Meditations In The Dark

October 1st, 2009 No comments »

Meditations in the dark,
Contemplations of the abyss
I walk the edge of nothing
Peering on the other side
One foot over, one foot on,
Should I take the step?
Sweet oblivion calls to me
Darkness answers my grief
I glance over my shoulder …
and delicately back away
Wondering “what if?”
… “what if?”

– Dave Young

  • Share/Bookmark

Big Government Faith

September 26th, 2009 1 comment »

In my last post, I shared a favorable review of Skye Jethani’s exhortation for the church to abandon the “Daisy Cutter Doctrine”.  Jethani was right on.  But at the end of my post, I shared my concern as well. I wrote;

The implications of this “Daisy Cutter Doctrine” are huge for our time. Jethani rightly points out some flaws within the church in seeking to fulfill our Big Mission using Big Solutions from Big Corporations, but I think he also reflects one of the major blind-spots of our culture. Does this flaw reflect Jethani’s hypocrisy? Or is it simply his own generational bias? I will share the details of Jethani’s own “Daisy Cutter Doctrine”

My concern about Jethani’s own “Daisy Cutter Doctrine” is raised because of his views espoused in another post entitled, “Pro-Choice but Anti-Healthcare?” In truth, while Jethani rightly points out that Big Mission using Big Solutions form Big Corporations is not good.  He, like many other well intended Christians, seem to believe that Big Government is the solution to our Big Mission. Is Jethani’s post on Healthcare, when compared to his Daisy Cutter Doctrine, a demonstration of hypocrissy?  Cultural blindness?  Pandering to help sales for his magazine?  Or something else?  I don’t know because Jethani wont discuss the seeming contradiction of his two posts.

In response to his post, I posted the a comment on his blog.  Yet despite Jethani’s rhetoric about “entering the debate” Jethani was never willing to post my comment.  I attempted several times over a week long period to engage jethani, but it seems his definitino of “debate” is different from the one I read in Webster’s Dictionary.

So I decided to post my comment as “An Open Letter to Skye Jethani“.  Even if he is unable to offer a coherent defense of his position, then I am hoping someone who is better informed can help me out.

Hi, Skye. may I call you Skye?

My name is Joe. I am new to your site. I apologize in advance for the directness of some of my questions below, but I am truly hoping to get direct answers in return if you are willing to engage on this with me. You seem an intelligent writer and thinker, and I hope to get some insight into how you think on this issue since it is quite differently than me.

Your post begins with the assertion that those who are pro-life and oppose govt. run healthcare contradict themselves. I don’t know anything about the group you mention, and maybe they do have the flaws you write about, but on a personal level I would humbly submit my disagreement with your assertion that the only pro-life position includes govt. run healthcare.

I came to your blog when a friend referred me to your post on the “Daisy Cutter” Theology. It is very well written and I plan on writing favorable a post on my blog with some quotes [which is my previous post]. However, if you stand by what you wrote in that post, then I think you should apply it not just to missions, but to all aspects of your life as a follower of Jesus. There is no secular or sacred in our life, only the mission of the King.

Here is my concern Skye, in your other post [on the Daisy Cutter Doctrine], you write, “We have incorrectly made the scale of our methods conform to the scale of our mission. We have assumed that the magnitude of the ends should be proportional to the magnitude of the means. And in the process we’ve revealed how captivated our imaginations really are to consumerism.
I think that is exactly what you are doing here. You are wrongly assuming that the scale of your “compassion:” must be met by a massive systemic overhaul–not church-run but govt. run. Interesting how the “massive program for massive impact” solution is acceptable when it is the things we value and “consumerist” when it is something someone else values. Interesting how we reject “systems” in one area of life, but promote them in others where we think it serves our goals. And I say, “we” because I am prone to the same things Skye, if I do not take the wise council of brothers and sisters into my life.

Before I move on, let me give a little background on myself. I am a church planter and have been on a State run healthcare plan for the past 3 years. You have a good job Skye, so I assume you have healthcare from a private insurer. Do you have some personal experience with a successful govt. run healthcare system? My guess is that you would not trade in your private health insurance to be on my State insurance, would you? Based on my experience with both systems, I would trade insurance coverage with you any time.

You write, “But our conviction about life should also lead us to care about the 45 million Americans who lack health insurance and therefore receive inadequate care.”
Can you give me the breakdown of who is in this group of 45 Million? Your latter comment seems to indicate you think this number reflects the poor and unemployed. Do you really think that is the demographic of the total 45 Million? Just curious to know if you really understand this number or if you are just repeating what you read somewhere?

