological sense of this idea; we can't digest it in a way that's meaningful for us.  We will always make the mistake of thinking that if God sees us as righteous, we therefore are righteous.    If you need proof - why, it's everywhere around you.  Take a look at the history of the church for the past 400 years if you don't believe me.
 
And, I mean, let's face it:  Luther was nuts.  Really, he was.  That's not meant to be a casting of aspersions; it's just a fact.  He was saved by Grace - no small thing in an era before Xanax - but he was bonkers.  (Listen:  I was bonkers, too!  I identify with him, in fact - but nuttiness takes awhile to work itself out, if it ever does, and we shouldn't hang on his every fanciful notion.)

Let me also point out that, after Pastor Ed mentioned the 2 Corinthians verse above, I did a little reading in commentaries - because while I know the pastor was trying to be kind, and while I do have deep respect for what I know of Lutheran theology, well:  this is just a proof-text, really.  One of the commentaries I found, N.T. Wright's piece called "On Becoming the Righteousness of God," (that's a PDF) kind of shreds the idea above to little, tiny bits.   His very straighforward argument consists of just a few points:

1. Paul uses the phrase "the righteousness of God" elsewhere in his writings (specfically in Romans and Phillippians) - and it never has the meaning attributed to it by Luther here.
2. Paul does not do "theology" detached from argument about the practical matters he's addressing.  He's making a chapters-long argument here about the nature of Apostleship (his, in particular), and about salvation history.  He's arguing that "the righteousness of God" has more to do with Abraham's faith before the Law came into being, than with individual soteriology.  (Big theology word!)  This verse is a summing-up of that argument, which has as its base the historical and contemporaneously continuing "covenant relationship."  Wright says:
   

   Verse 20 then follows from this as a dramatic double statement of his conception of the task: “So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” That is to say, when Paul preaches, his hearers ought to hear a voice from God, a voice which speaks on behalf of the Christ in whom God was reconciling the world. Astonishingly, the voice of the suffering apostle is to be regarded as the voice of God himself, the God who in Christ has established the new covenant, and who now desires to extend its reconciling work into all the world. The second half of the verse should not, I think, be taken as an address to the Corinthians specifically, but as a short and pithy statement of Paul’s whole vocation: “On behalf of Christ, we make this appeal: ‘Be reconciled to God!’”
   
   In the light of this exegesis of chaps. 3-5, and this reading of 5:11-20 in particular, the thrust of 5:21 emerges into the light. It is not an aside, a soteriological statement thrown in here for good measure as though to explain how it is that people can in fact thus be reconciled. It is a climactic statement of the whole argument so far. The “earthen vessel” that Paul knows himself to be (4:7) has found the problem of his own earthiness dealt with, and has found itself filled, paradoxically, with treasure indeed: “for our sake God made Christ, who did not know sin, to be a sin-offering for us, so that in him we might become God’s covenant-faithfulness.” The “righteousness of God” in this verse is not a human status in virtue of which the one who has “become” it stands righteous” before God, as in Lutheran soteriology. It is the covenant faithfulness of the one true God, now active through the paradoxical Christ-shaped ministry of Paul, reaching out with the offer of reconciliation to all who hear his bold preaching.
   
   What the whole passage involves, then, is the idea of the covenant ambassador, who represents the one for whom he speaks in such a full and thorough way that he actually becomes the living embodiment of his sovereign — or perhaps, in the light of 4:7-18 and 6:1-10, we should equally say the dying embodiment. Once this is grasped as the meaning of 5:21, it appears that this meaning fits very well with the graphic language of those other passages, especially 4:10-12. This in turn should play back into our understanding of chap. 3: the paradoxical boldness which Paul displays in addressing the Corinthians is organically related to his self-understanding as the “minister of the new covenant,” the one who has “become the righteousness of God.” Indeed, we can now suggest that those two phrases are mutually interpretative ways of saying substantially the same thing.

3. This would be the single example of the "wondrous exchange" to be found anywhere in the Gospels or letters.  And that means that there simply isn't enough evidence to construe "imputed righteousness" at its heart.  In actual fact, there isn't any such evidence.

So now we have arguments against it from two different, unrelated directions.  (Granted, my own personal opinion may not carry much weight - but I did attempt to back it up with some facts.  And there is a perfectly coherent theological argument above, anyway.  (And Look, Ma!  I'm fighting with Evangelicals via Evangelicals sources!  Yay!)



