Secrets, Surprises, and Confidences

Today we hosted a surprise baby shower for our pastoral intern.  It was pretty amazing that we pulled it off - not least because we have kids in our Sunday school class who, God help them, simply cannot keep a secret.  Also, I was amazed that Intern didn't think anything was up when her mom, her in-laws, her grandparents, grandparents-in-law, and 1-year-old daughter all showed up for church.  She just thought they were there to hear her preach.

This got me thinking, yet again, about the difference between secrets, surprises and confidences.  Talking about it with one of the newer parents, we arrived at some great definitions for use especially with kids, though they are by no means unique:

Secrets: "covering up wrongdoing."  Asking kids to keep a secret is pretty dangerous stuff.  It's what abusers do to their young victims ("this is just our little secret), it's what corrupt bosses do to their employees ("we'll pay you under the table and keep your employment a secret from the government), and it's what people generally do when they know they're doing something wrong - covering it up.  Secrets, we need to teach our children, are bad.

Surprises: "withholding information to create a pleasant surprise in the near future."  This is what we did with Intern.  We withheld a lot of information so that she could have a happy surprise party in her honor.  I knew she would have been embarrassed to have known about it in advance, but this way, we got to celebrate her pregnancy and the impending birth of her child, and she got to enjoy the generosity of our congregation's love.  A surprise is a special kind of secret - one that is meant to be revealed at the right time, for a positive end.  These are okay to keep - and our kids did a fantastic job keeping this surprise!!!

Confidences: "not sharing information to third parties."  As a pastor, I'm put in the position to keep all kinds of confidences.  About surgeries, illnesses, indiscretions, marriages in crisis, pregnancies of all sorts, and so on.  Part of my vows mean that I don't get to share this information with people, even when I want to or it might make a difference in how another person might treat a certain situation.  I keep a lot of confidences in my professional capacity.

For a lot of lay people, you too keep confidences, even if you don't have "vows" you promised to the church to keep.  Things your friends tell you that they don't want the world to know, vulnerable places in their life or psyche, or just plain embarrassing stories.  Trust is a really important part of friendships, and knowing that you aren't going to tell everyone everything is a good way to be a good friend to someone.

Confidences are meant to be kept, often indefinitely, and I hold them in the highest regard.  That being said, I have been in a couple of situations where I have needed to break a confidence.  I did so with the full knowledge of the person who had revealed the confidence to me.  In one case, it was a case of abuse reported to me which by the law of the state I lived in at the time, I had to report to the authorities, and in another, it was revealing to camp leadership staff a report about something a camper had experienced "down the hill" (not at camp) that was affecting her experience of camp.  (In a few other cases, the person has told me, "It's okay to tell your spouse," and then I use my best judgment as to whether or not Backbencher needs to know the information.)  When I have had to break a confidence, I have told the person involved that I needed to do that and why beforehand.  It saves a lot of drama and preserves one's ability to be trustworthy in future situations.

When someone asks me if I can keep a secret, I always reply, "It depends."  If someone wants me to keep something confidential, I can do that.  If someone wants to plan I surprise, I can definitely do that!  If someone just needs to get something off their chest in a non-confessional capacity, I can probably do that.  But if someone wants to tell me that they are hurting someone or being hurt by someone, that's not the kind of secret I can necessarily keep.*  

In my work with young people in particular, if I'm asked to keep a secret, I say, "I want to keep things confidential - that is, not blabbing information around.  But if you are being hurt by someone, or if you are hurting someone or yourself, that isn't the kind of secret I can keep.  In that case, I need to tell other people so that you can get the help you need.  Because I care about you, sometimes I have to tell someone else."  No person, having heard my criteria for keeping a confidence, has ever chosen not to tell me the situation.

I encourage you all to work to adopt these definitions for use in your personal and professional lives - especially if you work with young people.  J. came up with the "secrets" definition, and I give him full credit for the wording.  

*By virtue of my ordination vows, I must keep confidential anything said to me in a confessional/penitential setting, even if it involves someone abusing another.  It's a specific context, and in our denomination, "confession" isn't as commonly used as it is in other religious traditions.  But it still exists.  In Iowa, as clergy I am not a mandated reporter (though that may change this year), but in my sex educator capacity, I am mandated reporter.  So, for me personally, a lot depends on my professional context.  Also, if my friends want to know that I will keep something silent, it goes "in the vault," where I don't reveal the information to anyone ... sometimes even myself, forgetting about the information!  (I did this when my friend Emily had a crush on Tim, and then couldn't figure out who she had started dating....Kids, it's not a secret anymore as they've been married a few years!)

Something Fun

from the good people at Feministing. Enjoy!

Christ as Sacrament

This was my sermon from last Sunday. The biblical texts referenced are Numbers 21: 4-9 and John 3: 14-21.

What an odd little story we have in the Hebrew Scriptures this morning. It’s not the grumbling of the Israelites that’s odd – we’ve seen that before (see: manna, quail, water at Marah). In fact, this story is the last of five “grumbling stories” of the Israelites during their sojourn in the wilderness following their liberation from Egypt. The odd part isn't even when God punishes the grumblers with a plague of snakes. Retribution theology runs a strong streak through the Old Testament, though it is by no means the only theology represented there. God punishing people for their lack of faith in God’s providence is a common way that humans understand the way God works.

Retribution theology has never made a great deal of sense to me. So, we believe in a loving God who forgives us our sins, who “so loved the world that God sent God’s only son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life,” and that same God punishes us for the wrong things we do? Mmmm, forgiveness and retribution in the heart of God seem at the core, incompatible.

And in this story, the retribution aspect of God also seems to make little sense. What makes more sense is the healing that follows. When the people, connecting their grumbling to the snake plague, come to Moses and beg forgiveness for their speaking against God, God gives a command to Moses. “Make a poisonous [or fiery] serpent, and set it on a pole; and everyone who is bitten shall look at it and live.” The bronze serpent raised up in the wilderness becomes a source of healing for the Israelites, rooted in God’s mercy and grace.

Theologian Barbara Brown Taylor points out that this bronze serpent served a sacramental function for the Israelites. “Looking up at the serpent reminded the people to lift their hearts to God,” pointing to the true Source of the healing they experienced. That’s what a sacrament is, you know. The Reformed definition of a sacrament is “a visible sign of God’s invisible grace.” A sacrament is a physical thing that points to God’s intangible mercy.

In the Protestant church, we have two “churchly” sacraments: baptism and communion, or the Eucharist. But these two things are by no means the only things that can be sacraments. If gazing upon nesting bald eagles reminds you to give thanks to the God who made heaven and earth, those eagles too can be a sacrament. If visiting a friend who’s in the hospital or who simply lives alone, or if trying to repair a damaged relationship calls your attention to the God who desires us to be in relationship with each other, then those people can be sacraments to us.

That bronze serpent stuck around, you know. It made the wilderness journey with the Israelites and when the Temple was built, it had a place of prominence. It seems that the people did not easily forget this story of healing and redemption. But over time, the bronze serpent took on more and more prominence in the life of the people. No longer was it a sign or a symbol pointing to the power of God to heal and restore life – it became the object to which people looked for that healing. The people came to believe that the serpent itself, not God, was responsible for their cure. For that reason, King Hezekiah in the book of 2 Kings, several hundred years later, destroyed the serpent when he restored the Temple to its rightful place as a place to worship El Shaddai – the Lord God. It had become an idol, to which the people made offerings, and even had a name – Ne-hush-tan.

Sacraments can easily become idols when we neglect the source of their power in our lives, when we forget that it is not the object that has power, but that to which the thing points – God. Take, for example, wedding rings. They, too, can take on totemic significance in our lives. On our honeymoon, [Backbencher] and I went to a lovely Anglican church for service – in fact, it was the very church where Oscar Wilde had been married (snicker, snicker). When we arrived and sat down, [Backbencher] suddenly noticed that he was not wearing his wedding ring. Like many men his age, he wasn’t used to wearing “jewelry,” and he’d simply forgot to put it on when he got ready that morning. He looked at me, stricken. What could I say? It wasn’t really a big deal. I mean, if he never wore it, that might be one thing. But this was just an honest lapse, a week after getting it. It’s not like he was out trolling for women or anything – he was with me, at church.

My view about our wedding rings is that they are precious gifts to one another that symbolize our love for each other and signify the vows we made at our wedding; they represent our commitment to our relationship. My ring reminds me of my vow, calls my attention to what I have promised my beloved, and invites me to look beyond the ring to what it symbolizes: our mutual love and commitment, and the ways that God has come alive in my relationship with [Backbencher]. However, my ring is not my vow. My ring is not my commitment. My ring is not my marriage. Without this ring on my finger, I would still be married, and I would still have the same promises and commitments as I do wearing the ring.

We humans get like this, sometimes. We mistake a symbol for that to which it points. So it was with the snake in the wilderness, so it is sometimes with wedding rings, and so it is sometimes with Christ. The image of Jesus Christ lifted up – even the image of the thing upon which Jesus Christ was lifted up, the cross – becomes itself the object of worship and sacrifice. It becomes an idol, an object we worship instead of God, rather than a sacrament, something that points to God and invites us to deeper relationship with God.

Idol worship makes our life and faith shallow. If the object is the thing, then we need not plumb the depths and the mystery of what the object represents. We merely go to the object, and offer it our thoughts and prayers. If our ring becomes our vow, then it is the object that has power, rather than the relationship that has power. And if Christ becomes the be-all-end-all of how we relate to God, then we miss out on the depth and wonder that is God at work in the natural world, in other faith traditions, and through the Holy Spirit blowing where it will. Such idol worship will eventually lead to death, the very opposite of that which God intends for us.