You wrote, “Our belief in the value of life should drive us to seek a system that will care for our brothers and sisters after they are born and not just before.
Over the past few years, I have been without insurance a few times (mostly when the State messes up my paperwork and we lose it until we file again). We have several friends, and churches around us, who support a state run system and say, like you, that “no one should be without insurance.” Yet interestingly enough, when we were without insurance not one of these people, or churches, offered to help us pay for insurance, or pay for some of our medical bills. So, since this is your value, please tell me how many people who lack insurance do you personally assist Skye? Or is it that you just want other people to pay for your compassion? I see from your site, you are invited to speak at a lot of conferences. How much does it cost to go to one of those and run one? I wonder, if that money was better prioritized to help people instead of promoting careers or sell books or magazines, if the church could not do more for the Gospel? I wonder why the church needs the system of the State to care for people, when that is our mission not the mission of a secular world?

I am also interested to know, can you tell me exactly how much this new system will cost? Do you know how it will be paid for? Who will pay for it? The Bible speaks about indebtedness and its destructive power. Do you think massive debt and deflationary spending is a good solution and demonstrates compassion for the next generation who will be forced to work and pay for it?

You also wrote, ” We should care that the uninsured are 1.6 times more likely to die from cancer than those with insurance who are diagnosed and treated earlier.”
You are right, we should. The problem, however, with your comparison Skye is that you are using the wrong statistic to make your point. The 1.6% statistic you cite demonstrates that people who do not have the Private healthcare system (the one you think is completely broken and needs replaced) are more likely to die from cancer. In other words, the private healthcare system in America is successful in keeping people with cancer alive who would otherwise die. So clearly the system of healthcare itself is not broken if it is saving lives. Skye, if you want to make a statistically meaningful argument, you need to compare for me the rate of death from Cancer for the “fully” insured person in the Canadian and European healthcare systems vs. the Private US system? That is the correct comparison. Please look this up and then tell me. Do more people in the State run systems die of cancer or in the US private system? Which is more successful and caring for people? Do you know? I actually don’t know either, so when you find out please reinforce your argument with the right statistics.

You wrote, “We should care that we have a system that discriminates against those with preexisting conditions, the weakest and most vulnerable in our society.
I agree 100%. My wife and I are in this boat if we try and get private insurance in the future when our income is higher and that scares me. But, this is also a red-herring (either that or it demonstrates a lack of understanding about the issue itself). The US Govt. can force private insurers to cover pre-existing conditions, AND force them not to drop people who cost “to much.” This law wont cost the taxpayer a single penny in Govt. bureaucracy.

Do you also know Skye that in many states, the government prevents a person from carrying their insurer from one job to the next. It is the govt. that prevents insurance portability.

There are many practical and meaningful solutions to the problems with healthcare that don’t include a State run system. but do you understand why these solutions wont pass? Because politicians want power. Power over people. Power over their lives. Power to control things. I think those Christians who are in favor of a State run system (and I do realize you are on the fence here brother), have an inherent misunderstanding about why govt exists (not just in the US, but the systems of govt itself). If you care to read further, I offer you these couple links.
http://www.morethancake.org/2009/03/one-blood-many-governments.html
http://www.morethancake.org/2006/09/laws-demonstrate-immorality-not-goodness.html

You seem wiling to wait and see how the govt. runs GM before deciding on healthcare, but that is not the indicator you need to look at. Think about this, why is it that NOT ONE SINGLE PROPOSAL now before the US House or Senate mandates that our Congressman must lay aside their Gold Plated healthcare plan and move to this new Government system? Will Barack Obama get the same plan as me? If this solution is so wonderful, why is the political class not willing to receive healthcare under the same system they propose for all other Americans?

I judge leadership Skye by actions, not rhetoric. You write for a magazine on leadership. Is this the kind of leadership you value and put your faith in? Leadership that forces others to do what the Congress itself is unwilling to do? I trust and value leadership that says, “follow me” not leadership that says, “you jump first” How do you define leadership Skye?