The upshot here is this:  I'm of the opinion that Christianity IS quite a bit about "healing."  It really is and must be; Christ was incarnate as a healer, after all - not as an accountant or a king.   And it doesn't seem to me that the church has ever been very good at healing; certainly it hasn't been recently.  To repeat myself (I'm sure), William James said the same thing over a hundred years ago, in pointing out why the "mind cure" movement had gained hold even as the churches were emptying out:

On the whole, one is struck by a psychological similarity between the mind-cure movement and the Lutheran and Wesleyan movements. To the believer in moralism and works, with his anxious query, "What shall I do to be saved?" Luther and Wesley replied: "You are saved now, if you would but believe it." And the mind-curers come with precisely similar words of emancipation. They speak, it is true, to persons for whom the conception of salvation has lost its ancient theological meaning, but who labor nevertheless with the same eternal human difficulty. THINGS ARE WRONG WITH THEM; and "What shall I do to be clear, right, sound, whole, well?" is the form of their question. And the answer is: "You ARE well, sound, and clear already, if you did but know it." "The whole matter may be summed up in one sentence," says one of the authors whom I have already quoted, "GOD IS WELL, AND SO ARE YOU. You must awaken to the knowledge of your real being."

The adequacy of their message to the mental needs of a large fraction of mankind is what gave force to those earlier gospels. Exactly the same adequacy holds in the case of the mind-cure message, foolish as it may sound upon its surface; and seeing its rapid growth in influence, and its therapeutic triumphs, one is tempted to ask whether it may not be destined (probably by very reason of the crudity and extravagance of many of its manifestations[53]) to play a part almost as great in the evolution of the popular religion of the future as did those earlier movements in their day.  ...  The ideas of Christian churches are not efficacious in the therapeutic direction to-day, whatever they may have been in earlier centuries; and when the whole question is as to why the salt has lost its savor here or gained it there, the mere blank waving of the word "suggestion" as if it were a banner gives no light. Dr. Goddard, whose candid psychological essay on Faith Cures ascribes them to nothing but ordinary suggestion, concludes by saying that "Religion [and by this he seems to mean our popular Christianity] has in it all there is in mental therapeutics, and has it in its best form. Living up to [our religious] ideas will do anything for us that can be done." And this in spite of the actual fact that the popular Christianity does absolutely NOTHING, or did nothing until mind-cure came to the rescue.[55]

Whether you agree with this or not - I don't, in fact, with quite a bit of it - there are a few simple ideas that argue in favor of what he's saying:

1. The human condition, even here today with all our riches and our lives made so much easier as a result, has not changed much in thousands of years.  We are all still subject to doubts, fears, inadequacies, addictions, etc.  The Seven Deadly Sins (to put it another way) haven't gone anywhere.  Failure is still a reality.  Loneliness is still a reality.  Poverty is still a reality.  Death is still a reality. 
2. People are left very, very angry without spiritual help and succor, despite all those riches.  Take a look at any anonymous web forum to see the depth of the fury that's out there.  And there is nowhere to go with all this anger - no relief, and noplace that even pretends to offer it, other than the therapist's office.
3. Is there anyplace that has seemed less like a place of healing over the course of its history than the church?

I'm going to end this now, because it's getting too long.  I will end by saying that I'm more convinced than ever that the church could - should - recognize its own message to be a source of healing of the mind and heart and spirit.  And, equally important:  there is, simply, no place else except religion that offers such a thing to anybody who wants it, free for the asking.   People should be beating down the doors to get in - and if they are not, it's because we're not offering them anything important.

More later - and, I think, back to the analysis of the Twelve Steps.  A.A., of all things, is a mind-cure if it's anything, and it's actually a healthier place on average than most churches.  We've got to do something about that, because most people won't go to A.A., even if it was designed for them - which it's not.   And A.A. was started by a crackpot Lutheran pastor, BTW.....

Christ, the Fair Glory

Here's something interesting for the Feast of St. Michael and All Angels (September 29).



Christe, Sanctorum decus Angelorum is the hymn at Lauds on the day. The arrangement - which is a composite of that plainchant hymn and another, later version, the 1906 hymn tune, Caelites plaudant from the Rouen Antiphoner - is by Andrew Senn, who's a contemporary organist - and looks to have been done perhaps in honor of his father, the Rev. Dr. Frank Senn, pastor for 20 years (as of 2010) at Immanuel Lutheran Church in Evanston, IL.

Here's the blurb at YouTube:

Words: Latin, ninth century;
trans. Athelstan Riley, 1906

Music: Caelites plaudant (Rouen) & Christe Sanctorum
arr. Andrew Senn

Christe, sanctorum decus Angelorum
Rector humani generis et auctor,
nobis aeternum tribue benigne
scandere caelum.

Christ, the fair glory of the holy Angels,
Thou who hast made us, Thou who o'er us rulest,
grant of Thy mercy unto us Thy servants
steps up to heaven.