But we need not devote ourselves to idols, putting them in the place of God and forgetting the Source of all that is good. Nor do I believe that the answer is to destroy all the idols in the world or anything that might become an idol. You’ll notice that I do in fact wear my wedding ring, that we do celebrate Communion on a regular basis, and that our altar has a cross upon it. In any event, not only is it impractical to get rid of everything that may become an idol for us, but it would be impossible. Humans seem to have an innate capacity and desire for ritual and sacrament, even if it is not within the walls of the church. Anything that could be a sacrament could also turn into an idol.

The key is to keep our attention focused on the physical objects themselves, but on the reality to which they point. Seeing Christ as a sacrament means that he becomes for us a visible representation of God’s love and mercy for all creation. Christ, whom the gospel writer called “The Logos, or Word, of God,” is a manifestation of what John 3:16 declares: “For God so loved the world that God gave God’s only-begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall not die, but have eternal life.” We know these words are true because Jesus, in all his words and deeds, is a living proclamation of that truth.

Just as the snake was lifted up to God and gave the people life, so too was Jesus’ lifting up – both upon the Cross and up to heaven – means of bringing us to new life in his name. When we see these events not as things to be worshipped in themselves, we are freed from idolatry and free to see Christ as that for which he truly is: God alive and at work among us, desiring our repentance and making our lives holy and rich. Living sacramentally, with our eyes and souls fixed not on things but on the One who has created all things, helps us do what God would have us do. For the writer of Ephesians tell the truth: We are what God has made us – created in Jesus Christ for good works.

Our calling is not merely to recognize God as the source of life, love and healing, but to reflect that life, love and healing in our own lives. In short, God has created us in Christ Jesus to be living sacraments for the world, so that through us, people would come to see God truly and love God fully.

In this season of Lent, let us celebrate the sacrament of Christ, turn our hearts to all the holiness to which God’s creation points, and embody the Gospel to this hungry, hurting world. Amen.

Bill Richardson Is My Hero...

...but I am definitely over my crush on him. (That's because of the van dyke, which I think has mercifully been shaved by now). He's my hero because when he came to my small town before the caucuses, he said that he supported civil rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender folk. You don't really hear too much of that where I live, unless you're at church and I'm preaching on the subject. So yeah, I was his big cheerleader in our county...for all the good it did.

And now, he's signed a bill abolishing the death penalty in New Mexico. Thank you, Gov. Richardson! His thoughtful and measured words in the press release accompanying the signing were also outstanding. He acknowledges the difficulty in the decision, how he has struggled and evolved on the issue, and he gives credit to people who believe differently than he does. I admit it - I'm still a sucker for his rhetoric (though I'm perfectly happy to the the POTUS that we do!).

Gov. Richardson raises two issues around the death penalty that have shaped my civil/legal opposition to it: the possibility of executing an innocent person, and the disproportionate way that it is applied to people of color, especially poor people of color. I learned growing up that our legal system believed that it was better to let one hundred guilty people go free than it was to jail one innocent person, and for a long time I was naive enough to believe we meant that. I no longer believe we live by that ideal, but I steadfastly believe it's an American value well-worth returning to.* When an innocent person is executed, you don't get to go back and say, "Ooops, sorry, we got the wrong guy."

Also, when I see the atrocious way that poor people and people of color are treated in our legal system, it makes me want to puke. (Frankly, the way people of color are treated in the media's reporting on legal issues makes me want to puke, too. Just try to remember the last time you saw a white person's mugshot lead the evening news, or be on the front page, above the fold. Bet you saw a black person's mugshot within the last two days, either on TV or in the paper.) DA's often cut deals with white defendants, but bring the full weight of the law down on black ones. Often, a white defendant is said to have made an error in judgment, but a black defendant is just a thug. Ineffective counsel is appointed, and they compound the trouble.

Look at the case of Dominique Green - a microcosm for all that can go wrong. The kid did not pull the trigger, but he still was executed. Oh, and did you know that the white people involved in the shooting - including the one who ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE MURDER - all got off? And that the victim's family asked for him NOT to be executed?! Listen to author Thomas Cahill discuss the case on NPR's "Tell Me More." This may be one case, but it represents a system badly out of whack.

My religious opposition to the death penalty, in addition to the religious aspects of the two above-mentioned reason, is shaped a lot by Augustine (don't laugh, Luis or Jocelyn!), who believed that execution robbed the person of the possibility of repenting of their crime and coming to experience God's forgiveness (and perhaps the forgiveness of the victim and/or victim's family).

Also, Ta-Nehisi has a great post relating to the death penalty, conservatives and small government, which I urge you to mull over. I think it will be the subject of my next post.

* Sorry to end the sentence with a preposition, grammar police.

Things That Make You Go "Noooooo!!!!!!"

Our beloved MML is leaving the blogosphere. 'Tis a sad, sad day at Casa Liturgygeek (or, to be more precise, at Office Liturgygeek). This was the first blog I checked in the morning and in the evening - often even before I checked Backbencher's. It has been thought-provoking and a balm to my soul on many day. Yet Matt is a guy with a ton of integrity, so if this is what he thinks is best, you can be sure he's given it a lot of thought and prayer.

And Matt? If you ever decide you want to guest post anywhere, we'd be glad to have you here. Love you!

Beware the Ides of March!

Because, you know, Julius Caesar died on that day.

Abortion and Grammar Fun!

Check out this great post from my new pal over at What The F*%$ Would Jesus Do?  I just love it when other people combine things I love - in this case, a cogent pro-choice argument and a grammar smackdown.  

Also, and totally unrelated, I just love it when a plan comes together....

Guilty; or Beloved Children of God, Behaving Appallingly

What a great, and tragic, way to start the morning.  John Sickels and James Christensen, respectively the former assistant police chief and the police chief of Creston, Iowa, were both found guilty of sexual abuse in the rape of a country club employee in 2008.

It's a great way to start the day because these small-town cops obviously thought they could get away with rape, and they didn't.  When first confronted by DCI, they said there was absolutely no sexual contact whatsoever.  Then Sickels said he put his hand down the victim's pants.  Then he said it was consensual sex.  Apparently, Christensen stroked the victim's hair and tried to shush her during the attack, though he now maintains that he never touched her.

Now, my legal experience (apart from my minor in political science) basically comes from crime dramas on television, but I know that once you tell a story to police investigators, you should stick to it, because otherwise you look guilty as sin.  If you say there was no sexual contact, stick to it.  Oh or better yet! - Tell the truth the first time.  You people are cops, don't you know the rules of interrogation?  My God, I'm a freakin' pacifist and I know this!  (Of course, my father also trains interrogators for the military, so that may also be why I know this....)  If you had sex with her, just admit it.  

If the two cops had led with the story of consensual sex when they were first interrogated, I doubt they would have been convicted yesterday.  Which would have been a pity, because I have been pretty sure they were guilty from the first time I heard this story, mostly because the victim has always been consistent in her story, and the cops have done nothing but lied and changed their stories.  I know, I know, innocent until proven guilty, right to a fair trial and all that....which I do believe and which I am sure they did in fact receive.  And they are GUILTY!  

It's also a tragic way to start a morning because a young woman was raped, for God's sake, and by those who are charged with protecting citizens and upholding the law.  Rape is not something one just "gets over," like a car accident or something else.  It is an assault on our bodies, the precious gift God has given to be bearers of holy light and to contain our souls, abusing the sacred gift of sex as a weapon of violence and pain.

It's also tragic because these men, no matter how heinous and stupidly they've behaved, are also men with families, and beloved children of God, and they all are going to be in a lot of pain for a long time to come.  The difference, of course, is that the victim did not choose the pain she's experiencing, but these men could have chosen not to cause themselves, their families, or their victim, this sort of pain.  Beloved children of God - behaving absolutely wretchedly.

Pray that the victim can continue her process of healing, and that these men acknowledge the wrong they have done, and that God gives them all a new path forward in life and hope.

Why I Live-Blogged ER, and part of what I love about television

So, I used to watch ER in college, and loved it.  Like some people, I drifted away from it over the years, but kept "in touch" via the commercials and an occasional episode.  This being the last season, I have decided to see how it ends.  And I'm glad I watched tonight with all the old all-stars (or, most of the old all-stars, anyway).....it reminded me of one of the things I love about good television.

See, with good television, the characters continue to live on, even when they're off-stage.  They marry, have children, continue to slay vampires, live, love, experience loss and grace.  Now, sloppy writers try to incorporate the life of the actor into the future life of the character, but good writers really take time to think about the character, not the actor, and how the character would have grown/changed/stayed the same in the time off-stage.

Tonight, we saw how things have turned out so far for many of our favorites from ER.  Mostly they are all doing well, with their lives relatively "together," or more so than when they were living the crazy life on ER.  George Clooney, for example, has really settled down, matured, and is a calm and steady presence in a difficult situation.  Julianna Margulies has really come into her own - with awesome confidence and a real sense of self.  She really is George's equal...and his partner.

Lovely jokes among the cast.  A lovely demonstration of the next generation of ER's staff and that County General is clearly in good hands - and the "two generations" working together is so cool.  And I loved how it ended, with Julianna telling George that "the kidney went to some doctor."  She didn't even know it was their former colleague.  

I also love the way that we can "see" that their ... um.... lives do go on.  (sorry for the wretched Celine Dion reference)  Even after this episode, their lives will continue, and we have both a sense of closure and a little bit of joy knowing some of how it turned out.  

This week I was talking with someone from church who is also a Monk fan.  This summer is the last season, and he said he hoped that Monk finally finds out who kills his wife.  I am more ambivalent.  It would be good to know, but on the other hand, there's a certain bittersweet joy in imagining Monk carrying on in his neuroses and his struggle to understand what happened to his wife, and why.  I like to imagine him going on doing what he did in the time I "knew" him.  In a way, it makes him more real, more human.  

And yes, I know he's a character and not real.  But good television lets you imagine that they are.  