Finally, I would suggest that any desire for a “system” that forces compassion is not compassion. For the Christian, the solution is not private insurance or state insurance. I think the solution lies with individuals and churches who must demonstrate compassion by caring for the sick. May I ask your indulgence to read this parable I wrote that expresses my own view on this issue?
http://www.morethancake.org/2009/09/a-parable-of-political-compassion.html

Wow, that got long. I am sure my post reads with a lot more judgement than I truly intend Skye–I fear it is a shortcoming of the intent and probably my own failings as a writer. My apologies in advance, but I do hope you will consider a reply.

Thanks and God bless.

So what do you say?   Is the Daisy Cutter Doctrine alive in well among the Christians who seek Big Government solutions instead of Kingdom solutions?

  • Share/Bookmark

Daisy Cutter Doctrine

September 21st, 2009 1 comment »

skye_nov_08

Skye Jethani

My friend Paula showed me a recent blog post from Skye Jethani where he writes about his “Daisy-Cutter Doctrine.” Jethani is the managing editor of Leadership Journal which is owned by Christianity Today International.

So what is this new Daisy Cutter Doctrine Jethani writes about? It is named after a military weapon designed to do intimidate the enemy with an explosion so massive, that their desire to fight is stripped away. Jethani allegorizes this weapon to the the approach many churches take toward missions. He relates his own experience with speakers at large conferences aimed at energizing the audience for the “big” mission of the Gospel. Jethani writes about these popular conference presenters this way…

Throughout the stump speech, the presenter will wax eloquent about the fate he or she foresees for the new generation of church leaders in the audience. “Your generation will do what mine could not.” “The young leaders in the church are leading the way by throwing off what’s come before.” “You will be the generation to change the world.” Convinced of their manifest destiny, the twenty-somethings will head off to breakout sessions where they will learn the skills to impact the world-usually from other twenty-somethings.

In my study of Church history, this generational bigotry has, in my opinion, been one of the biggest barriers to fulfilling God’s mission for the world. If we are going to really fulfill the Gospel mission, then it must be done by recognizing it is not the task of one “chosen” generation or one “chosen” leader. It is the task of all God’s saints working together in the unity and power of the Spirit. Jethani, goes on to explain why the Daisy Cutter Doctrine is so appealing.

The shock and awe approach to mission is extremely appealing to people shaped by consumerism. It taps into our consumer-oriented desire for big impact and feeds the assumption that large equals legit.

But there is a less incriminating [I think Jethani means "obvious" not "incriminating"] reason why we are attracted to the Daisy Cutter Doctrine-a big mission seems to logically demand a big strategy… So we ask, how does Coca-Cola impact the world? How does Disney impact the world? How does Starbucks impact the world? And we forget to ask the only question that really matters: How does Jesus impact the world?

…through much of its history the church in Europe employed conventional (worldly) means to advance its spiritual mission. This resulted in the gospel being spread by the sword. We now look back at the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the slaughter of native peoples in the Americas mournfully. Centuries removed from those atrocities we wonder-how could people do such things in the name of Christ? Did they not see how inconsistent those methods were with the ways of Jesus? At the time, of course, they did not.

Jethani makes an excellent point. Let me extend his comment. I believe that each generation has its own methods to fulfill the Gospel mission. Each generation has some inherent blind-spot which feeds the mistaken notion that their methods are the enlightened path to achieving God’s call. Cultural bias is one reason why we need the wisdom of every generation to overcome our blind-spots.

The implications of this “Daisy Cutter Doctrine” are huge for our time. Jethani rightly points out some flaws within the church in seeking to fulfill our Big Mission using Big Solutions from Big Corporations, but I think he also reflects one of the major blind-spots of our culture. Does this flaw reflect Jethani’s hypocrisy? Or is it simply his own generational bias? I will share the details of Jethani’s own “Daisy Cutter Doctrine” in the next post and you can decide for yourself.

In the meantime, I want to leave you with a great quote from Phil Vischer of VeggieTales fame. Vischer’s blog is the newest link on my blogroll and his quote is the perfect shield against the Daisy Cutter Doctrine.

phil-vischer

  • Share/Bookmark

Your Faith in a Facebook Box

September 20th, 2009 No comments »

Facebook IconI really love using Facebook.  It is a great social networking tool that allows me to connect with current friends, and reconnect with friends from the past.  I promote my blog through Facebook, and More Than Cake is in the Top 10 in 3 different categories (if you have not joined my blog network, you should).

Facebook is a cool tool, but I never would have guessed that joining Facebook could create a crisis of identity for so many people.  What question has caused the most trouble for people.