Send Thine Archangel, Michael, to our succor;
Peacemaker blessed, may he banish from us
striving and hatred, so that for the peaceful all
things may prosper.

Send Thine Archangel, Gabriel, the mighty,
herald of heaven; may he from us mortals
spurn the old serpent, watching o'er the temples
where Thou art worshiped.

Send Thine Archangel, Raphael, the restorer
of the misguided ways of men who wander,
who at Thy biding strengthens soul and body
with Thine anointing.

May the blest Mother of our God and Savior,
may the assembly of the Saints in glory,
may the celestial companies of Angels
ever assist us.

This He vouchsafe us, God forever blessed,
Father eternal, Son, and Holy Spirit,
whose is the glory which through all creation
ever resoundeth. Amen.

The words to this hymn are very old, written by Rhabanus Maurus sometime in the early 9th Century. Cyberhymnal has more on this hymn, including a midi file here, and says that:

Maurus was ed­u­cat­ed in Tours, France, around 802. In 803, he be­came di­rect­or of the Ben­e­dict­ine school at Ful­da, Ger­ma­ny. He was or­dained in 814 and went on a pil­grim­age to the Ho­ly Land. He be­came ab­bot at Ful­da in 822, and served there two de­cades. In 847, he was ap­point­ed arch­bi­shop of Mainz.

Maurus also apparently wrote the words for the Vespers hymn for this feast: Tibi Christe, Splendor Patris.


Here's something interesting about Caelites plaudant:

The text 'Christ, the fair glory of the holy angles,' is a translation of a 9th C. office hymn for the Feast of St Michael and All Angels, Christe sanctorum decus angelorum. This hymn names the celestial visitors who have graced this earth, and once again calls on them to renew their graces: Chrst the Savior, three archangels (Michael, defender; Gabriel, herald; Raphael, healer), Mary, the saints, and all the company of angels. The hymn concludes with a doxology.

The English text appeared in the 1906 hymnal, matched to Caelites plaudant, a French tune from the Rouen Antiphoner newly harmonized by Ralph Vaughan Williams, a majestic setting that is today a fixture for Michaelmas. The tune is one of very few that supports the the peculiar Greek poetic form known as Sapphic meter (11.11.11.5), named for the Greek poet who used this verse form for a significant portion of her work. The tune name means 'from heaven praise,' and is also sometimes spelled Coelites plaudant.

The Latin version of this hymn is also sung to another French tune from the same period, Christe sanctorum, which takes it's name from the words of the hymn, and in The Hymnal 1982, is given the honor of being hymn 1.

And it all comes together, doesn't it? RVW and the folk tune project involved, too! (Some day I'll have to write about that, too. I just discovered, very much by accident, that the text for one of my very favorite RVW hymns, "Monk's Gate" in the 1982 hymnal, "He who would valiant be," comes from Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress"! There are a lot of really interesting, and for me unsuspected and unexpected, connections between music and literature of different eras. This makes me even more eager to promote deep theology that will stand up to the test of time and make further such connections.)

(And, BTW, as I've written before: Sapphic meter (11.11.11.5) is my favorite meter! It's actually used for many of the Office hymns - in particular the one hymn sung, with varying words, for the Commons of Saints. But also others, including Ut Queant Laxis. It would be mighty interesting to research this fact, actually; I wonder if it's coming from Prudentius or somebody very early? Or if, instead, it was simply a popular rhythm around the time Benedict and contemps? It's a dramatic meter; the last line gets a strong emphasis simply being so different from - and so much shorter than - the first three. Well, that's on the list, too, then.)

All very interesting.

I'd like to find a good plainchant recording of this hymn, but haven't so far. When I do, I'll post it. (There was a fantastic vocal alternatim version of Dufay's Tibi Christe, Splendor Patri out there for awhile, but the YouTuber has closed his/her account. God, that was gorgeous.....)

BTW, there is a veritable cottage industry in YouTube videos dedicated to St. Michael - and especially to his battle against Satan. Well, as I've said before: I'm very much looking forward to the movie.

I believe this is an icon of St. Michael. It "comes from a gallery in Skopje, Macedonia, that mostly works on crafting and painting icons."

Three Minute Philosophy: Rene Descartes

Just because.



HT this guy. And before that, this guy.

Dead Sea Scrolls Are Now Online : The Two-Way : NPR

Dead Sea Scrolls Are Now Online : The Two-Way : NPR

Sebastian Scheiner/AP.Shai Halevi, a photographer working for the Israel Antiquities Authority, IAA, photographs fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are 2,000 years old and very sensitive to direct light. At the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, where they are housed, the scrolls are rotated every few months to minimize the damage. As Bloomberg explains it, the Great Isaiah Scroll, which is the most ancient biblical manuscript on Earth, is so sensitive that only a copy of it is on display.