Live-Blogging ER, part four

9:45pm definitely should not flip over to Private Practice at commercial.  I don't even watch this show!

9:46pm back to the ER, and Noah Wyle's surgery.  (Oh, Dr. Benton!  That was his name!)  Way to be an awesome advocate for Noah's health care needs.  Please let it go okay.  (Yes, I pray for television characters.)

9:48PM Way to advocate for the heart patient.....and we are back to Noah's surgery.  Arterial thrombosis....And holy crap Eriq La Salle just schooled the surgeon!  Now we see the benefit of a teaching hospital like County General.

9:50pm fibrillation!  ... and baby momma.  The baby is so cute!  Has Angela Bassett still not figured out that this girl is the mom?  I saw that in the first minute.  (Please - I should write for television.)  She should have figured it out when the girl left the ER the first time.  

9:53pm.  Nice new kidney Noah Wyle.  Only doctors can have this kind of humor.  And only doctors would call urine "liquid gold."  And only a doctor would wait until AFTER surgery to call his almost-ex-wife to tell him about his kidney transplant.

9:55pm - Kid with mom and her new heart.  Seeing the new generation take over....awwww.

9:56pm.  Julianna and George in bed.  Mmmmm.  They don't even know which doctor got the kidney.  That it was their friend and former colleague.  I love that.

Live-Blogging ER, part three

9:35PM OK maybe it's not Jamie-Lynn Sigler.  It's not on IMDB anyway, either on ER's episode cast or her page.  But who is it then?  It sure looks like her.

9:39pm Seriously - no plane?  Jerks!  Of course that would happen.  Loved the bit about the human heart.  And, "Do you like reggae?"  (um, sort of)

"You married a sister?"  Nice.  Nice.  "She's half-Congolese...grew up in Paris."  So....she's not really a sister? ... it doesn't really count?  That's just kind of weird.  Maybe I'm overthinking it.  Maybe he was just trying to tell Eriq something about her.

But Eriq's right.  She should know about it.  And of course he'll do the right thing and stay with Noah.  

"Do you like reggae?"  Nice.  They do do a good job with repeating lines like that in different contexts....good television.

Oh, and yes, I realize I'm using the actors' names, because I've forgotten half of their character names and it's just easier to be consistent and use all actor names.

Live-Blogging ER, part two

What's the kid from Sopranos doing on ER?  She's playing a character named Daria.  Can't think of the actress' name.

9:23 pm ....and there's Eriq La Salle.  So many dreamy guys on this show... Love that they are all, in their own ways, catching up on old times.  Nice to hear how these characters and their lives have evolved "off-stage" over the years.  

9:25 back in Seattle.  George Clooney and Julianna Margulies were among my favorite characters back in the day, so I like seeing them again.  (I also liked Noah Wyle and had a soft spot in my heart for Eriq La Salle's character, in part because of his deaf son.)  These two are an artful team - I'd give them my own kidney if they asked.....

Live-Blogging ER, part one

9:17PM Just got the computer from Backbencher...OMG this ep is amazing!  I knew we'd be seeing Noah Wyle and Julianna Margulies, but George Clooney?!?!?!  He's amazing.  They're amazing.  And Susan Sarandon is just the sort of guest star you want for such an episode.

It's been a long time since I watched ER consistently, but I've totally been sucked in to these eps with the guest stars of the past....

Noah Wyle's character has kidney failure, apparently.  And there's a transplant team from County General that Julianna and George .... oh, wait, George just revealed himself to the gals.  catching up on old times.

9:20pm ooh, evidently G and J have kids.  "girls"

Plus the normal insanity of the ER....God I love this show.

Apparently...

The correct term for one who is from Utah is Utahn.  Who knew?  That's the important takeaway from this article.  Oh, and MC Hammer and Vanilla Ice are teaming up for a concert in Orem, Utah.

And no, Shar, I'm so not going to this concert.  I already saw one of them once; it was more than enough.  I'm not that white.  I swear.  I read TNC and everything!

(h/t Ta-Nehisi Coates)

Something Nice About the Catholic Church

They held a very nice Mass for my grandmother last week.  Props to St. Ambrose Parish in Elkton, Florida and to the priest.  It's a lovely little church in the middle of almost-nowhere near East Palatka, with relatively good memories for me, and if you're ever in the area, please go check it out.  The current priest, Fr. Edward Booth is very good and personable, and of course the former priest, Fr. Patty, will always live cheerfully in my memory as a kind and generous soul in the deeply upsetting situation of my Papa's funeral.  His radiance, a reflection of Christ's light, continues to brighten my memories of this place.  The new priest only added to my fondness of the place.  Also, I love that as you walk in the doors of the church, you are greeted with a picture of Pope John Paul II.  

The new priest did a fine job and I was once again reminded how deeply central to the liturgy the Eucharist is.  (I know, duh.)  Then, we walked - walked! - from the church to the cemetery, with the hearse following behind (until they passed us...).  It was beautiful.  Out of a movie.  Only better, because it was real life.  At the grave, the priest did a very lovely committal.  Then my uncle and cousin got up in turn to share stories of Nana.  

You all will be surprised to know that I didn't share anything at the service; I was content to be a granddaughter.  Also, my uncle shared this passage, which expressed my resurrection hope just about perfectly:

 "I am standing upon the seashore.  A ship at my side spreads her white sails to the morning breeze and starts for the blue ocean.  She is an object of beauty and strength, and I stand and watch her until at length she hangs like a speck of white cloud just where the sea and sky come down to meet and mingle with each other.  Then someone at my side says, 'There!  She's gone!'  Gone where?  Gone from my sight, that is all.  She is just at large in the mast and hull and spar as she was when she left my side, and just as able to bear her load of living freight to the place of her destination.  Her diminished size is in me, and not in her.  And just at that moment, when some one at my side says, 'There! She's gone!' there are other eyes that are watching for her coming and other voices ready to take up the glad shout, 'There she comes!' "

 It is attributed to Henry Van Dyke, and calls to mind of all those who took up the glad shout "There she comes!" to greet my Nana.  Papa.  Uncle Bud.  My maternal grandparents.  Others I do not know and may never know.  What a joy to know she is not, has not ever been, alone.

Thanks be to God for the gift of life in Jesus Christ, and the new life that awaits us beyond the grave.  

The Sacrifice of Women's Bodies

....seems to be pretty acceptable in the eyes of the Catholic Church hierarchy.  Where do I even begin?

First of all, I know this story is kind of old for some of y'all, but have mercy.  I've been in Florida with my family and Backbencher's for the past several days for my Nana's funeral.  

Second of all, let me also acknowledge that some of y'all reading may in fact be Catholic and/or pro-life.  There is much I admire about the Catholic Church, and its relatively consistent ethic toward life is one of those things (I may not agree with their stance on abortion, but at least they oppose war, too....unlike other pro-life, pro-military 'churches' in this country).  But this is ridiculous.

A nine-year-old girl is repeatedly raped by her stepfather.  Repeatedly.  She becomes pregnant with twins - often a high-risk pregnancy even for adult women, and more so in a girl who has barely reached puberty and whose hips have not widened enough to give birth to one child, much less two, even assuming she survives the pregnancy and the concomitant changes to her internal anatomy - as a result of this rape.  Doctors perform an abortion to save her life, and they and her mother are excommunicated by their bishop.

The MSNBC article notes that, "Despite the nature of the case, the church had to hold its line against abortion."  Thank you, Archbishop Sobrinho.  Because apparently women's bodies - or children's bodies, in this case - are less important to the church than are the theological ethic of life that leads the church to have what they call a "pro-life" stance.  What is it that Lincoln said? "I care not for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it."  Or, again, whose CHILDREN are not better for it.

Some of you may be saying, "What about the fetuses that are aborted?  Don't they deserve to be treated better?"  Here's the thing.  Sometimes that is a false argument - to choose between the life of the mother and the life of the fetus (or, in this case, fetuses).  Without the abortion, the nine-year-old would have died, and so would have the lives growing her womb.  An ethic of life that leads to a forced death - not a death this little child CHOSE (which is the death of Jesus) but one that was forced upon her by her rapist stepfather - is no ethic of life whatsoever.  Again, the sacrifice of women's bodies seems to be an acceptable one of the church hierarchy.  

But I am here to tell you, by whatever authority I have as a child of God baptized into the church of Jesus Christ and as an ordained minister within a mainline Christian denomination, the sacrifice of women's bodies is not an acceptable sacrifice to God.  The sacrifice of human bodies, if it was ever acceptable to God (and boys and girls, that is a debate for another day), is no longer acceptable after the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  

In short, the sacrifice of women's bodies on the altar of "pro-life" is not acceptable to God.

Oh, and did we mention the stepfather has not been excommunicated by the Church?  Because apparently the ongoing rape of a child is not an excommunicable offense.  I wonder, what would it take for such a one to be excommunicated?  

Creationist Gets Pwned

My, my, my.  I've been trying to figure out from blog-context (blogtext?) what "pwned" meant, to little avail.  I gathered enough to figure out that it is similar to what we old folks used to say about someone getting "schooled," but that was as far as I'd gotten.  (I only use the urban dictionary in extreme cases or if I have some sort of unreasonable deadline.)

Then, I came across this.  (thanks RussellKing @ Street Prophets)  And all became clear.  

Poor Discovery Institute.  Now you know what it means to be pwned, too.  SUCKA!

Well, This is Interesting

James Dobson is resigning from the Focus on the Family board. The article states that this will "lessen his administrative burden" while keeping speaking on his radio programs and write the monthly newsletter.

The march of time includes us all, I suppose. Some are hoping this will hasten the end of FotF's relevance in evangelical culture, with younger evangelical families tending not to froth at the mouth every time the words "abortion," "gay marriage," or "feminism" is mentioned (issues FotF seem to be built to oppose), and who tend to be concerned about issues like the environment and feeding the hungry (issues FotF seems to give little heed to). Perhaps.

