Reluctant Hillary supporter?

Much to my surprise, I found that I should reconsider my voting intentions. I had been struggling between Obama and McCain... and just didn't like Hillary. But, on this survey at Minnesota Public Radio, I got the following results (stupid survey has me all goofed up!):

Hillary Clinton 21.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

Barack Obama 16.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

Mike Gravel 12.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

Mike Huckabee 10.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

Mitt Romney 10.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

John McCain 7.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

Ron Paul 5.0

Iraq Iran Immigration Taxes The mortgage crisis Education Social Security Stem cell research Health care SCHIP Abortion Line-item veto Energy Marriage Death penalty Gun control Climate change

That obvious, eh?

I finally remembered that I have been wanting to renew my passport for a year now, and I had some time available today. I knew that you could do it at post offices, and there was a sign in the Massillon one that said that the Winesburg office does them too. I figured the Winesburg office would be quicker and easier, plus it is a beautiful (and equidistant to Massillon) drive. Since the entire county population where Winesburg is (Holmes County) is about the same as the City of Massillon, I knew it would be less busy.

I drove into town, but somehow missed the post office. So I pulled into a bank and started to go in. An older woman was coming out.

"Pardon me, are you from around here?" I asked.

"Yes I am."

"May I ask where the post office is?"

She sized me up, and then said, "You aren't getting a passport, are you?"

My surprise must have been plastered all over my face as I responded, "Uh, um, yes, I am."

"I thought so. WKSU and all. I'm heading there right now. Follow me."

It took me a moment to remember that I had my WKSU jacket on. Did I stick out that much? Does she associate public radio listeners as world travelers? Did my corduroy pants and button-up shirt underneath a green WKSU jacket betray a comopolitan air? Was it that obvious?

The (Spiritual) State of the Union

So, I'm watching the series premiere of the TV show, Eli Stone. It was a pretty good show. But, wow, I think it is quite the commentary on the state of the nation's spirituality.

I strongly suggest watching this show... at least the first episode. In any case, there is a fascinating exchange between the main character and his "holistic healer." Only slightly paraphrased, the healer suggests:

"Maybe you're a prophet."

"Just one problem... I don't believe in God."

"Sure you do. You believe in right and wrong. You believe in justice. And you believe in love. That's God."

I have heard a lot about the increasing spirituality of the nation (with the concomitant decreasing religiosity). It seems like shows like Eli Stone are helping the nation explore, wrestle, and give shape to their increasingly questioned sense of spirituality.

The show's message seems best summarized in its theme song from George Michael: "You gotta have faith, faith, faith."

Fascinating.

Pentacost Prose

When Jared and I went to a conference in Minneapolis two summers ago (2006), we had the chance to visit Solomon’s Porch on a Sunday. As it turns out, it was Pentecost Sunday, and it was an amazing experience.

Anyway, I was given a small piece of prose to read. I don’t know who wrote it. But I recently refound this scrap piece of paper, and the power of the words spoke to my heart. I share it here:

I heard about your tongues of fire
Spreading word to heart and soul
Burning goal; burning desire
Redeeming the dead the broken the torn
All to mission; none to mourn
But I want to speak fire now
And it rains in my heart.
Bow! Spark!

---

Fascinating Thought in Song

My friends Carey and Doug joined me in going to Christ Presbyterian Church in Canton for Christmas Eve service. It was beautiful. It started with a half-hour concert (broadcast on a local radio station) by the church's choir. Then, there was a 1.5 hour liturgical, candlelight communion service. I was surprised how much I liked it, since my only other liturgical experience (at a Canton Episcopal church) was less than inspiring. I have many observations about the difference between liturgical and "evangelical" churches, but that will have to wait for a possible later post.

The Eastern Orthodox tradition refers to a term in reference to the Trinitarian Godhead - perichoresis. Literally, it means, "dancing around," and refers to the intimacy and coordination involved in joyful dancing.