Now, though, in cooperation with Google, the museum has digitized five of those scrolls and today they were made available online.

The scrolls are searchable in English and they were digitized using a $250,000 high-resolution camera, so you can zoom in and get a feel for the animal skin they was written on.

Here's a video explaining the digitization and the importance of the scrolls:

Source: YouTube

And the AP provides further background:

The five scrolls are among those purchased by Israeli researchers between 1947 and 1967 from antiquities dealers, having first been found by Bedouin shepherds in the Judean Desert.

The scrolls, considered by many to be the most significant archaeological find of the 20th century, are thought to have been written or collected by an ascetic Jewish sect that fled Jerusalem for the desert 2,000 years ago and settled at Qumran, on the banks of the Dead Sea. The hundreds of manuscripts that survived, partially or in full, in caves near the site, have shed light on the development of the Hebrew Bible and the origins of Christianity.

The most complete scrolls are held by the Israel Museum, with more pieces and smaller fragments found in other institutions and private collections. Tens of thousands of fragments from 900 Dead Sea manuscripts are held by the Israel Antiquities Authority, which has separately begun its own project to put them online in conjunction with Google.

Health Data Could Spot Genocide Risk: Scientific American Podcast

Health Data Could Spot Genocide Risk: Scientific American Podcast

It often takes military intervention to halt genocide. But health data also might help—by providing markers that show a population’s risk of being genocide victims.

Researchers at North Carolina State University examined skeletal remains of 142 males from the Srebenica massacre in 1995. Eight thousand Bosnian men and boys were killed there. The scientists found evidence of a number of diseases that are related to maternal malnutrition and poor prenatal care. One of them is spina bifida, which occurred in a higher proportion in this group and is related to poor nutrition.

The researchers were able to also compare these data to survivors of the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides, and the numbers are consistent. The results seem to demonstrate that the victim population had been marginalized and denied access to nutrition and healthcare even before the genocide took place. The work will appear in the journal Forensic Science Policy and Management. [Ashley Maxwell and Ann H. Ross, Epidemiology of Genocide: An Example from the Former Yugoslavia]

The study authors say that this information gives another tool to politicians and international bodies. By evaluating the health of a given at-risk population, they may be able to identify a marginalized group, and mobilize international efforts to prevent a genocide from ever beginning.

Anglican Chant XV: Psalm 84, Anglican Chant - Bairstow - YouTube

Psalm 84, Anglican Chant - Bairstow - YouTube

Another version of this lovely Psalm, from "St. Andrew's Schola Cantorum" (not sure where, but I think it might be Pittsburgh):



Here's the Coverdale text:

1 O how amiable are thy dwellings *
thou Lord of hosts!

2 My soul hath a desire and longing to enter into the courts of the Lord *
my heart and my flesh rejoice in the living God.

3 Yea, the sparrow hath found her an house, and the swallow a nest where she may lay her young *
even thy altars, O Lord of hosts, my King and my God.

4 Blessed are they that dwell in thy house *
they will be alway praising thee.

5 Blessed is the man whose strength is in thee *
in whose heart are thy ways.

6 Who going through the vale of misery use it for a well *
and the pools are filled with water.

7 They will go from strength to strength *
and unto the God of gods appeareth every one of them in Sion.

8 O Lord God of hosts, hear my prayer *
hearken, O God of Jacob.

9 Behold, O God our defender *
and look upon the face of thine Anointed.

10 For one day in thy courts *
is better than a thousand.

11 I had rather be a door-keeper in the house of my God *
than to dwell in the tents of ungodliness.

12 For the Lord God is a light and defence *
the Lord will give grace and worship, and no good thing shall he withhold from them that live a godly life.
13 O Lord God of hosts *

blessed is the man that putteth his trust in thee.