We're seeing a sea change of this generation's evangelical leaders retiring and a resultant implosion of their ministries (Crystal Cathedral, Oral Roberts University, to name two others). I would like to see evangelicalism embrace a wider agenda - though, not really being a part of the "club" I guess I don't really get a vote in how they view the world. And there are opportunities for that; it just seems as if evangelicalism is entering a new era of uncertainty. Will they continue to embrace a "cult of personality" approach with one central leader, or will they embrace postmodernity in a sense and give voice to multiple leaders, who may not speak univocally on the issues of the day?

I dare not speculate at the moment, but I suspect that these organizations will face the same problems that every organization faces when its founders die off....including the Church. (But that's another blog post.)

Shameless Self-Promotion

The Clarinda Herald-Journal has a review of "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten," the community theater production of which I'm currently a part. Go check it out. Then come back tell me how great the show is (it really is terrific!).

Better yet, come see it yourself - the run ends this weekend, with shows tonight and tomorrow at 7:30pm and the Sunday matinee at 2:30pm.

Deep Thought

What happens when the expression "jumps the shark" ... itself jumps the shark?

Remember That Thou Art Dust, and To Dust Thou Shalt Return

The Order for Tonight's Ash Wednesday Service

Words of Adoration
Search us, O Lord. Know our hearts and know the deepest chambers of our spirits. Invite us, as living souls, to enter into the life eternal Christ offers in this and every moment.
Words of Welcome
Welcome to this evening’s Ash Wednesday service.
Lent stretches for forty days from Ash Wednesday until Easter, not counting Sundays. In this season of penitence, the church invites us – individually and communally – to reflect on all that keeps us from full union with God and holy relationships with one another. We hear again the stories of Jesus' ministry and the people he encountered, and we seek like them to be made whole by his touch and his love.
Later in this service, I will ask you, if you feel so moved, to come forward to receive ashes on either your forehead or your hand. The words we use at this imposition are ancient: “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” See these words not as harsh judgment for our imperfections, but a humble acknowledgement of our frail humanity, a holy recognition that we are not invincibile, and a devout renunciation of our desire and practice to live as if we were in the place of God. Though we are dust, that is not all that we are. We are also blessed creatures possessed of mighty wonder, passionate power, and daily grace - all gifts from a loving God.

Prayer of Readiness
Leader: Let us pray.
People: God, this is a hard time. The focus of Lent is on the pain and suffering of Jesus and our own need for penitence. It is a time of gathering darkness. But we would rather skip this part and go straight to Easter. We would rather ignore the suffering—in you and in the world—and avoid the hard work of true self-examination. Forgive us for wanting this to be bright and painless and easy, when we know that Jesus did not take the easy way, but chose the path of the Cross. Teach us the true meaning of penitence, so that we use this Lenten season to humbly seek a clean heart and a renewed spirit. We pray in the name Jesus Christ. Amen.

We Hear the Word of God
Scripture Readings:
Hebrew Scriptures ~ Isaiah 58: 1-12
Psalm 51: 1-17
Gospel Lesson ~ Matthew 11: 28-30

Reflection: Power, Need and Brokenness

We Respond to God’s Call
Litany of Confession
Leader: God, from the depths of your creative power you have shaped the world in love and beauty. You have given to human beings the gift of vision, the power of imagination, and the will to do the good.
People: We confess to you, O God, that we have neglected all that you have given us, have squandered our gifts and wasted precious time.
Leader: We have given in to the sin of pride and self-satisfaction, thinking ourselves better than our brothers and sisters. We have lived inauthentic lives, trying to be that which we are not in order that others will not see who we truly are.
People: Have mercy on us, O Lord of all that lives and breathes.
Leader: We have let ourselves be ruled by fear and anxiety rather than faith and hope. We have let the world change us rather than work to change the world.
People: Have mercy upon us, O Lord of all that has been made.
Leader: We have given in to judgmentalism and a lack of grace in our hearts. We let partisan beliefs and divided opinions divide our hearts and our relationships with other.
People: Have mercy upon us, O God of all people and nations.
Leader: We have given in to apathy about the world’s conditions, circling the wagons around ourselves rather than enlarging your welcome to all who have need of you in this and every time.
People: Have mercy upon us, O Author of Days.
Leader: We have been indifferent to the sufferings of others and of the sinful systems that oppress the poor and people of color throughout the world. We have strived for power and glory instead of seeking to follow you humbly.
People: Have mercy upon us, O God of the dirt and the gutter.
Leader: We have treated the earth with disdain, as if it were one more possession to use and throw away. We have not cared for what dwells upon this planet, and we have abused the very things you made in love.
People: Have mercy upon us, O God of earth and air and water and fire.
Leader: O God, hear in our voices and see in our hearts the desire for true repentance, and help us to find the way back to you.
People: Come to us, Lord of our lives, and show us the fullness of your great mercy.

Time of Silence

Receiving of Ashes

Leader: Accomplish in us, O God, the work of your salvation,
People: That we may reflect your light and glory.
Leader: By the life and death and transformation of Jesus Christ,
People: Bring our minds and hearts to such a depth of understanding that we, too, accept the full promise and challenge of your love.

Benediction
Go now, marked with the sign of Christ's outrageous love, to live as God's humble children in service to our broken and blessed world. And may the Holy Spirit be with you today, tomorrow, and in the life that is to come. Amen and amen.

This service includes elements taken or adapted from traditional sources, the UCC Book of Worship, and www.processandfaith.org.

I Just Couldn't Do It

After all those years of "speeches" by GWB over the years, I just couldn't bring myself to watch much of President Obama's Address to Congress last night. I just couldn't do it. It's not that I don't love our new president, because I do. And it's not that I don't think he's a great speaker, because I do.

But I will admit that there were times during the campaign when his rhetoric didn't match what I knew he was capable of. Without tanking, he just wasn't what I knew he could be. His speech on race was actually what finally tipped me from being a lukewarm supporter to a passionate advocate for his election, because it was then that I saw him give the speech I had known all along was inside of him. And while he has seldom disappointed me since that day in terms of his speeches, I just couldn't get into it last night.

I watched part of it, and was impressed that so often the entire chamber applauded at his words (I remember so many States of the Union where one side sat stone-faced throughout the entire speech), and it was very nice to be spoken to like a grown-up for a change, but still....my attention just faded in and out. No doubt it was due to 1) being gunshy after so many terrible, terrible States of the Union (GWB was deeply annoying with his "noun, verb, 9/11" routine, too), and 2) just plain being sad at my Nana's death. Instead, I focused more on making travel arrangements and talking to Backbencher's family, with whom we'll be staying for part of our trip.

And Gov. Jindal's response was so, well, just plain ludicrous, that I had to go bathe the dogs. It was treacly, and it was much less a response to the President's speech than it was an opportunity to position himself as a credible conservative in the folksy, feel-good mold of Ronald Reagan. Gag me with a spoon! His bi-partisan stuff was okay, and a step in the right direction (though Backbencher will argue that point, I'm sure), and he was far less prickly than other responses have been in the past (again, that chipper Gipper routine); but, my God, the man is a political wonk with a Harvard degree and is a Rhodes scholar. Man up to your identity and your intelligence, and give us more of that! I might not agree with you, but at least we can wrestle with substance together.

In the end, I'm kind of sorry I missed President Obama's speech, because the more I hear of it, the better it sounds. He, at least, gives us what we need: frank and honest assessments of where we're at, an acknowledgement that we have different ways we'd like to get to the places we'd like to be, and SUBSTANCE that we can tussle with. Like Jacob at the river, wrestling with God - this is what I want in a President.

Nana

So....we may be a little busy here at Casa Liturgygeek, what with Lent starting and all.  

Also, my grandmother died this morning.  Lots I'd like to say at the moment, but I think I might wait until I can gather them into something a little more coherent than, "She was fierce, and awesome, and I love her a lot."

Oh, and this is just for fun

Christians who hate the haters who claim to be Christians? Check out this blog! (And, since the title of the blog is wtfwjdbitch, consider yourself warned on the language front.)

h/t Dan Savage

This Is Why I Do What I Do

...and why I believe what I do about reproductive health, access and justice, and why as a Christian minister I support Roe v. Wade. Right here. This is why. Go and read.

And Matthew, bless you for all that you do, all that you are, and all that you were for this family.

This One's For Shar

Just a reminder that I am not, nor do I any longer in any way whatsoever (nor did I ever closely), resemble Tonya Harding.
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=12101109

G-mo, it was your stupid friend who said that in the first place. I still blame you, because I don't remember who he was.

Internet Down...

...at Casa Liturgygeek/Backbencher. Still. So that's why the lack of posts. That, and I've been insanely busy getting ready for the premiere of our community theatre show - in the brand-new theater! We open tomorrow and tickets are still available.

Hopefully we'll get our wireless up and running in the next day or so....and just you wait! I've been mulling over that Viagra sermon, and with no preaching duties this week (thank you, blessed Intern!), I just may get to writing it for y'all.

Coming Out

So, the time has come. I need to come out.

I Jazzercise.

There, I said it.

I used to blame "Pope" Laura for this. When I interviewed for the church I currently serve, she, the chair of the search committee, invited me to join her for a class. Maybe partly to show off the new Y, and partly to see how I dealt with strangers? I saw it as a test, kind of, and thought it'd probably be good if I went. Well, everyone was super-friendly (it is Iowa), no one yelled at my ridiculously poor rhythm, and when they asked if I'd be back, both Laura and I kind of looked at each other and said, "Hopefully." As in, hopefully I'd get called to the church, and hopefully I'd want to go back to Jazzercise. I really wanted the former, but I wasn't sure about the latter.

