Weighing In Again

Image via Wikipedia

As motivation, the first day of the year I publicly posted my weight on my blog. Over the holidays, I really let myself go and I was at my all time heaviest. I refuse to accept the fact that I have to be fatter just because I am older. Since January I've been on a regimen of diet and exercise to try to get back down to where I was in my youth. My goal was to get there by the Derby Party (coming up in a few days). As of today, I have officially hit the weight I was when I graduated from college. Finally, people are telling me I am too skinny again. LOL.

In case you care about the number, it's 185.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Weighing in for 2009

My Thoughts On Church

Image via Wikipedia

If you're a long time follower of my blog, you know my struggles with "Should I Stay or Should I Go?" as from time to time I write about my perceptions with my love/hate relationship with church. I haven't written about it much lately. In this case, my silence is a good thing. But, Annie (a good friend of mine) brought up something this morning that prompted me to write about my views on church now.

Annie said:

here's what i can't figure out... jim and i were discussing it the other day. with so many folks changing their minds (metanoia), why isn't that translating into change WITHIN churches? after all, they're made up of people. it seems that by the time folks get so fed up with the old and leave, they have no interest in planting something new. aisi, we are still folks who thrive most in community, in committed relationships that extend beyond our families. i like what shane claiborne and others doing it call "intentional communities". but, how...? jim and i moved into the inner city, thinking that it would facilitate our work with the homeless, bring about that sense of "community" with them. but, after 6 years here, the city shut down our homeless feeding and our neighborhood has been rehabbed with mostly "yuppie" neighbors who aren't remotely interested in even knowing their neighbors' names, much less establishing relationships. the UCC where i volunteer at the food pantry is wonderful in terms of outreach, in being open and affirming... but they cling to the sunday morning liturgy. and they tend to gather on sunday morning and then go their separate ways. even the guys i volunteer with a the pantry come in from another church out in the county. i spent time with pastor mary (herself a lesbian and a wonderful loving, accepting christian universalist) and let her know the only reason jim and i weren't going to attend there was that we're just not looking to go back to the format of listening to a monologue while looking at the backs of everyone else's heads. if it's "relationship over religion", then shouldn't we have a gathering that actually encourages relationships between us all? i don't miss the IC, but i very much miss interacting in small groups on a deeper level. right now, the only other option available to us in the quaker church - which again, doesn't have much in the way of interaction, mostly meditating alone together. but, at least they sit in a circle... :) -

Great questions, Annie....

Here's my completely uneducated guess at it.

People who are interested in relationship and truly following the spiritual path and developing themselves are getting fed up with the church and it's feeding of either pablum, poison or both. Many "progressives" are also intellectuals and we lose a certain percentage to atheism or agnosticism as they reject the literal interpretation of the Bible and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Those who remain with Christianity struggle to find a church they find relevant to their lives as they see it now. They aren't looking for "salvation" (as in the escape from a lake of fire) anymore and are no longer interested in going to church to get a ticky mark from G-d. When I first heard Spong say the church must change or die, I thought he was exaggerating. I don't think so anymore. I think the modern church is dying and the rate of death will accelerate unless it makes some radical changes.

People are also less and less involved in real community and I think we Americans have become so ruggedly individualistic that we don't even know what we are missing. Plus, our schedules are so full that we are not going to sacrifice our precious Sunday morning to go sing a few songs and hear 20 minutes of a sermon that we will have forgotten by the time we hit the parking lot.