Selling Junk Bonds and Reading Lectures to Elephants: Robert Capon on Religion, Grace and Nose Slicers | Mockingbird

Selling Junk Bonds and Reading Lectures to Elephants: Robert Capon on Religion, Grace and Nose Slicers | Mockingbird

From Mockingbird blog:

A couple characteristically vivid quotes from Robert Farrar Capon’s classic Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus:

The world is already drowning in its own efforts as life; it does not need lifeguards who swim to it carrying the barbells of their own moral and spiritual efforts. Preachers are to come honestly empty-handed to the world, because anyone who comes bearing more than the folly of… the word of the cross (1 Cor 1:21,18) has missed completely the foolishness of God that is wiser than men. The wise steward, therefore, is the one who knows that God has stood all known values on their heads – that, as Paul says in 1 Cor 1:26ff, he has not chosen the wise, or the mighty, or the socially adept, but rather that he has chosen what the world considers nonsense in order to shame the wise, and what the world considers weak in order to shame the strong. The clergy are worth their salt only if they understand that God deals out salvation solely through the klutzes and nobodies of the world – through, in short, the last, the least, the lost, the little, and the dead. If they think God is waiting for them to provide classier help, they should do everybody a favor and get out of the preaching business. Let them do less foolish work. Let them sell junk bonds. (pg 242)

What role have I left for religion? None. And I have left none because the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ leaves none. Christianity is not a religion; it is the announcement of the end of religion. Religion consists of all the things (believing, behaving, worshiping, sacrificing) the human race has ever thought it had to do to get right with God. About those things, Christianity has only two comments to make. The first is that none of them ever had the least chance of doing the trick: the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sins (see the Epistle to the Hebrews) and no effort of ours to keep the law of God can ever succeed (see the Epistle to the Romans). The second is that everything religion tried (and failed) to do has been perfectly done, once and for all, by Jesus in his death and resurrection. For Christians, therefore, the entire religion shop has been closed, boarded up, and forgotten.

The church is not in the religion business. It never has been and it never will be, in spite of all the ecclesiastical turkeys through two thousand years who have acted as if religion was their stock in trade. The church, instead, is in the Gospel-proclaiming business. It is not here to bring the world the bad news that God will think kindly about us only after we have gone through certain creedal, liturgical and ethical wickets; it is here to bring the world the Good News that “while we were yet sinners, Chirst died for the ungodly.” It is here, in short, for no religious purpose at all, only to announce the Gospel of free grace.

The reason for not going out and sinning all you like is the same as the reason for not going out and putting your nose in a slicing machine: it’s dumb, stupid and no fun. Some individual sins may have pleasure still attached to them because of the residual goodness of the realities they are abusing: adultery can indeed be pleasant, and tying one on can amuse. But betrayal, jealously, love grown cold, and the gray dawn of the morning after are nobody’s idea of a good time.

On the other hand, there’s no use belaboring that point, because it never stopped anybody. And neither did religion. The notion that people won’t sin as long as you keep them well supplied with guilt and holy terror is a bit overblown. Giving the human race religious reasons for not sinning is about as useful as reading lectures to an elephant in rut. We have always, in the pinches, done what we damn pleased, and God has let us do it. His answer to sin is not to scream “Stop that!” but to shut up once and for all on the subject in Jesus’ death. (pg 252-253)

That's good stuff; I do love Mockingbird, even when I don't understand what they're saying, really, or agree with a lot of it.

I'm an empiricist, without a doubt - and I suppose it hinders me at times. I don't really understand the point of trying to make everything make perfect sense, down to the last dotted iota; I don't think various contradictory ideas in the Bible can be harmonized - and don't really worry about this, either. I don't know why anybody does.

I've just come from reading the Wikipedia definition of "The Theology of the Cross," and find I don't really accept that in full, either - and again, don't know why I should have to.

I do know one thing, though - and as I've just come from writing elsewhere, it's the horse I'm definitely riding these days. And this is the thing I know: there is nothing so productive of energy and growth as admitting one's weaknesses and acknowledging one's problems. These things are the very elementary bases for recovery in A.A., which is by a long shot the most exciting, productive, energetic, and fascinating spiritual journey I've seen and been involved in in all the world and in all my life. There is and has been nothing like it.

For quite a while, I thought it didn't translate to non-addicts - but I'm over that now. And so I'm sort of "preaching the Gospel of preaching the Gospel" these days. I'm out there making claims that if we did this - if clergy and members of Episcopal churches would stick to the very basic ideas behind "the theology of the cross" - we would matter to people. If we would just admit our own weaknesses - and acknowledge that that's what we were there for in the first place! - we would be an irreplaceable lifeline in the world. We would be as vital - and as necessary to its members - as A.A. is to alcoholics.

It would be like this:

By way of contrast, the Christian church often creates an environment where people cannot really be open and honest about their struggles. It can appear that Christians have no besetting struggles, just “victory,” and the occasional assaults of the devil, but very few inwardly generated liabilities or recidivistic tendencies. The person in AA who denies these things is nothing more than a liar. To quote 1 John 1: “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves.”

Imagine walking into a church where all who entered were asked to sign a waiver at the door that said: “I’m a sinner and by stepping into the room today I acknowledge that fact.” Ministry and church life would be tremendously more effective. Unfortunately, you can come into church these days and sign up for any number of identities: Easter/Christmas type, fanatic/Pharisee, sinner, middle-of-the-road, or whatever. In AA there is only the option of sinner.