One of the songs that was sung at the Christmas Eve service was composed by one of my favorite contemporary choral composers, John Rutter. The song was called "Tomorrow Shall Be My Dancing Day." The words are beautiful, and build upon the thought of the perichoresis:

Tomorrow shall be my dancing day:
I would my true love did chance
To see the legend of my play,
To call my true love to my dance:

Sing oh my love, oh my love, my love, my love;
This have I done for my true love.

Then was I born of a virgin pure,
Of her I took fleshy substance;
Thus was I knit to man's nature,
To call my true love to my dance:

Sing oh my love, oh my love, my love, my love;
This have I done for my true love.

In a manger laid and wrapped I was,
So very poor, this was my chance,
Betwixt an ox and a silly poor ass,
To call my true love to my dance:

Sing oh my love, oh my love, my love, my love;
This have I done for my true love.

What more can I say? Amen.

Time of Reflection: Part 3

Cacophony Number Two: Event Horizon Fugue
(written December 2007 by Tony H.)

SOPRANO

He looks into the pleading eyes
Of a man. But barely.
The North Star is only a faint
Flicker - among many.
Though, without a ship, it matters
Little. Did it ever?
What do you plead for? Answer me!
Faith? Hope? Love? A forever?
His anxious silence - maddening.
His cause - captivating.

His voiceless mouth and screaming eyes
Peer back from the mirror.

ALTO

Silent tears fall, the world he knows-
Explicitly therapeutic?
Emotion, manifest sorrows?
Excretions, the eye's sole tonic?
Expected, a behavior learned?
Expression of a soul just turned?
Preposterous!

TENOR

The sands of Time could not erase
the clawing hands, much less the face.
A monument to guard the Nile,
a figure of hubristic wile.
Though sand did hide, the past - forgot;
it waited there to be resought.

In holy zeal for the Great Disc -
or shrewd scheming in politics -
A city birthed upon the Nile,
soon razed to earth with jealous bile.
Amarna's fate for years unknown -
now naught but dust where once it shone.

A mountain tomb for all to see,
a monument of vanity -
Though once the home to king, and gold,
expected peace as they grew old,
The great facade is empty now;
a hope destroyed, a pointless vow.

Though young compared to all the rest,
it may have been the nation's best.
Its hallowed walls upon the sea
encompassed all Humanity.
But all it took was one small flame,
and Man's grand trove was gone in shame.

My query should apparent be,
of all of these, which one are we?

BASS

a trust a knowing deep inside
a faith somewhere within me hides

a future landscape far and wide
a hope somewhere within me hides

a warm embrace where peace resides
a love somewhere within me hides

experience the flow of blood

an unseen force to walk beside
somewhere spirit within me hides

two friends by choice pneumas entwined
somewhere friendship within me hides

one soul by choice bodies entwined
somewhere marriage within me hides

experience the flow of blood

Time of Reflection: Part 2

Cacophony Number One: Heart Song
(written somewhere between 1993-1995 by Tony H.)

SOPRANO

no one understands
how could they?

yet how is it that we
are able to hide
the Sun?

are we that blind?
or have we just learned
to shame the
Great Wall?

one was brave
taking up his chisel
a chip from
the Wall

but with his one blow
a breech was born
a glimpse of the mountain that
reigns beyond

will we just place
another brick in
the Wall?

ALTO

isn't it frustrating?
do they see can they hear

the roaring waterfall

springing from the mountain

rushing to offer itself

only to be damned by
the Wall?

TENOR

the Passion burns within
and yet only flickers are seen
a silly laugh a common meal
words shared...barely
hug and holy kiss...rarely
we await the hour
when the Lord in His day
fans the flickers into flames
an unhidden passion that will incinerate
the Walls
as we share in the love
the Perfect
Love of God.

BASS

i can't always say it
i don't always try
i thank my brother
for saying it so well
the Passion i have
i through Christ have for you

You my brother

You my sister

all my beloved

and though we may be apart
in body or spirit
know that we are
One
in Him.