Personally, I think I'm still in church because it was so deeply ingrained in me as a child. But, as you know, it's been a real struggle. The best I've found is Nexus and while it's good (really good), it is not without its share of challenges. Sunday mornings are still my time of sacrifice as we follow a pretty traditional worship format. Having said that, the last couple of Sundays we've busted out of the mold and they've been fantastic. Two weeks ago we had a recommitment ceremony for all the families in the church. We exchanged vows within families and between families promising our love and support. We had a single adoptive mother, a lesbian couple, a newly married couple and a older married couple speak about their commitments to each other. Yesterday was talent day where we had storytelling, music and art presented by the congregation. We're doing a book study on The Shack and the discussion yesterday was the best discussion I've ever had in any church group anywhere. But, most Sundays are pretty much the same old Sunday morning stuff.  People like my atheistic friend,who would like to be in community, just won't make the sacrifice. I make the sacrifice to sit through Sunday mornings because the pay off I get is Nexus is a real community for us.  And, I do  it for my family. I've made real friendships with several people there and we do things outside of church which is the way it should be. Nexus is going really well. Financially, we've got to get our numbers up so we can be self-sustaining. If Mike (our pastor), sticks around, I think Nexus is mostly over-the-hump and will be a nice little force in the community here.

Apart from Nexus, until that came along, I kind of liked the Quaker church if I were going to stick with Christianity. I wasn't there long enough to really get to know anyone. But, I liked their theology. Not sure how excited I could have gotten about the Sunday morning services. Even though the pastor's sermons were more interesting than most I have heard over the years. If Nexus goes away for some reason, I don't know what I'll do. I was seriously considering joining the Buddhist sangha. Ty wouldn't have gone for that though. Not sure how she'd feel about it now.

It's hard for those of us who really long for relationship to be surrounded by those who couldn't seem to care less. Ty and I have been really blessed. We are actually good friends with many of our neighbors. We take care of each others' children, we go out to dinner together, we have parties together. Funny though, we don't go to church together. They'd freak out at Nexus.

Keep searching, Annie. You never know what's going to turn up. Keep looking and keep making a difference where you are. I would have never guessed that a place like Nexus would spring up in Butler County, Ohio. But, it did. It's kind of a little spark that's just beginning to turn into a flame. Maybe the same thing can happen where you are. Maybe you can make it happen.

Peace,
Brian

Putting On the Mind of Christ

Putting On the Mind of Christ is the second book by Jim Marion that I have read.  Compared to the first, "The Death of the Mythic God", at least this one has a title that won't get you kicked out of church for reading.  I mean, what could be more Christian than putting on the mind of Christ?  But, it's perhaps more heretical than the first, at least compared to the teachings I grew up with.

I expected the book to be a "how to" book on being more like Jesus.  If that's what you are looking for, I don't think this is the book for you.  Rather than a how to, the first part of the book is a description of the different levels of consciousness one progresses until one reaches (or surpasses) the Christ level of consciousness.  I found this part of the book very difficult to get through and difficult to relate to as he made constant references to old, dead saints like Theresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, etc.  Many of these mystics' writings about the path to "The Kingdom" start at a level so far above the average person that it's almost impossible for us to relate to.  Jim Marion does start at the beginning and describes the path in great detail.  But, to see it laid out like that is almost disheartening because when most of us compare ourselves to saints or to Jesus, we can quickly see there is no way we're going to get there in a single lifetime.  Marion later makes reference to this fact when he is making his case for reincarnation.  And, he's absolutely right.  If it requires getting the Mind of Christ to enter the Kingdom, most Christians are not going to get it right in this lifetime.  If you're at all familiar with Spiral Dynamics or other models of levels of human development, the first part of the book will be very familiar to you.  Marion uses different terms and may have more levels than other models.  But, there are similarities.

In spite of the rather dry academic tone of the first 16 chapters, I took it as a spiritual discipline to plow through it and I'm glad I did.  First of all, there were some very good insights in there that I would have missed otherwise.  Secondly, at Chapter 17, the book has a divide and Book Two begins.  Literally, this book could have been two books because while the first part of the book was way over my head and not particularly of a lot of interest to me, the second part of the book was one of the better books I've ever read.

The second part of the book concerns problems particular to the Christian as he tries to follow Jesus into the Kingdom.  I think the biggest problem facing most Christians is that we have been taught Jesus did it all and there is nothing left that we can do or have to do.  It's taken me decades to realize that this is a false teaching and is extremely harmful to the spiritual development of Christians.  Rather than seeing our lives as a practice and making it our goal to progress a little every day, we use trite phrases and avoid the hard work of spiritually disciplining ourselves.  The first chapter in the second half of the book is "The Problem of Jesus' Last Name" and addresses Jesus' humanity and Jesus' divinity and what that means to us.  An overemphasis on Jesus' divinity (and the uniqueness of His divinity) has let many Christians off of the hook of taking up their own cross and doing the hard work that Jesus had to do.