To be weak is to be strong; to fail is to triumph. And at that point, how could we lose? We would be offering something fascinating and really utterly unique in the world - a path to energy, movement, and personal transformation of the most exciting kind. They would be beating the doors down to get in.

It's no good to want or try to be right or perfect; what's the fun in that? Where can you go? What do you have to look forward to? Nothing at all, in fact; you're stuck right where you are, forever.  (Unless you become as little children, you really cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.)

So I ask you: which path sounds like the more exciting and wonderful one?

That's the horse I'm riding these days, and I don't care about all the rest of it.  I'm not interested in whether or not there's "free will" or in "irresistible grace" or in "justification by faith alone" - I don't have much faith most of the time, myself - or in whether or not people can do anything good at all; that's "over-egging the pudding," as they say in the Olde Country.  It's going way, way beyond what's necessary; it's thinking way, way too much.

No, I'm interested in offering people some way to get unstuck - to find joy in and engagement with life and living, and the potential for growth and change.  The rest is, literally, academic.

2011 MacArthur 'Genius' Grants Announced : The Two-Way : NPR

2011 MacArthur 'Genius' Grants Announced : The Two-Way : NPR

I've always liked A.E. Stallings, one of the grantees.

Radiolab co-host and producer Jad Abumrad is among this year's 22 recipients of "genius" grants from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

Each MacArthur fellow receives $500,000 "to advance their expertise, engage in bold new work, or, if they wish, to change fields or alter the direction of their careers."

Jad, who hosts and produces Radiolab from WNYC in New York, creates "engaging audio explorations of scientific and philosophical questions [that] captivate listeners and bring to broadcast journalism a distinctive new aesthetic," the MacArthur citation reads.

This year's other winners, and excerpts about them from the MacArthur announcements:
— Marie-Therese Connolly of Washington, D.C.: "a lawyer who draws on a blend of legal, policy, and legislative skills to combat the largely hidden but immense problem of elder abuse and mistreatment."

— Roland Fryer of Harvard University: "an economist illuminating the causes and consequences of economic disparity due to race and inequality in American society."

— Jeanne Gang of Chicago: "an architect challenging the aesthetic and technical possibilities of the art form in a wide range of structures."

— Elodie Ghedin of the University of Pittsburgh: "a biomedical researcher who is harnessing the power of genomic sequencing techniques to generate critical insights about human pathogens."

— Markus Greiner of Harvard: "an experimental physicist who is advancing our capacity to control the spatial organization of ultra-cold atoms with the aim of revealing basic principles of condensed matter physics."

— Kevin Guskiewicz of the University of North Carolina: "a researcher and athletic trainer who has made major advances in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of sports-related concussions."

— Peter Hessler of Ridgway, Colo.: "a long-form journalist whose three books and numerous magazine articles explore the complexities of life in Reform Era China as it undergoes one of the fastest social transformations in history."

— Tiya Miles of the University of Michigan: "a public historian who explores the complex interrelationships between African and Cherokee people living and working in colonial America." (Coincidentally, she's due on Tell Me More later today.)

— Matthew Nock of Harvard: "a leading clinical psychologist of suicide and self-injury in adolescents and adults, [who] has made significant breakthroughs associated with the very basic question of why people harm themselves."

— Francisco Nunez, director and founder of the Young People's Chorus of New York City: He is "is shaping the future of choral singing for children."

— Sarah Otto of the University of British Columbia: "a theoretical biologist whose research focuses on fundamental questions of population genetics and evolution, such as why some species reproduce sexually and why some species carry more than one copy of each gene."

— Shwetak Patel of the University of Washington: "a computer scientist who has invented a series of sensor technology systems for home environments with the goal of saving energy and improving daily life through a broad range of applications."

— Dafnis Prieto of New York City: "a percussionist whose dazzling technical abilities electrify audiences and whose rhythmically adventurous compositions combine a range of musical vocabularies."

— Kay Ryan of Fairfax, Calif.: "an accomplished poet whose immediately distinctive and tightly woven verse is grounded in incisive explorations of seemingly familiar language, ideas, and experiences."

— Melanie Sanford of the University of Michigan: "a chemist reviving and enhancing approaches to organic synthesis previously set aside because of their technical difficulty."

— William Seeley of the University of California, San Francisco: "a clinician-researcher who integrates microscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, and clinical examination to explore the structural, functional, and behavioral aspects of human neurodegenerative disease."

— Jacob Soll of Rutgers University: "a historian whose meticulously researched studies of early modern Europe are shedding new light on the origins of the modern state."