CHORUS

the most harlotted word
the most sacred word
i share all its holiness
with you

I Love You.

Time of Reflection: Part 1 - READ FIRST

Although I am an emotional guy, I, like many MBTI Thinkers, have problems comprehending and understanding these emotions, much less expressing them. Occasionally, I have used the process of writing to sort through these emotions, and in the end, to express them. Recently, I have been going through a lot of inner reflection (hence the relative quiet on the blog).

In the process of churning through some of the emotions, I went back and read some old writings, and came across a couple that I will share. One is a short reflection that I will share in a later post. The other was a poem written years ago that inspired the form of my most recent emotional exploration.

I share these humbly, knowing that I am no poet (nor a good editor).

Was the cross just a case of cosmic child abuse?

(Recent Insight from Rob Bell's "The gods aren't angry" Tour)

Until recently, I never asked that question. It was an absurd question, the kind that is unthinkable. Until, that is, the assumptions that created the foundation of my worldview began to shift, and space was made for such questions. A friend of mine mentioned in passing his struggle with the cross being "cosmic child abuse." And suddenly, I had eyes to actually "see" the dilema for the first time.

I mean, really, it certainly can seem that way. Here is a god, who, seemingly for arbitrary reasons, requires a blood sacrifice for forgiveness of sins. Why? We aren't told. It seems brutal and heartless, and meaningless. If someone sheds blood, they are supposed to shed additional blood for forgiveness? Sounds more like the primitive “eye for an eye.” The Hebrew writer, in Hebrews 9:22 even states, “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (TNIV).

Since his creation is full of sin, and in need of forgiveness, he ordains a system of animal sacrifice. When that fails to “keep up” with the sin, he decides to send his son to endure beatings, mocking, and “dehumanizing” treatment (not to mention, de-dietization), and ultimately to have his son’s blood shed to appease some arbitrary need for blood. When looked at from this (traditional) perspective, it certainly seems like “cosmic child abuse” to appease a blood thirsty god.

But Rob Bell gave me a way of understanding the cross, that puts to ease my consternation about the abusiveness of the cross… well, really, he gave me more to work with, so that when added to what Jared shared a couple weekends ago (see prior post), I can be in awe of the cross once again.

First, I must address the Hebrew writer’s statement. It was taken out of context (as most verses used in doctrinal assumptions are). The whole context is comparing the old covenant system to the new system that Jesus ushered in. To give a little more context:

16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made
it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes
effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first
covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed
every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves,
together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the
scroll and all the people. 20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which
God has commanded you to keep." 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the
blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the
law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the
shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. (Heb 9:16-22 TNIV)

So, there are two ways in which the context influences my understanding. First, the writer is talking about blood as a way of proving the death of something; Christ’s spilled blood proved the death of the old “will” or covenant. Second, the Hebrew writer was contexualizing Christ’s death in terms of what the Hebrews were already very familiar – the temple sacrificial system. One could argue that the statement “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” really is only an extension of what “the law requires” referred to in the first part of that sentence, and that law has been done away. The Hebrew writer was not necessarily (though he or she could have been) saying that the shedding of blood for forgiveness of sins is some universal, cosmic, unaltering truth.

Having addressed that, then, brings me to a new way of understanding the cross that Rob Bell shared. Jesus came to do away with the old systems (powers, dominions) that caused oppression and suffering and violence. The old system of appeasing our own sense of guilt through blood sacrifices was based on violence (to animals, in the case of the Hebrews, but even to human children, in the case of the worshippers of Molech). Christ, in the cleansing of the temple, hints at the fact that the old order needed to change; that Christ (“something greater than the temple”) was the new order. He declared that he was the way to forgiveness (ie, freedom from guilt), not the old system based on the “vortex of the altar” as Rob referred to it. But if Jesus was to be victorious in overturning the system based on violence, there is no way that he could use violence to usher the new system of peace and reconciliation. Of course, those with a vested interest in the old system (the leaders who were made wealthy by the violence-based system) would use violence to defend their system. And they did. And he didn’t.