The second chapter of the second half is the Problem of Good and Evil and the problem we get into when judge things as good and evil.  I think Marion does an excellent job of addressing the concept of being dead to the law and, as Christians, sin does not exist for us.  The concept that we can do as we please is very troubling for most Christians who are still looking for some sort of law to live under and who have simply replaced the law of Moses with a new law derived from the pages of the New Testament.  Marion points out that there are spiritual laws (the law of karma for example) and just because we can do as we please does not mean there are no consequences or that there are not skillful and unskillful acts.  This chapter was very good for me as I realize that one of the things I still struggle greatly with is "judgment".  Judging a thing good or bad, judging people, judging situations.  Later chapters address the problems with God's favorites (saints) and how putting them on a pedestal excuses us from trying to be like them.  This is where Marion addresses reincarnation more fully and explains why we should not allow the fact that these spiritual masters are further along the path than us to be an excuse not to continue along our own path because, he points out, we each have to walk the path ourselves and we each have to reach that point to enter into the Kingdom.  Later, he explains the after-death model of the Kingdom that he believes in. Pretty interesting stuff.

Overall, I think this book was very good.  But, it's certainly not for everyone.  It's not an easy read by any stretch of the imagination.  It will bore some to tears and I think it will challenge nearly everyone.  It's certainly not a paint-by-numbers approach to how to Put on the Mind of Christ and it actually can be very daunting to realize how far most of us have to go.  However, for the serious Christian practitioner who is looking for more practical spirituality than you get in the hour you spend in church on Sunday morning and who wants to explore what lies ahead as he seriously tries to emulate Jesus, I think it's a good book to have in your library.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Death of the Mythic God (thebeautifulheresy.com)
• Hell- Why it matters what you believe (thebeautifulheresy.com)

Ch...chhh...chhh...changes

Yesterday at church we had a special service for recommitment of couples. It was quite a moving experience as we had four families represented each talking about what family means to them and how their family was formed. We had a young couple who has known each other only a year and a half and only been married 5 months. Yet, there is a strong commitment there. We had an older couple that has been together for decades. We had a single woman who has not yet found her “Prince Charming” but who has love to spare and is adopting a deaf girl from Guatemala. And, we had a lesbian couple united in a wedding ceremony a year ago.

Nexus is a church that recognizes all types of families and committed couples. Yesterday, we went around the room and each couple told how long they had been together. You may or may not know that we have several homosexual couples that attend Nexus. Interestingly, the homosexual couples there had been together for an average of over 7 years each (with the longest being together 17). That blows the stereotype that the “gay lifestyle” is not one of commitment right out of the water.

As part of the service, each couple in attendance pledged our support to each other again. Furthermore, we each pledged support to the other couples there, affirming our own relationships and theirs. It was so cool.

Dana spoke on behalf of herself and her partner Cheri. Dana and Cheri have known each other for 7 years and have been “married” for almost a year. I put married in quote marks because, of course, their marriage is not recognized by the state of Ohio. As Dana spoke of her life journey and how she really didn’t even seek a “happy ending” because such a thing really doesn’t exist outside of the romance novels and movies that she loves so much, my heart was overflowing with joy for her; realizing that she had found her soul mate in Cheri and the love they both have for their little girl, CJ. I have had the privilege of getting to know Dana and Cheri a little better over the last few months and while the thought of lesbian “wedding” would have grossed me out not so very long ago. And, the ideas of weddings even now is boring at best, I found myself wishing I could have been there for Dana’s and Cheri’s celebration because I could tell just from her five minute talk how special that must have been. I’m not easily moved to tears and, of course, I didn’t allow any to fall from my eyes. But, I was crying on the inside as I thought about how their relationship and the fact that, at Nexus, they have found a place where they can share it and receive love and support for it. I have finally realized that what I think about the union between two people doesn't matter at all, what matters is the fulfillment they find in each other.