— A. E. Stallings of Athens, Greece: "a poet and translator mining the classical world and traditional poetic techniques to craft works that evoke startling insights about contemporary life."

— Ubaldo Vitali of Maplewood, N.J.: "a fourth-generation silversmith, conservator, and scholar who draws upon a deep knowledge of past and modern metalworking techniques to restore historical masterworks in silver and to create original works of art."

— Alisa Weilerstein of New York City: "a young cellist whose emotionally resonant performances of both traditional and contemporary music have earned her international recognition."

— Yukiko Yamashita of the University of Michigan Medical School: "a developmental biologist exploring the biochemical, structural, and molecular genetic mechanisms that regulate stem cell division."

Update at 12:10 p.m. ET. More On The Winners.

Two other NPR blogs now have posts up about some of the geniuses:

— "A Genius Grant For An Economist Who Studies Race And Inequality." (Planet Money)

— "Three Musicians Awarded MacArthur 'Genius' Grants." (The Record)

Note: NPR is among the organizations that the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation supports.

Pew: One-third surveyed prefer texting to talking | Crave - CNET

Pew: One-third surveyed prefer texting to talking | Crave - CNET

Check out the part I bolded below!

More of us are letting our thumbs do the talking.

According to a new Pew study, 83 percent of American adults own cell phones and 73 percent of them send and receive text messages. Pew surveyed more than 2,200 people and asked those who text to cite their preferred way of being contacted on their cell phone. Almost a third--31 percent--said texting, while 53 percent said they prefer a voice call and 14 percent say it depends on the situation.

Texters in the 18- to 24-year-old range are likely to have the most buff thumbs. Pew finds the average young adult in that range sends or receives an average of 109.5 texts per day, or about 3,200 per month. About a quarter of 18- to 24-year-olds fit into the hard-core 100-plus-texts-per-day demographic. The median texter in that age group sends or receives about 50 texts a day.

One thing for demographics and data nerds to watch in the coming years is whether the college-age texters of today keep up that alphanumeric pace as they age. Pew's latest data shows a steep drop-off in texting among the next age group, those between 25 and 34 years of age, who send less than half the number of texts that their younger counterparts dash off, by both mean and median measures.

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20108461-1/pew-one-third-surveyed-prefer-texting-to-talking/#ixzz1YW1UKpu3

3 Million Texts for Free | Internet Archive Blogs

3 Million Texts for Free | Internet Archive Blogs

Hundreds of libraries reached the milestone of offering 3 million freely downloadable texts yesterday through the Internet Archive website. Our 3 millionth text is a Galileo pamphlet from the rare book collection of the University of Toronto.

Internet Archive has been scanning books since 2005. We have made approximately 2 million books from 1,000 libraries in 200 languages available online since that time. Another 1 million texts have been uploaded by others, including everything from original books to court records to scans from other digitization projects and 37,000 books from Project Gutenberg.

More than 100 people digitize books in Internet Archive scanning centers in 27 libraries in 6 countries. At 10 cents a page, we are bringing over 1,000 new books online every day.

Archive.org is visited by more than 1 million different users every day. Books are downloaded or read on archive.org about 10 million times each month, and approximately 2,000 books for the blind and dyslexic (print disabled) are downloaded every day.

Other projects use the texts archive in bulk. Researches at the University of Massachusetts have used millions of archive.org books to do digital scholarship. OpenLibrary.org integrates these books with many thousands of recent books for the print disabled and library borrowers. All of the public domain books are full text searchable, indexed by multuiple search engines, and downloadable individually or in bulk.

Please help us build the library of free books by scanning and uploading, by donating physical books to the Internet Archive, or by sponsoring the digitization of great collections!

PBS: "Number of Americans Living in Poverty at 52-year High"

Economic Check-Up Dismal for Many U.S. Families | The Rundown News Blog | PBS NewsHour | PBS

*Chelsea Ricardo, 9, looks through a suitcase as she prepares to go to school as her family lives at the Community Partnership for the Homeless assistance center October 1, 2008 in Miami, Fla. Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images.*

American families continued to take an economic pounding in 2010, with median household income declining, health insurance rates remaining dreary and the number of Americans living in poverty reaching a 52-year high, [the U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday](http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/income_wealth/cb11-157.html).

According to the yearly status update, real median income for U.S. households dipped by 2.3 percent, coming in at $49,445 in 2010.



The official poverty rate rose for the third year in a row, increasing by nearly a percentage point and topping out at 15.1 percent -- the highest rate since 1993. In real terms, that means that about 2.6 million people slipped below the poverty line last year, bringing the total of those living in poverty to 46.2 million nationwide.