So when I look at the cross now, I don’t see some blood thirsty god requiring the blood of his son. I see a Son who was willing to take on our suffering to create a space for love (see previous post). I see a Son who was revoking the system based on violence and replacing it with a system of peace and love and reconciliation, and in the process, became a (albeit, willing) victim of the violence-based system.

The New Testament writers appropriated the language of the old sacrificial system for the situation of the cross. It was a system that the people of that day and age could understand, where sacrificial blood systems were ubiquitous.

No, the cross was not cosmic child abuse. The cross was the evidence of the failure of a sacrificial system of blood offerings – one that was designed to appease our own sense of guilt. The cross was the creation of space for love. The cross was the victory of love and peace over guilt and violence.

Praise God for the Cross.

The Power of Sacrificial Suffering

Jared shared something incredibly insightful and powerful a week ago, that has really stuck with me. I would go so far as to say that it was a conceptual hanger on which I will be able to hang much spirituality, humanity, and theology.

Paraphrased, we were talking about what the incarnation teaches us, or means to us. He said that it taught him about suffering. He pointed out that there is always going to be suffering. By sacrificing, that person takes on someone else's suffering. The suffering is still there; it still hurts; it doesn't lessen in the sacrifice. But by taking on someone else's suffering, by sacrificing, a creative force is unleashed; a space for love is created, where before there was none. Suffering has the power to generate anger, bitterness, regret, and sorrow on it's own; sacrificial suffering has the power to create love.

That gives a great framework for me to understand what Christ did.

Thanks Jared.

My head hurts... (A poly-rant)

I think it is from too much thinking. Or, perhaps, from too much deconstructing. There has not been one area of my life that I have not been analyzing, struggling with, or learning from. The constant challenges at work, the uncertainty of work and healthcare in general, relationships, church, spirituality.... all of these things have kept my mind spinning. So, I thought I would share a few random rants and thoughts... to give a taste of my thoughts lately.

... Stark County (and Ohio in gereral most likely) is very parochial, and if it is going to be successful, the hospital of Western Stark county must understand this and play into that. Even if it is owned by some corporate "outsider" monolith, that doesn't mean that it can bring outside "expert" help and get positive results. "All politics are local" is a famous truism... so it is with healthcare. I need to be on a guidance board... ;-)

...When you have a paradigm shift, it is truly like Alice in Wonderland (or the Matrix, if you prefer): Once you have taken the red pill, there's no going back. So, as I look at what Jesus says, I'm struck more and more by the fact that I've had it wrong all along. When Paul says, "There's no other name in which you are saved," I now wonder if he meant that in the literal, immediate since which the context seems to demand. When Rome invaded Judea, historically, no Christians were killed, because they all believed in Jesus and his message, and fled, allowing utter destruction to come upon the Jews (unfaithful Israel) alone. What does such a statement in such a context mean for me, today? (Lest any flip out, I do think that there are important ways such messages speak to us today, but I no longer look at it in the direct way that I used to.)

...I love curriculum development, educational planning, and assessment models. If I had the resources and unlimited reign... (since most of you who know me are cringing at the thought, I will not dwell on that blessed (or cursed) state of affairs!)

...Why do people hate change??? I'll never get it. No matter how fast or slow it is presented, there are always gripers. If something doesn't work, then change it. If that doesn't work, change it again. Oy. What's the big deal?

...Why do relationships have to be so difficult? Why did I have to be born in a generation that has watched our parents' marriages fall apart, and in fact watched many of our generation endure divorce? Can I, and others, be blamed for our "gun shy" attitudes about marriage? Why do I have such a hard time opening myself up... to joy, but also hurt? (There's the answer, eh?)