As I sat through the service yesterday, I flashed back to another spring day about 13 or 14 years ago. I was fed up with the conservative churches we had been attending with all of their talk of eternal damnation and intolerance for anyone other than Christians just like themselves. While seeking a new place to attend, I ran across the Unitarian Universalists. I visited once and had talked Ty into attending with me. We just happened to visit on a day that I now realize was similar to the day that Nexus had yesterday. A lesbian woman spoke about her relationship with her partner and the church affirmed that there were “all kinds of families”. Unfortunately, my response to such a declaration at that time was nothing like my response yesterday. I thought there are not “all kinds of families”. While I definitely would not have condemned homosexuals to hell or said that G-d loved them any less. I left the UU church shaking my head at such a teaching. Surely, in the name of "tolerance" they had gone goo far. I was not ready to say that two women living with a child was a true “family”. Just a few years ago, Ohio had a marriage protection law up for vote and I, thinking I was voting to “protect” marriage voted for it. My, what a difference a few years makes. Yesterday I was sitting there affirming families headed up by homosexuals and I’ve been advocating for gay marriage.

I don’t have any guilt or shame for the way I once felt. There’s no point in that. I am more of the Buddhist mindset that there is no "sin" or right and wrong and consequently no need for guilt or shame. There is skillful and unskillful behavior. There is behavior that is beneficial and behavior that is no beneficial. So, I don't spend any time beating myself up over how I once felt. Nor do I feel any pride or superiority for the the progress I have made. I am very happy to know that I am open to change, am open to admitting that I’m wrong about something and that even though I was pretty sure I was right about how I felt. I hold such convictions loosely and am always open to further revelation. The UCC has a saying that I quote so often that it has become cliche’. But, for me, G-d is still speaking and, as long as I am able to draw breath, I am determined to keep listening. Often the spiritual journey seems so long and such an uphill climb with two steps forward and one step back. Often progress seems to come painfully slowly, if at all. I’ve often heard it said that life only makes sense as you look backwards at it . I think that is so often true. Some people resist change. Change is something that I truly embrace and seek out (except for the changes coming along with my aging body). I say this with all humility, yesterday was one of those moments where I could look back, see a couple of milestones I have passed and see some appreciable progress. That gave me a an overwhelming sense of gratitude.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Great NY Post commentary on gay marriage (americablog.com)
• Lez Wrap It Up: Pink, Rachel Maddow, Cat Cora, Ben & Jerry's (lezgetreal.com)

What Really Matters?

Image via Wikipedia

Recently I posted about the Butler County policy on adoption that gives "preferential" treatment to "traditional couples".  I came out opposed to our pastor's characterization of the policy, as it has been publicized anyway, as "immoral and hateful".  Honestly, I think one of the reasons I posted it was that I was hoping someone could convince me I am wrong (or at least would try to).  Like every other progressive person in the world, I like to think of myself as being "open minded" and liberal.  And sometimes (rarely) I even care about being politically correct.  So, a policy that discriminates is something I should clearly be against.  Right?  I mean discrimination is wrong.

However, I think sometimes in our efforts to be open minded and inclusive, we go to far and try to overlook legitimate differences in people.  We were created equal, not the same. Being equal in value does not mean that each of us doesn't have different traits and characteristics that actually do matter in everyday life.  Taking the idea of equality to the extreme of not discriminating at all get us things like the guy who sued Hooters restaurants because they wouldn't hire him to wear the little orange shorts and serve the Hooters clientele.  I'm sorry. But, back in my Hooter's days, I did not want to see a guy in the shorts. It would be absurd for Hooter's to hire male wait staff. Being an attractive female is part of the gig at Hooter's.  Should I, in the interest of being inclusive, hire a dyslexic accountant who has trouble reading numbers? I cite extremely ridiculous examples to make a point.  Clearly, there are times when we would all agree discrimination is a good thing.  There are times though when the situation is not so clear.  A few years back there was a professional golfer, Casey Martin, who has a physical disability that makes it impossible for him to walk the courses they play on the PGA Tour.  He arguably had everything else it takes to play on the tour.  The only exception he was asking for was to be allowed to ride in a cart.  My first thought was "Of course.  Let the guy ride in a cart."  But, many players on the tour argued that the miles of walking they do during the course of a round and four days of a tournament is part of the game.  They are often playing in hot, humid conditions. Conditioning (laugh if you like) has actually become a part of golf.  Should an exception have been made for Casey or is being able to walk the course part of playing the game? This is one of those situtations that is debatable.