I'm a little ashamed to admit that before I moved to Iowa, I had a rather snobby attitude regarding Jazzercise, seeing it mostly as something that white, middle-aged Midwestern women did to try to stay in shape. It's the vestige of being a former collegiate athlete, I suppose, but I saw Jazzercise mostly as a gateway activity until I got myself motivated to run or swim more consistently. The music is pretty good and the moves are all right, but I always found myself snickering on the inside (and sometimes on the outside) when I confessed to Jazzercising. I was embarrassed to admit it, especially to my running friends.

Well, five-plus years in, and I'm ready to come out. First of all, I admit that I had a lot of misconceptions about Jazzercise. In our community there are tons of young people who Jazzercise - I've met most of my friends in town there. (Also, when I visited Backbencher in Georgia, the class was very multicultural.) Second of all, the workouts are pretty good. If I went more often, I'd probably be in better shape. You should see what Judi Sheppard Missett looks like - she's as old as my mom and she is hotter than ... well, she's in outstanding shape, let's just say that. (Or, judge for yourself.) Our instructors, Sandy, Carrie and Tina are also incredible, each in their own way. Third of all, the main instructor refers to me as "the stripping minister" and everyone thinks it's hilarious! Especially me. Sandy is a riot. If nothing else, your abs will get a great workout from all the laughing. Fourth of all, my friend Shar's little sis sometimes teaches Jazzercise. And anything connected to Shar is automatically cool.

We lovingly refer to becoming a part of the Jazzer community as "joining the cult." And, I've drunk the Kool-Aid. It is a great community and I'm no longer ashamed of who I am.

Oh, and unlike teh gayz, we recruit. See you in class, 5:45 pm most evenings at the Montgomery County Y, 8:45 am on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays. If you are insane, join Tina at 5:45 am on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Tell them "the stripping minister" sent you - they know me there.

Fidelity

Catch this video (yah, I'm still learning how to embed these things, so for now you'll just have to click the link).

I won't rehash the marriage equality arguments here, or give a big shout-out to my moms, who are among the 18,000+ couples legally wed in California. But for those of you who are married, try to imagine if someone tried to force you to get divorced. Literally force you. Like, going to court against your will to forcibly have your marriage ENDED. Bet you'd love that.

Ironically, the same people who want to force these married people to be forcibly divorced are the same people who lament the "casualness" with which heterosexuals enter and leave "traditional marriage." So, the best way for our culture to honor marriage vows is to ... force happily married people to not be married to each other any longer? Way to honor the sanctity of marriage, you jerks. (Backbencher, who's from the South, says I can say, "Bless their hearts" at the end of that sentence and it doesn't count as an insult.)

h/t Street Prophets and The Pocket Mardis

Oh, God, the Snark!

Have you seen those ridiculous Snuggie commercials? It is a weird pitch for a 'blanket' that looks more like some creepy secret society cult ritual robe. Well, I came across a hilarious ad parodying it that I simply felt I had to share. Check it out here; but fair warning, the language is a little coarse and not for tender ears or for people who are sensitive about such things. Sorry, Moms.

h/t Scratchbomb.com

Jesus in Worship?

Last week, I had an interesting experience at PSR's Earl Lectures.  

As probably most of you know, I attended PSR, an extremely progressive UCC seminary in Berkeley, CA.  It is also interdenominational (not non-denominational), which means we have students from all sorts of religious backgrounds.  UCC, obviously, and also DOC, UMC, and MCC.  But also Swedenborgians, UUAs, and a smattering of students from other denominations.  When I was there, the range was pretty broad - from Episcopalian to Church of Religious Science to someone who was really about the Urantia Book/Movement to a Buddhist to .... well, you get the idea.

Naturally, worship was fraught with all sorts of peril.  Inclusive language for God was pretty much the expected norm, which meant that people could say "Goddess" but "Father" raised some gasps.  "Lord," pretty much out of the question.  Jesus could maybe be used, but too much orthodoxy (bodily resurrection, Jesus as divine Son of God, etc.) was definitely looked at somewhat askance.  There was a lot of intellectualizing our faith, showing off how smart and theologically astute we were, as opposed to too much confessional/devotional language.  We were earnest and this is definitely where we were at the time, but in retrospect there were some different things I might have liked a bit more.

Having grown up in a progressive UCC tradition, the inclusive language for God was not really a problem for me.  But, I confess I sometimes found it kind of annoying that "inclusive language" too often meant "really generic language" or occasionally "deliberately provocative language."  *sigh*

Examining the language  we use for God is always something I favor, as well as a robustly intellectual faith.  But one thing we didn't do too much in seminary was acknowledge that some people have legitimately examined their language, and they still find "Father" language to be what moves them.  That is not a sign of an intellectually vacant faith.  

Yet I was still really, really shocked by the closing worship at Earl Lectures.  I think "surreal and confusing" was the wording I used in a text to a friend I was supposed to meet for worship, but got late to because ... worship went longer than I expected.  There was praise music - with relatively progressive theology.  There was Jesus language.  Someone said "Lord."  Repeatedly.  Did I mention the praise music?  

I confess that it was very weird for me.  On the one hand, I was really happy to hear Jesus mentioned at my seminary.  On the other hand, praise music kind of annoys me, even if it has a good theology.  Back to the first hand, the worship team at PSR (worship professor Andrea Bieler, director of worship Andrea Davidson and music director Aeri Lee) are freaking awesome!  And the students who are also involved in worship planning are also pretty outstanding, including that Pentecostal student.  Wow!  

On the other hand, did I mention how WEIRD it was?  Jesus, Pentecostal-y stuff, praise music, professors authentically revealing their faith in appropriate ways, and, um, Jesus.  Who knew?  

I'm still processing it.  I'm so used to my worship experiences at PSR to be more intellectual than devotional, with little Jesus-as-Savior, that I did not know what to make of what I experienced at the closing of Earl Lectures.   It was everything I could have hoped for...and yet I was also really uncomfortable.  I tried to pretend it was on behalf of others who might be uncomfortable (you know, solidarity and all)....but the truth is that I was a little weirded out by the whole thing.

And it's not as if I never use Jesus as Lord language - I rather believe that progressive Christianity ought to reclaim that language.  Or that I'm opposed to praise music....okay, I kind of am, but that's really more a personal preference as opposed to some sort of theological stance.  And this praise music had really good theology!  Or that I'm not appropriately self-revelatory in my preaching and praying.  I think and hope that I am.

So, I don't know exactly what it was, but the whole thing was so bizarre.

Recovering Fundamentalists

So, I have to confess that I've not had much experience with fundamentalist churches as a parishioner.  I grew up in the UCC, with a significant detour into Lutheranism.  Now, to be honest, those Lutherans were Missouri Synod, which here in the Midwest pretty much counts as fundamentalist to many.  But this was in California, and the minister was really progressive, so if you'd asked me which branch of Lutheranism our church was, I would have said ELCA for sure.  But even at Faith Lutheran, I strongly identified as UCC, primarily because of my participation at Camp Caz, a UCC camp in Northern California.

So I've never gotten the whole struggle with the Bible and homosexuality, or the Bible and earth stewardship, or the whole thing about the world coming to an end in our lifetimes.  I'm trying not to judge folk who believe that homosexuality is a sin, or that we shouldn't care about loving the earth because Jesus is coming soon to destroy it, or I'll be carried away in the Rapture, but this stuff is just not.for.me.

Maybe it's because I've never had to reject the theologies of fundamentalism, never had to recover from the spiritual abuse that so many experienced in these traditions, that I'm less defensive or afraid of engaging it, or of being in relationship with people who share these theologies. Even though I totally disagree with what so many of them believe.

In fact, I have a strange love for these folk.  And especially (though unsurprisingly) for those who leave such traditions in favor of a more inclusive Christian gospel of unconditional love.  In that vein, I encourage you to go read this blog.  It's written by the ex-wife of a Christian singer Ray Boltz, who came out a while ago, and it is just sweet and wonderful and I'm learning a lot about straight spouses in what is known as a "mixed-orientation" marriage.  And, how we can minister to such people.

By the way, my seminary president Bill "Shut up!" McKinney pointed out a while ago that I always had an openness to more conservative/traditional/fundamentalist theologies, even though I often think I'm about as liberal as they come, and that maybe that's why I'm more open to this kind of stuff now in my ministry.  It seems as if people have a hard time putting me in a theological box, what with believing in the bodily resurrection of Jesus AND in marriage equality for gays and lesbians and all.

Our Dear Darwin

I don't often write about my parishioners, for a whole host of reasons.  Their privacy, my pastoral responsibilities, etc.  But please keep Darwin in your prayers.  Everything I'm about to reveal is common knowledge.  Last Monday, as I was about to leave for Pacific School of Religion's Earl Lectures, I stopped by to visit him in the hospital, as he'd recently broken his hip.  To put it clearly and concisely, it was not good.  For some time, my trip was questionable.  After several hours with Darwin and his family, time of prayer with him and them, we decided it would be okay for me to go.  I expected them to call me on Tuesday at the latest with the sad news of his death.

But by late Wednesday, still no word.  I learned on Thursday at he had been released from the hospital; the word was that he'd apparently rallied enough to go back to the nursing home.  

Today I went to see him; he is non-responsive but still alive.  Please keep him and his family in your prayers.

I also want to give a shout-out to Southwest Airlines.  When I called to say I'd miss my flight and figure out my options, I learned that I didn't have to cancel my reservation or change my plans until I knew better what my plans would be.  If I arrived at the airport at least 2 hours before the last flight left, there would be no charge and I could fly standby.  The woman also checked and made sure that the later flights had room; "they're all wide open," she said cheerfully.  "You should be with your parishioner."  I did not actually make the 2 hour window, but Southwest still did not charge me for the switch.  I even got an "A" seating.  Plus, everyone with Southwest was so friendly and cheerful on all the flights that it was practically a pleasure to fly again.