...How can I sustain my singleness much longer, when I am increasingly feeling "traditionless?" Though I have the best friends and circle of spiritual family that a person could want, I nevertheless am not integrated into any one family unit's tradtions. One family has a tradition of getting a tree, decorating it, and watching a certain movie together the day after Thanksgiving. My best friend did something similar with just he and his wife. That is a very exciting, and warming, tradition, one that don't have any share in. I actually nearly broke down on Sunday while singing, because I suddenly realized that the holidays make people feel lonely not because you don't have someone, but because you don't have any one to share traditions with. I have been struggling with whether or not to put up a tree this year. I struggle each year... the last two years I have put up a "blessing tree" where I decorate it with "blessing ornaments" from years past. But I have no one to put it up with, no one to share the past blessings with, no one to enjoy the warm feelings that the glow of a tree at night produces. While thinking about all that, I thought of my grandma, whom I love dearly. Every year, she decorates here little apartment with lots of Christmas decorations, and puts a little ceramic Christmas tree up. No one shares in that, at least no one person or group of people in a regular way. She's be a widow for decades... the loneliness of it all, and the fact for the first time I could relate, nearly brought me to tears.


...I currently have asthmatic bronchitis... I have never really wheezed before, and it is a vulnerable feeling, the physician being a patient. Plus migraines... oy vay. (which, as I recently discovered thanks to Carey and her "Joy of Yiddish" book, literally means, "Oh the pain!".)

That's enough. I have ranted long enough. Indeed, my head hurts.

So you think going to war in Iraq was stupid...

If you think that the reasons for going to Iraq (and staying there) were stupid, try reading a little bit of the history of World War I. Most likely, you'll come out of that endeavor confused, frustrated, and acknowledging the wisdom of Solomon when he stated that there was nothing new under the sun.

I mean, come on, can we even now understand the foolish reasoning of a war that engulfed nearly all of Europe and much of North Africa and the Middle East? I remember growing up, and learning that World War I was triggered by the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo (yep, that Sarajevo, famous for the Winter Olympics, the bombings of the Bosnian War, and Christmas Night Over Sarajev0). But that was the the extent of my knowledge.

But here is the gist of the start of the war: Archduke Ferdinand is assassinated in Sarajevo, Austria attacks Serbia, Germany invades Belgium, and then invades France. France mounts a defense and Russia begins preparing to attack Germany. Does that make any sense to anyone? And that is just the beginning of the War.

A little more background and detail does not bring much elucidation: A Serbian nationalist assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Ferdinand, while he was in Austrian-controlled Bosnia. Austria retaliated against Serbia. Russia, who was allied with Serbia, prepares to intervene. Germany, who is supportive of any action by Austria, decides that it is in their best interest to try to neutralize its biggest threats, France and Russia. Foolishly, it decides to attack France through neutral Belgium, breaking longstanding neutrality treaties, thus irking the wary British who feared the industrial power of Germany and Germany's rising threat to the British naval supperiority.

See what I mean? Very confusing. The pretenses for war were "legitamate" (in their eyes) but the reality is that each country had its own selfish reason for joining in.

Why do I bring all this up? I used to think that people seeking higher office should be intelligent people who were altruistic. But I now think it should be more than that. Perhaps all public officials in higher office should be well educated in either history or ecology. Why history? Even principled leaders are doomed to bring pain and suffering to many if they are not aware of how history shapes the current landscape, much less the lessons of history themselves. (As a sidenote, I find it interesting that the Matrix Trilogy explores the interplay between history, free will, and fate/destiny.)

Why ecology? I think that ecologists are at least aware of the interconnectedness of things. They may not be be experts in economics, but I imagine that they would at least know to look or anticipate how an action may inpact other areas. Same thing with foreign policy. Anyone can learn the "facts on the ground." But it takes the insight to look for and seek the bigger picture of things. And that requires a mindset that has trained you to see the connections of things. I guess history teaches that as well.

Perhaps instead of debates, we should have history questions for the candidates. Would that give the voters anymore insight?