Christine Owens of The National Employment Law Project called the numbers "unacceptable" and urged the government to continue federal unemployment programs that have kept them from slipping even more dramatically. Unemployment insurance and Social Security, she noted, collectively kept 23.5 million Americans out of poverty in 2010.

"It's distressing but not surprising that poverty continues to increase," she said. "I think the critical thing is putting people back to work, and the plan the president proposed has a lot of important elements to move in that direction."

At the conservative American Enterprise Institute, economist Joe Antos said the release "simply confirms what we all know: 2010 was a very bad year economically and a very bad year for families." His AEI colleague, Tom Miller, blamed the stalled economy on the Obama administration's economic policies.

"Whatever changes that have happened in the past year didn't help much and didn't hurt much," he said. "We haven't solved the problem. The economy is staggering along and I don't think we'll get much progress anytime soon."

While the number of people without health insurance rose from 49 million to 49.9 million in 2010, the Census reported that the percent without coverage remained fairly stable at 16.3 percent.

Much of the decrease in the private marketplace resulted from employers dropping their insurance coverage due to skyrocketing prices. In 2010, just a little more than half of Americans -- 55.3 percent -- received health care through their workplace, a one percent drop from 2009 levels, and nearly 10 points lower than a decade ago.

"I think the most significant takeaway from all of this that we have an ongoing trend of people losing job-based health coverage. We now have the lowest portion of the American population covered by jobs-based health coverage since the Census Bureau has been collecting this data," said Ron Pollack, executive director of the consumer advocacy group Families USA.

What that means, he said, is that "more and more people needed to depend on the public safety nets, specifically Medicaid," as their lifeline for health coverage. In 2000, 28.1 million people relied on the government health care program for low-income and disabled Americans. In 2010, it's up to 48.6 million.

"This has profound implications for the current debate taking place about the budget. If Medicaid gets cut back and that lifeline is frayed, we're going to see a very significant increase in the number of uninsured," he said.

On its official blog, the Obama administration avoided all of the dreary aspects of the report and focused instead on a ray of hope: the percentage of 18-24 year olds with insurance increased by more than two percentage points in 2010 -- rising from 70.7 to 72.8 percent.

That translates into 500,000 more young people with insurance, Health & Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote in the blog post. Noting that the health care reform law allows young people to stay on their parents' plans until age 26, she pointed to the report as a sign "that the Affordable Care Act is working."

"This 2% increase in coverage for young people came as the number of Americans under 65 with insurance went down slightly," she wrote. "The Affordable Care Act will help provide coverage at a decent price for millions of uninsured Americans starting in 2014, when millions of Americans will have access to affordable insurance options."

BBC News - Space junk at tipping point, says report

BBC News - Space junk at tipping point, says report

Scientists in the US have warned Nasa that the amount of so-called space junk orbiting Earth is at tipping point.

A report by the National Research Council says the debris could cause fatal leaks in spaceships or destroy valuable satellites.

It calls for international regulations to limit the junk and more research into the possible use of launching large magnetic nets or giant umbrellas.

The debris includes clouds of minuscule fragments, old boosters and satellites.

Some computer models show the amount of orbital debris "has reached a tipping point, with enough currently in orbit to continually collide and create even more debris, raising the risk of spacecraft failures," the research council said in a statement on Thursday.

Situation 'critical'

Hopes of limiting the amount of space junk in orbit suffered two major setbacks in recent years.

In 2007, China conducted an anti-satellite weapon test which destroyed a decommissioned weather satellite, smashing the object into 150,000 pieces of debris larger than 1cm.

The International Space Station sometimes has to dodge orbital debris

Two years later, two satellites - one defunct and one active - crashed in orbit, creating even more debris.

"Those two single events doubled the amount of fragments in Earth orbit and completely wiped out what we had done in the last 25 years," said Donald Kessler, who led the research.

There are 22,000 pieces of debris large enough to track from the ground, but smaller objects could still cause serious damage.

The International Space Station must occasionally dodge some of the debris, which flies around the Earth at speeds of up to 17,500 mph (28,164 km/h).

The situation is critical, said Mr Kessler, a retired Nasa scientist, because colliding debris creates even more of the junk.

"We've lost control of the environment," he said.

The report makes no recommendations about how to clean up the field of debris.

But it refers to an earlier study for the Pentagon's science think-tank, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa).

The Darpa report, dubbed "Catcher's Mitt", suggested a range of technologies, including harpoons, nets and an umbrella-shaped device that would sweep up the debris.


The aim would be to push the debris further towards the earth where it would burn up, or into a higher but safer orbit.