Random Television Post

Backbencher may have the upper hand on Scrubs trivia, but it is only because I bugged him and bugged him and bugged him to give the show a shot.  He claimed he already had enough shows.  (Is such a thing possible?)

However, I was the one who noticed this weird thing on the show.  It's odd that the staff works at a hospital called "Sacred Heart."  Okay, that's not the odd part.  Lots of hospitals have religious names, especially if they are run by the Catholic Church.  What is odd is that Sacred Heart on Scrubs has advertisements for NuvaRing, a popular hormonal birth control, on practically all its walls.  Which you would almost certainly NOT find at a Catholic hospital.  (At least not the posters.)

Also, now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever seen a priest on the show.  Psychiatrists abound.  Priests, not so much.  Either they just picked a random, vaguely-religious-sounding name for the hospital and took the NuvaRing money without thinking about it, or it's an intentional ironic riff - which makes more sense, given the utter ridiculousness of the show.  And, I realize that "Sacred Heart" is not "vaguely-religious," it's an image fairly specific to and prominent in the Catholic tradition (perhaps also in Orthodox churches, if I remember correctly).

Anyway, it's late and I'm tired.  I'll get to that list tomorrow, and I do promise to get on that Viagra sermon, too!  (In the blogosphere, my seminary professors are wrong: Sunday does not come whether or not my sermon is ready.)

Processing All the Weirdness...

...that was this past week.  It was, for the most part, weird and wonderful, with more blessings than I expected and exactly what my soul needed.

The high points now, and I'll cover them in the next hours and days:

1. Darwin lives!  

2. Jay Bakker.  Seriously.  He's one of the few non-linear, random preacher-types I could listen to all day long.

3. The Miller-Mutias.  best.people.ever.  Except maybe Backbencher.

4. News from friends: pregnancies abound!  

5.  Karen Ward is my new shero.

6. Time with mentors is always great.  I heart Lizann and Kyle.

7. The 'kids' are all grown up, and one of them is my twin, separated at birth.

The weird and totally unexpected things:

1. Darwin lives.

2. PSR worship with the words "Jesus," "Lord," and "saves."  And progressive-theology praise music.  It was Earl Lectures, but still, it was surreal.

Reason, Science and Sanity...

...returns to global family planning services.  Thank you, President Obama!

I know there will be times when President Obama disappoints me, maybe even all of us.  I know he's not the Messiah, or even a political savior.  But today's troubles are enough for today, and today's solutions must be celebrated.

Oh, wait?  Did you want to hear that one more time?  Me too.  "President Obama."

Tears in My Eyes

I know it's a little bit old news, but last night as I was driving to a meeting, I heard that President Obama had outlawed torture and said that Gitmo will be closed in a year (at the longest). This morning, I heard on NPR that he says interrogations must follow the Army Field Manual. Now, I'm not an expert in the Army Field Manual, but I do know it says everyone we capture has to be treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention, which the previous regime was loath to agree to. (and why was that again? Oh, yeah....because we TORTURED.)

We're not all better again, we need to make amends for the ways we have hurt our fellow brothers and sisters - and I have no idea how we can repair some of these wounds - but at last, our president is calling us to account, and to a new and better way of operating in the world. AT LAST!

Can I repeat that one part again? Sure - President Obama. And that other part? No more torture. Music to my ears, kids.

Shameless Self-Promotion

Look, Ma's, I'm published!

There's lots more I wanted to say, and more nuance that 600 words simply does not allow.  And, of course, they took the most provocative statement of my column (the phrase that frankly, I was least comfortable with, though I believe it to be true) and made it the title.  

Thank You, Jesus

...for "the sweet victory of this hour."

Random Miscellany

1. Backbencher is AWESOME!  Tonight I went to play practice, which meant I missed my precious CSI (please don't tell me what happened in Grissom's last episode).  No problem, we have a VCR.  (Yes, a VCR.  We're too cheap for a DVR [to clarify: I'm too cheap for a DVR.].  And yes, you can buy VCR tapes, but not real easily.  But I digress...)  Well, tonight was Bush's farewell address, and Backbencher was concerned that the recording would end at 9pm, which might have been in the middle of CSI.  He changed the end time of the recording, but he expressed his anxiety that it might not work and that none of CSI would have gotten recorded.  He said, "I realize if this doesn't work, it may be grounds for divorce."

Silly Backbencher.  I can also watch CSI online if I need to.  But, he gets all kinds of points anyway ... (even though, upon checking the tape, he inadvertently got the start time a couple of minutes late.  No one's perfect, and anyway, it was just a rebroadcast of the prior episode, so no harm, no foul.)

2.  Dude, why has John Basedow not aged in a decade?  And why haven't his commercials changed in that time period, either?  His "Fitness Made Simple" ads are just plain weird.  

Time for bed, kids.

Random Football Post

Look, I don't consider myself that much of a jock.  True, I ran cross-country and track in high school and college - but I attended a Division III school and went on an academic scholarship.  (And, as Backbencher likes to point out, I do have a school record - in the 2000-meter steeplechase, which is no longer run because now the collegiate authorities have determined that we womenfolk can handle the rigor of a 3000.)  

However, I enjoy watching sports, particularly baseball and football.  I like to think I have more than average knowledge about the games, but this season in football I've learned two things that, frankly, I'm surprised I never knew about before.  I think this may be due to both the sheer volume of football I've watched this season, and to the fact that I'm paying more attention to what's going on the field in a bigger-picture sort of way.  I find I'm no longer just watching where the ball goes, but also how the offensive and defensive lines work (or don't).  I think I'm figuring out "plays," in other words.  (Though, God help me, I could never memorize the volume of plays most NFL players have to know.)

Here's my learnings from the 2009 season:

1. Play Action - this is when the quarterback (QB) pretends to hand off the ball to a nearby player, thus buying himself a few more seconds to throw the ball down the field.  I mean, I've seen this play for years (and I'm always surprised when it works, and when it doesn't), but it's only this season that I've heard announcers refer to it as such.  I guess I didn't pay that much of attention to the announcers previously....because this is clearly not a new move.

2. "Offsides, defense, unabated to the QB" - this is a foul called when a member of the defense crosses the line of scrimmage before the snap and has a clear path to the QB.  Apparently, defensive players can cross the line of scrimmage before the snap, as long as they get back on their before the snap AND they don't touch anyone on the offense; however, if that defensive player has an "unabated path" to the QB, it's a foul.  I just heard this foul called today for the first time, and I've heard it called at least 3 times this afternoon.  What is up with that?

And, can I just express my displeasure with the common play of handing off the ball to a running back who goes straight down the middle, right into a big mob of defensive players?  This is a silly move, IMO, and it seems like it isn't very effective.  True, sometimes all you need is a few yards, and this play can get you where you need to go.  (It is also very popular near the end zone, where, okay, it makes some sense.)  And, of course, sometimes you go straight up the middle, find a fantastic opening, and are twenty yards down the field before anyone else knows what's happening.  

But that second scenario is not that common.  Mostly, the running back ends up at the bottom of a huge dog pile, and has gained his team at most 2 or 3 yards.  Yes 2.5 yards x 4 downs = first down (usually), but it seems to be a very rough and ineffective way to get the job done, particularly if you are mid-field.  Plus, I've seen it fail so much, and teams actually lose yardage in the process.  It's not a bad play, but I'm just annoyed at how often it's used.  (As a side note, I think - and Backbencher agrees - that there is a good possibility that I prefer passing plays to the diving plays because of my love for the Joe Montana and Steve Young years of the 49ers.)

My friend, the genius

I think it's very admirable that my beloved, Backbencher, takes no offense at or bears no jealousy toward my near-continual pimping of our mutual friend Matt. Now, go read this.

I think I can say with some certainty that Matt would be a little pleased and proud to know that I find his blog post about not being impressive to be, well, rather impressive. Because, as much as we all (and by "we all," I mean we preacher-types) claim we don't want to be impressive, um, deep down, we do. We really, really do. (We know it's wrong and soul-killing, but we want to impress nonetheless.)

We want to impress not only for our own glory (which is nice), but also because we are on some level convicted that if we're impressive, what we'll really be doing is representing the Gospel really well. We seldom take it to its logical next step, because when we do, we're embarrassed at where it leads us. That is, if we're not impressive, then the Gospel - the call of Jesus Christ - won't be impressive.

As if!

And, way to go, Matt! Enjoy your friends, your beloved, and your time today. Use it wastefully, extravagantly, even, and give thanks to God for the freedom and power of the Holy Spirit.

Extravagant Welcome

When a church, like, say, our church, says it has an extravagant welcome, and that everyone is truly welcome, no matter who we are or where we are on our faith journeys, the amazing thing is that people believe us. They come to us, looking for that extravagant welcome which is to supposed to be representative of God's love for each and all of us, and they bring their full, true selves.

The humbling thing is, sometimes we don't like what they bring, and wish they'd be different. They bring their smells, their travails, their bad prior choices, their bad ongoing choices, and their unrealistic expectations of who and what God/the church/the pastor is supposed to be and do for or with them. And we are so tempted to try to fix them up, to make them "respectable," or at least less embarrassing.

Thank God for reminding us that it's not our job to fix people, but to love them, unconditionally.* (And to marvel at the transformations that come from unconditional love.)


* "Unconditional love" does not equal "tolerating any kind of wretched or abusive behavior." That's not what I'm talking about in this post. You can look for me to talk about that in my "doormat for Jesus" spiel, which should be posted sometime after the upcoming "Viagra Sermon."

Sorry to be on an unplanned hiatus...