  • Interested in Men?
  • Interested in Women?
  • Looking for Friendship?
  • Looking for a Date?
  • Looking for a Relationship?
  • Looking to Network?

Nope, not these questions are it.  And no, it is not the question about, “are you a man or are you a women.”  The Washington Post says that the Facebook question about “Religious Views” is the most probing question subscribers face.

Creating a Facebook profile for the first time, Eric Heim hadn’t expected something so serious. Hunched over his laptop, he had whipped through the social network Web site’s questionnaire about his interests, favorite movies and relationship status, typing witty replies wherever possible. But when he reached the little blank box asking for his core beliefs, it stopped him short.

“It’s Facebook. The whole point is to keep it light and playful, you know?” said Heim, 27, a college student from Dumfries. “But a question like that kind of makes you think.”

Such public proclamations of beliefs used to require a baptism in water, or a circumcision, or learning the five pillars of Islam. Now Facebook users announce their spiritual identity with the stroke of a few keys. And what they are typing into the open-ended box offers a revealing peek into modern faith and what happens to that faith as it migrates online.

Wow.  How amazing that a simple empty box could create such personal upheaval?  I appreciate that last line quoted above because it brings up a profound question,  ”What happens to faith as it migrates on-line?”  The article goes on to explore how putting down one’s faith in a Facebook box has caused a lot of soul searching for millions of people across the globe.

Facebook Faith Box.Millions have plumbed their innermost thoughts, struggling to sum up their beliefs in roughly 10 words or less. For many, it has led to age-old questions about purpose, the existence of the divine and the meaning of life itself.

Some emerge from the experience with serious answers. George Mason University student Travis Hammill, 19, spent several days distilling his beliefs into this sentence: “Love God, Love Others, Change the World.”

Others try to deflect the question with humor.

“God knows,” wrote Hannah Green, 19, who attended Richard Montgomery High School in Rockville. “Pastafarian,” typed Maddy Gillis, 20, of Kensington, invoking a popular pseudo-religion that venerates a “Flying Spaghetti Monster.”

A good many, however, tread the fine line between wit and truth: “Agnostic, but accepting offers.” “I barely believe I exist.”

When Facebook added in this question and made it a “fill in the blank” they never guessed it would become one of the most popular and talked about features.  One reason this little box “works” is that it creates challenge for people to both define and refine their beliefs as all their friends read along.

My own experience with this little box with big implications is much the same. Writing in the word, “Christian” felt trite to me.  It seemed like writing that single word would diminish my faith.  I never even considered writing silly things like “Protestant” or “Evangelical” because those words have very little meaning to me and even less meaning to everyone else.  Today, my Faith in the Facebook Box reads, “I am saved by grace… and boy do I need it!

How have others faced this struggle to fill in the box?  The Times article goes on to share more personal stories about putting ones Faith in the Facebook box.

With space limited to 100 characters, there was simply no room for Heim to go into his childhood experiences with faith — growing up with an agnostic father, an evangelical mother and a fundamentalist grandmother. There was no space to describe the terror he felt after learning of heaven and hell. Or how the hell part weighed especially heavily after he was caught breaking into a neighbor’s home at age 7.

He couldn’t convey the profound faith and forgiveness he found in junior high after hearing the tear-filled sermons of a charismatic Baptist minister. Or the eventual dulling of that faith in college by alcohol. And he couldn’t fully explain the slow reformation of that faith, now that he has abandoned the hollowness of his old party life.

“How the heck do you fit all of that into a box?” asked Heim, who sometimes attends a Lutheran church in Dale City.

So rather than type in a specific denomination or a pithy, amusing answer, Heim entered this non-sequitur: “Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.”

The honesty of Hein’s answer is important, but it also reflects the influence of culture on both our perception and assurance of ‘truth’.  So where does that phrase used by Hein to define his faith come from?

It is a phrase written by linguistic philosopher Noam Chomsky to demonstrate how a sentence can be grammatically logical and yet have no meaning — how things that seem so right at first can crumble under scrutiny.

“It represents my faith,” Heim said, “how it sometimes makes sense to me and sometimes doesn’t.”

I am completely sympathetic to Hein’s plight.  There are times in my own life when I feel the exact same way.  What I want to know today is this,

  • How have you filled in the Facebook box?
  • Was it hard?  Was it simple?
  • Maybe you left it blank.  Why?
  • If you are one of those readers who has not yet discovered the joy of Facebook, how would you chose to answer the question in 110 characters or less?
  • Share/Bookmark