When I was younger, I desperately wanted to be like everyone else.  I wanted there to be no differences.  As a black guy growing up in a mostly white environment, I just wished we could all be the same and I didn't want to recognize there were any differences between myself and my white friends.  As I've gotten older, I've learned to not only accept differences but to appreciate them.  Until very recently I didn't have any gay friends. That may have been partially due to my homophobia.  But, mostly I think it was due to just not being in an environment where I had a lot of opportunities to get ot know gay people.  That has all changed. Now, I know several gay people I'd like to think of as friends.  I can't say the fact that they are gay makes no difference.  It does.  It actually, in some ways, makes them more interesting.  In this society, to be comfortable enough with yourself and your sexuality to be openly gay takes a special kind of person.

Recently I was on the search committee for our church as we sought a new pastor.  We had tons and tons of candidates to consider.  I know you're not supposed to consider (discriminate) based upon age and gender and all of that stuff.  We even had to ask the laywer on the committee what questions we could ask candidates.  But, I'd be lying if I said I did not consider those things.  Typically, a younger person would bring more energy to the job than a guy who had been a pastor for 20 years.  I would have preferred a woman because I think having a woman pastor at a progressive church would be a great thing.  Older people would bring more maturity, stability, the ability to read people to the job.  A black person would be able to relate to the discrimination and social injustice our church tries to fight.  A white male would probably have been pretty low on my list of preferences.  

We ended up extending the call to Mike Underhill.  Mike is an older (relative to other candidates we considered), white male.  Mike is also gay.  I can't say that any of these characteristics of Mike were not considered in my mind.  The fact that Mike is older was a plus, I thought.   It could also have been a detriment.  But, after meeting Mike, I knew it was a plus. While it's hard to say if Mike will still be leading Nexus in 20 years, the fact is right now he brings maturity and experience from his former career that is a stabilizing force at Nexus. The fact that Mike is a male was a slight negative, in my opinion.  The fact that Mike is gay gives him the experience of dealing with discrimination that I think is beneficial in the role he is playing at Nexus.  To pretend all of these things about Mike don't matter would be to miss the point of non-discrimination, IMO.  Even the fact that Mike is gay is something, in and of itself, that is both a benefit and a possible detriment to the position.  Unfair discrimination would be to look at any one of these factors and eliminate a person from consideration based on it.  But, to consider each of them as one factor among many is perfectly legitimate.

The question, to me, comes down to "What really matters?".  In the case of adoption, the welfare of the child is the most important thing.  What really matters is how the person or couple adopting the child will impact the child's life and where we think the best place is for the child.  I think it is naive to pretend that society views gay couples the same way as they do heterosexual couples and I would have to wonder what type of impact this might have on a child.  I think it's just plain silly to think a single parent doesn't have to work a lot harder than a couple to raise a child.  Children take time and energy and we each only have so much of those things.  I've now met the couple mentioned in the article (Michael and his partner) and the beautiful little girl they want to adopt.  I've only met them in passing. But, I can tell they care for her deeply just from the little bit of time I've spent with them.  I can tell they would try their best to make great fathers for her. I would not deny them being able to adopt her based solely on the fact that they are gay.  I wouldn't dream of it.   But, I think considering the fact that they are gay, and what impact that might have on the little girl, as one of many factors, is not unfairly discriminatory.