....for the last week or more.  First there was Christmas, then there was the New Year's Adam party (which this year took place on the day after Christmas), which itself entailed massive housecleaning, and then, just about the time I thought I might recover, a dearly beloved 90-year-old church member, Gretchen, died rather unexpectedly on Monday, hours after I rushed to be with her and her family.  Her funeral was yesterday.  And that has been my week.

Tomorrow I will baptize Gretchen's great-granddaughter, in another somewhat unexpected (but this time very happy) situation.  So, trying to work in baptismal theology with the remnant of Israel and the "In the beginning was the Word..." has proven interesting.  Also, my children's time was going to be about gratitude to accompany the Ephesians text (1:3-14), which I may or may not work in, or do it well.

If it all works out, maybe I'll post the sermon.  If not, well, I've got some other ideas rattling around, including the perhaps previously-unmentioned "Viagra Sermon."  

Christmas Eve Mental Health Break

This is a great YouTube video starring a kid from our church and his dad. As his mom puts it, this "is classic Harris." I have to agree. He is goofy almost beyond compare, in a completely unique way. Also, I like to think this reflects well on me, because, um, I know such a cool nine-year-old? Seriously, you will love it - I can almost guarantee it. And if not, it's just two-and-a-half minutes.

Merry Christmas, may there be no unintentional fires at your Christmas Eve (or Day) services, and if you are in Red Oak around 5pm, join us! 608 E. Reed Street. If you are not Christian, I hope your December holidays (if you celebrate any) are or were meaningful and full of the Holy Presence.

More stuff coming after the Christmas holidays - I've been rather busy of late, which I hope is understandable.

Sir, Your Fifteen Minutes Were Up Some Time Ago

Please, Kenneth Starr, slip back into obscurity.  Don't be a footnote in TWO shameful events in U.S. history.

A great many things about this whole situation put me into fits.  First of all, I find it maddening and a little sickening that a majority of Californians saw fit to eliminate the rights of gay and lesbian couples to marry.  Marriage equality ("gay marriage" to some of y'all) is not popular, I get that.  Extending equal civil rights to people in the minority seldom is (see Loving v. Virginia, Brown v. Board of Education, etc.) - but just because it is unpopular does not make it okay to discriminate.  The Bill of Rights and state constitutions enumerate the legitimate powers of government, and they also ensure the rights of individuals against the tyranny of government and the tyranny of the majority.  (entering sidebar rant) Look, I don't like guns.  I really, really don't like guns.  I've never fired one - in fact, I've never even held one and hope never to hold one - and yet, it is clear that the Constitution protects the legal rights of individuals to keep and bear arms, and so I support that right.  I find many uses of this right to be odious and unChristian, and I do not plan to ever make use of this right, and I wish there were fewer guns out there (especially those bought "for protection") and fewer people who used them....yet, it is a fundamental civil right that should be available to all citizens.  (not unlike marriage....)

Second of all, this lawsuit reveals the disingenuousness of the supporters of Prop 8, who, before Nov. 4, swore up and down that this change to the CA state constitution would not in any way affect the marriages already performed.  Cold comfort indeed, but now they are reneging on even that.  (I realize that supporters of Prop 8 are no more monolithic in nature than are its opponents, and that not all members of the "Yes on 8" coalition have to agree to everything that every other coalition member says, but still.)  Furthermore, the state AG, Jerry Brown (yep, former Governor Moonbeam) has already expressed his opinion that marriages performed in California during from June to November were and shall remain valid, and he's said repeatedly that would be his position before the courts.  

Third of all, and most personally, this raises up the same specters of fear that my moms lived with for nearly twenty years before I married them this summer.  (I posted my experience here.)  You know, they really were not that into getting married when it was not an option for them, and obviously their relationship isn't any more valid with that piece of paper than it was without it.  And yet, their marriage was a profoundly moving event for all of us, and it was only in the experience of being able to be legally married that they realized just how important it was for them, personally, politically, and spiritually.  

And now Ken Starr wants to take away all of this, for my family and for thousands of other families throughout California.  Thanks a lot.  

Pimpin' My Man

Check out his blog: http://ultimatebackbencher.blogspot.com/ If you don't know what a backbencher is, he'll probably explain it in a future post. Or, you could start watching a lot of Prime Minister's Questions on C-SPAN, and you'd probably learn for yourself.

Urgh.

This is making the rounds on the blogosphere: Rev. Rick Warren of Saddleback Church will be giving the invocation at the Inauguration of Barack Obama. Urgh.

He's the man who spoke out in support of Prop 8, who said that "stopping evil" was the legitimate function of government, and who wrote the truly atrocious Purpose-Driven Life, of which theologian Fleming Rutledge once said (and I paraphrase), "It's a book that starts out by saying, 'It's not about you. It's about God,' then proceeds for the next 250 pages to talk about you."

This is not a good choice. I would be much better. I've even had some practice - in 2008 I gave the invocation at the Iowa Statehouse (and I am pretty sure I'll be invited back in 2009).

Even better than me, though, would be my friend MML or my beloved Mr. LiturgyGeek, because both of them are great ministers and have excellent sensitivities on the diversities of religious experience in the United States of America. I can think of lots of others. Why don't you nominate a few people you think would make a good inauguration-giver in the comments, and I'll forward them to the Obama peeps. Because surely they'll be interested in what I have to say...

Mental Health Break

So...about a week or so ago my friend Matt posted on his blog about his preaching anxiety dreams. (Yeah, this is going to be another Mardis-related derivative post, not nearly as good as the original) I've been having a lot more of them lately, which I do not understand at all. I used to get them sometimes on Saturday nights, perhaps if the bulletin hadn't yet been folded or the sermon given that last tweak.

Now I'm finding I'm having them during the week, even in weeks I'm not scheduled to preach, which is deeply unsettling for me (still, thank you, church, and thank you, Intern, for these little respites!). Generally the dream goes like this: there are not enough bulletins to go around, we have every visitor imaginable - the Jewish dad who used to sit behind me in the church where I did my field ed (hi, Larry, if you're reading!), whole biker gangs (seriously), all my friends from everywhere, BISHOPS (from other denominations, naturally), etc. Also, I've forgotten everyone's name, the musician isn't here, it is five minutes to church, I have no sermon and no ideas for a sermon, and I am not wearing shoes.

It is nice, however, to wake up from that dream and realize it is only Tuesday, and that there is still plenty of time to make bulletins, find shoes, and remember names. And make sure the biker gangs feel welcome - though in my dreams, they are always well-behaved. (It's usually the bishops you have to worry about.)

Wiki Madness!

For those of you snowed in, or wishing you could be snowed in, I offer to you: Last Thursdayism.

The lengths of crazy that people will go to never ceases to astound me. Then again, as a philosophical argument, it's kind of intriguing.....

I hate wind chill.

I am a California girl, raised in the Mediterranean clime of Sonoma County.  I, therefore, had no idea what the term "wind chill factor" meant until my first year of college in NYC.  For those of you who've never left the temperate regions of the world, it's when the weather is not only insanely cold out, but there is also a strong wind that makes it feel even colder than it is.

Tonight in Red Oak, if you listen to our local station, the wind chill could get as cold as -25.  Yes, NEGATIVE twenty-five.  If you listen to our local NPR affiliate, it could go as low as -28.  I am just so very grateful that I don't live any farther north.  In some places, I hear it gets even colder, though I am not sure how that is even possible.

UCC Primer: Introduction

Starting us out, I have two points to make.  Really, the first point is just for any Catholics out there in Liturgy-Geek land, or former Catholics who've left the RCC but haven't made their way to a new church home.  Or, if your only experience of "church" comes from what you see on television, you might want to read that first one.  If you're a Protestant or have experience among the Proddies, you can skip right ahead to #2:

1.  When I was getting ready to start seminary, I used to get so sick of answering the question of if ministers can have sex (living in NYC, it seems I knew a lot of Catholics). The answer is YES.  (This alone should be a reason for you to consider making the switch.)  The larger point is: Have you heard of a little thing called the "Reformation"?  It's kind of a bump in the road of your church's history, but it rather important for us Protestants.

Yeah, it has to do with your church, and people breaking away from Rome. I'd love to say some folk broke away out of solidarity with the poor, or in protest of the church hiearchy's protection (sometimes for decades) of priests who sexually abused children, or important things like that. But no, the Reformation came about because of the church selling indulgences to the rich, and annulling a king's marriage so he could marry a new hottie, and other stuff like that.  Some people - mostly men, sometimes priests - got mad and threw little fits or nailed stuff to church doors trying to get the church hierarchy to pay attention. They were trying to REFORM the church from within (hence the name "Reformation," get it?).  When that didn't work, then they left. Sometimes reluctantly.  Sometimes they got kicked out ("excommunicated").  Some of the names you need to know regarding the Protestant Reformation are: Luther, Calvin, Zwingli. Do you need to know more about them? Probably. But I'm not the one to ask. Wiki them if you want.

As a result of the Reformation, yes, priests (or "ministers" as we're more commonly called in Protestant churches) can now have sex. We can marry. In some traditions, we can even marry someone of the same gender. And, yep, women can be priests. Try not to let all that blow your mind.

2. Now that that's out of the way....let's move on to the UCC.  If there's really one thing to know about the UCC, it's that any question you ask about us can be answered in two words: "It depends." (This should really be our motto: The United Church of Christ - it depends! Hey, that has a nice double meaning....) EVERY UCC congregation is different and does things differently. Sometimes those differences are small, but often they are very significant for that congregation. So even the stuff that I write is going to be true of my experience in the UCC, but you can bet that others will have different experiences. That doesn't make me a liar or their church bad, it just makes us the UCC.  There is no "UCC consensus" about anything....other than Jesus Christ being the sole head of the church.  (And I'm pretty sure there's no consensus among all UCC members about what "Jesus Christ being the sole head of the church" means.  You can see now what I mean about, "It depends.")

This is because, according to our polity (the rules governing our life together as a denomination), "the basic unit of the church is the local congregation." Each church has autonomy and gets to make its own rules. We don't have bishops. We don't have a pope. We do have a General Minister and President, but he doesn't technically have any more authority to speak for the UCC than does my parishioner K, who drives me nuts most weeks (though I do love L very much).  

We do have this every-two-years gathering called General Synod, where we come out with various statements and pronouncements (you may remember this one about marriage equality, it was big in the news in 2005) that is supposed to guide the national setting in its work between Synods, but this is where it gets tricky. General Synods speak TO the church - to its members and congregations and associations and conferences.  It does not speak FOR the church - to the world, to the media, etc. No one gets that.  (Even within the UCC, people don't get that.)

This basically means that at General Synod, the gathered assembly could vote to encourage every congregation to become a tithing congregation within the next five years, and that would mean that our stewardship and evangelism teams would be working hard at producing materials aimed toward this, our General Minister and President would start talking about tithing a lot more, etc. etc. etc., and ninety percent of our churches could still ignore the pronouncement. And nothing would happen to them. No votes removed, no penalties, no ministers pulled from pulpits.  

But now that I think about it, wouldn't that be a cool pronouncement?

Getting back to the UCC and autonomy...you may legitimately ask, "Why bother with denominational ties at all, if you don't have to agree with anything other settings of the church do?"  That will bring us to the next topic, "Covenant."  I'll post in a couple of days, God willing.

Coming Soon: UCC Primer!

A colleague of mine at Planned Parenthood is considering converting from Catholicism (I bet you can figure out why), and she recently attended a UCC congregation in her new hometown. She had a great experience, but also had some questions about us that I was only too happy to answer. It got me thinking that some of y'all out there might also be interested in learning more about the UCC. Maybe, like my friend, you're a refugee from Catholicism, or from a fundamentalist tradition, and want to know why we do what we do the way we do. Maybe you're just curious about religion, and about the faith practices of Protestants. Maybe you are just curious about why I love liturgy. Maybe you're just avoiding work.

Whatever the reason, in the next few days/weeks/whatever, I'll be posting some "stuff" about the UCC as I understand it. This isn't going to be some sort of graduate-level dissertation on the faith and practice of the UCC - others have done that far better than I ever could. (also, see this.) This is meant for ordinary folk who just want to have some general, practical information about the UCC and what we do and believe. I'll talk about Communion, baptism, hierarchy, and covenant, and maybe some other stuff, too. Some history will be sprinkled in, but I'm not a name-and-date kind of gal, so if you want that info, check out this resource. Or this one.

First up will be a mini-introduction to what we are and aren't, with a teaser on the Reformation in general, especially for all you Catholics!

Marriage Equality Comes to Iowa?

The Iowa Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments this morning. (EDITED TO UPDATE LINK)You can listen live here. (FWIW, the justices are hitting both sides hard, and one side was clearly ready for it. The one defending marriage discrimination was not compelling at all.) A decision is expected sometime in March, according to a totally unofficial source I saw this weekend at Gov. Culver's Holiday Party.

I can scarely say how much this would mean to me personally. I've always had mixed feelings about signing state marriage licenses when the state participates in discrimination against my family. I've done so, for a variety of reasons I won't go into here, but it is not without discussion with each couple I've married about my feelings.

When marriage equality came to my home state, California, this past spring, I seriously considered packing my robe, stole, and book of worship, getting a plane ticket home, and showing up at state courthouses asking who wanted to be married on the first day gay and lesbian couples could. Instead, I waited until August, and flew home to marry my moms, who have been together for nearly 20 years. (I blogged about that experience here.) And good thing they did, too, given the result of Prop 8 last month.

Now that I'm living here in Iowa, I am positively giddy at the possibility of marriage equality here. I joked with some friends that if this does pass, I'll go to Des Moines in my robe, stole, and BOW on the first day it's legal to marry gay couples there. They said, "Please don't. We may want you to marry us that day." For them, and for all my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters who long to know what my beloved and I get to take for granted, let's hope the Iowa SC does the right thing.

The Flu

Home sick with the flu today. Stupid stomach. Also, it's the day that The Intern comes to church, so I had to cancel our time together. I really hate doing that. In the meantime, if you haven't seen this already, enjoy this little gem - Prop 8: The Musical.

Women's Fellowship and the Minnisingers

One of the most steadfast institutions in the small church I serve is the Women's Fellowship. When I arrived, they met monthly on Wednesdays for at least two hours, with treats, a guest speaker, and a (rather tedious) business meeting, including the verbal reading of the previous month's minutes (which are published in the newsletter). I knew early on not to fight any of this. The group is mostly aging women, from the generation when many (let's face it, white) women did not have to work outside the home. They fretted that the younger women didn't come, but seldom changed the meeting times to accommodate the women who did work. And the topics were generally not interesting to many of the younger women. Alas - because I found this group to be engaging and obviously attentive to each other's needs, and interested in how they could serve the church.

Well, the group has continued to age, the times and situations of many have changed, and among the changes in the group has been that they now meet only 3-4 times a year. Today we are having lunch at the Hysham House and listening to the Minnisingers, one of our local high school's choirs. We've done this every year I've been here, but somehow, it's always a delight to listen to the students. Lunch, no doubt, will be some sort of casserole.

Ivy League Snark

So, my friend Matt at The Pocket Mardis always has something interesting to say. Mostly I just want to link to his stuff and offer extended replies. That, however, seems cheap and derivative. But today I'm going to, because he linked to an absolutely ridiculous article about some Yale grad who, when confronted by the plumber, could not think of anything to say to the man.

Matt's response was a very quiet, graceful post about how grateful he was for his Christian College education, even though his theology is really different now than what he learned at Messiah College. My God, the graduates got TOWELS along with their diplomas to remind them of their call to SERVANTHOOD!!!! Here's his blog post: http://mattmardislecroy.blogspot.com/2008/12/in-which-i-defend-christian-college.html

I, however, could not get over the stupidity of an Ivy League grad who apparently was so elitist he couldn't make chit-chat with the plumber. Seriously? Yeah, I had to respond. You can check me out in the responses to the blog, but I'm going to post my response here, because it's funny:

Matt may be too tired to open up a can of whup-a&% on WD, but I'm not. Now, granted, I *only* attended the largest private university in the world, not an Ivy, and I did so "on scholarship," which means my family was too poor to afford $30K/year for college.

But I think my advice is still valid. After all, I did grow up in a very working-class family, from my mom I learned how to talk to just about anyone. My spouse will attest that I can (and do) talk to anyone and everyone - kids waiting in line at Customs, people walking their dogs, security guards, etc.

So believe me that I am sincere when I say, SERIOUSLY? This man didn't know what to say to the PLUMBER? Jesus H. Christ, plumbers aren't idiots. They do inhabit the same planet - nay, the same CITY - that you and I with our schmancy degrees inhabit. They get the same TV channels we do - and while they might not watch snooty public television like us Ivies and Ivy-wannabees, surely you have heard of SOME well-regarded and popular tv show to talk about intelligently for 2 minutes. CSI? The Biggest Loser? The Sopranos? Hell, Dancing with the Stars?

Anyway, for all those Ivy grads who, like WD, cannot think of even one polite chit-chatty thing to say to a plumber WEARING OBVIOUS SPORTS APPAREL, here is my gift to you: a list of topics on which you can easily chit-chat for a minute or two when "the help" comes.

1. Any trouble finding this place? Of course, if your mansion is the only place on the block, you may want to ask, "Any trouble finding the servant's entrance?" But in that case, be prepared to be punched in the face.
2. How do you like the Red Sox's chances this season?/Bummer about this year [snicker, snicker]; What are their chances next year? (Whatever, I'd never do this with a Red Sox fan because I hate them with every fiber of my being, but you get the idea. Oh, and NEVER EVER snicker at the sad, sad fate of the Red Sox in front of their fans. Unless those fans are named TJ and Tracey. Or you are in New York City.)
3. What do you make of this crazy weather? If the weather isn't crazy, mention how nice it is, and ask if you think it will last.
4. Did you have a nice 4th of July/Thanksgiving/President's Day/etc.? (if one has just passed) You can also ask if one has plans for an upcoming holiday. Beware - since not everyone is as WASPY as you, don't assume they are Christian, even nominally so. (Also, don't assume they AREN'T....)
5. Thank you for coming on such short notice.
6. OMG can you believe what happened on Lost last night? (omit OMG if you don't want to sound like a teenage girl)
7. I see you've got Tom Clancy's new novel in your toolbox. How do you like it?
8. What a cool tattoo!
9. Sorry about the mess. (don't mention that the maid has the day off.)
10. Sorry about my dog peeing on your shoe. (then, make a mental note to fire your dog-trainer.)

Oh, and I daresay that plumbers in college towns probably make more money than even tenured Ivy League faculty. So, if $$ = success, who's the sucka now? (Yeah, I said "daresay," what are you going to do about it?)

His sad, sad, elitist article made me happy that I grew up poor. Thank you for linking to it, and for letting me vent for a while. You are a good, good man.

I get that William Deresiewicz is lamenting the shortfalls of his Ivy League education, and I appreciate that he understands that CLASS is an important element of diversity often missing on university campuses. At least there's that. I further get that, as a Christian minister, I ought to be more sympathetic to people's failures and shortcomings. (Generally, I am. Honest.) But class stuff really gets under my skin. Does he not think that plumbers might be interested in politics? Or literature? Or that plumbers cannot speak intelligently about these sorts of topics?

Maybe, Professor D, plumbers will sound to you like blowhards as they offer what seem to you to be uneducated or ridiculous beliefs or attitudes. Maybe ... maybe you sound like that to your students. So if you want them to listen to you, maybe you should spend some more time listening to plumbers.

But please, God, not Joe the Plumber.