Category Archives: Culture

by

Following in the Way of Katniss: You Have to See the “Other”

Last week our church launched our annual “God in Film” series (I wrote about that, here), and I kicked things off with “The Hunger Games.“

It was my first foray in to the world of doing a talk based on a film and while it was quite the challenge to prepare for (pretty different than a “normal” talk) I will say I thoroughly enjoyed it! And I can’t wait to do it again in a couple weeks with “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”

One of the points I make in the sermon comes from the scene in the movie where Katniss auditions her battle skills for the gamemakers and potential sponsors. You remember that scene: she picks up her bow and arrow and lets loose an arrow at a target, but misses completely. The gamemakers/observers laugh it off and then go about their business (chatting with each other, eating, drinking) and completely ignore Katniss. They were unimpressed and dismissed her, so when she fired her next arrow and scored a bullseye no one even noticed or cared. Annoyed at such indifference towards her, she strings one more arrow but this time shoots it up at where they were all sitting, and fires it straight through an apple that was resting in the open mouth of a cooked pig.

This quite obviously got their attention.

They turn, half amazed and half terrified, and stare at Katniss. She merely says, “for your consideration,”  takes a bow, and then exits the arena.

Brilliant scene.

In my sermon I use this scene as an example of creatively choosing a third way when people who are in power over you are ignoring you, oppressing you, or both: not Flight (passively walking away, sulking, and just accepting your lot), and not Fight (shooting arrows AT the people, picking off a few before you’re arrested or killed yourself).

No, she choose a third way.

A way that, essentially said, “Here I am. Right here. And you have to SEE me. I won’t let you ignore me any longer.”

I think that this is, in the Kingdom of God, one of the primary ways that the divide between “us” and “them” begins to dissolve. When people actually “see” the other.

SEE the oppressed.
SEE the forgotten.
SEE the outcast and the outliers.
SEE the ones society ignores.
SEE the ones the church has scorned.

“Seeing” makes all the difference. Or, at least, it’s a really good place to start.

When those who have power/wealth/privilege (the HAVES) remain isolated from those who have-not, then they can remain ignorant of what it actually means to be a have-not.

One of the questions I often pose to people who disagree with me, and are opposed to same-sex marriage or think that all expressions of same-sex attraction are a sin, is this: who do you know that is gay? What same-sex family have you taken the time to really get to know? Have you had them over for dinner? Have you gone to their house, and seen how they live, how they act, how they raise their kids?

Do you SEE them?

Of course, some people respond with, “oh I have lots of gay friends!”

Fine. That may (or may not actually) be true.

But most of the time the answer I get is silence.
No response.

Because they have not gone out of their way to “see” the other.

It’s easier, is it not, to sit in our comfy houses and continue with our non-messy lives. Where the world is easily dividable between “us” and “them.”

Turning around and looking to SEE “them?” That’s hard. That can take work. That can be scary.

But it is oh. so. important.

If you hold the position that gay people don’t deserve equal rights like getting married, then I implore you to get to know a same-sex family. I’m not saying your minds will instantly change, but if you don’t SEE them, then you are willfully choosing to remain ignorant, and you’ll never understand that these are real people.

And for folks like me, who HAVE a degree of power/influence/privilege (i.e. i’m a straight/white/male), part of our challenge is to discover how we can be more like Katniss. How can we get people to SEE, without choosing violence? Without causing more hatred and animosity? What do creative “third ways” look like as we live out this desire to eliminate the us/them divide?

by

Why Do a “God in Film” Teaching Series?

Screen Shot 2013-04-05 at April 5, 2.28 PM

Why would we talk about “worldly” movies in CHURCH?!

This Sunday, at Missiongathering, we are kicking off our annual Spring teaching series: God in Film.

Being still a relative newcomer to Missiongathering, I can say I am stoked to find out that our church does this series every year. Not just because I’m a huge fan of movies, but because I’m a huger fan of thinking critically about art and culture.

I love to explore how things like movies, music and books move us, unsettle us, transform and inspire us.

This Sunday I’ll be kicking off the series as I engage with The Hunger Games.

As I’ve been thinking about and writing the sermon for this week, I wanted to stop and reflect on the reason why we do this.

Why engage with movies like this at church.

So here are some of my thoughts on that.

Breaking the False Divide

If you’ve spent any amount of time (like I have) in the Christian sub-culture, the bubble of conservative christianity, you quickly discover how bizarre it can be.
Everything gets classified in to two categories:

Christian or non-Christian.
The Sacred and the Secular.

Thanks to the world of marketing, we now have:

Christian music and Secular music.
You have Christian books and Secular books.
Christian art and non-Christian art.

And so on…

David Dark, a prolific writer who teaches in Nashville at various institutions, says “there is not a single secular molecule in the universe.”

Or as Rob Bell says, “everything is spiritual.”

In David Dark’s book, “Everyday Apocalypse” he challenges us to return to the original meaning of the word “apocalypse:”
Which means “revelation,” or to uncover, to reveal.

And in the book he explores popular movies, t.v. shows, and music to demonstrate how we can look at things in such a way as to discover how there is a sacredness in everything.

He says,

When you begin to view all truthfulness as somehow bearing witness to God’s coming kingdom, you’re gradually able to view all kinds of art much more redemptively than a market-defined “Spirituality” or “Contemporary Christian Music” category can allow.

There is a division that has been created, a FALSE division, between things that belong to the world of “Christianity” and things that are Secular, or non-Christian. One of the things our God in Film series is trying to accomplish is to break down that false, invisible wall. To expose the myth that some things have spiritual value to them, and others don’t. Or that some products are “Christian” and so should be consumed  hook, line and sinker… while everything else is secular, scary, dangerous, and to be avoided at all costs.

But it is THIS separation, I would argue, that is thing that is dangerous, scary, and un-biblical (if you’ll permit me to use such a phrase), and it is the creation of these divisions that must be avoided at all costs.

We want to be people who develop eyes to see the Divine in all things. And so as we explore, over the next 6 weeks, these six different films, hopefully as a community we’ll all get some much needed exercise in seeing how everything is spiritual.

(That is NOT to say, of course, that everything is redeeming, or edifying, or has equal value to the soul. That is an equally dangerous position to hold. But that blog post is not this blog post.)

The Power of Movies

Movies are a powerful force, I think you’d agree.

Some movies inspire us to want to become more than we are, to live better stories, to keep moving forward in the pursuit of being the person we really want to be.

Other movies expose the lies that we live. They speak of messages that certain forces in this world would have us believe. That certain things or people can bring us happiness and satisfaction. And we find ourselves confronted with a choice to accept that this movie is either telling us something real about life, or exposing it to be a sham.

Other movies get underneath our skin, and unsettle us, unnerve us. They challenge us to look more closely, more critically at what we think and how we believe.

But movies are, ultimately, a medium for telling stories. And stories are one of the world’s most powerful forces to change people, to inspire transformation. And so God in Film provides us the chance to do a bit of apocalyptic work on some of last years most interesting movies.

To Reveal, really, ways in which we can say, “wait, that’s God!”

Or

“wait, that is NOT God!”

Of course, that begs the question, what does one mean when they say, “That’s God,” or “that’s NOT God.”

And much could be said about that (in fact, if you haven’t already, I invite you read Rob Bell’s newest book What we Talk about When we Talk About God for a fresh way to think about the word, name, and person of God), but I’ll try and sum up just briefly what “I” mean when I say things like “there, there I see the PRESENCE of God,” or “there I see the ABSENCE of God.”

The Presence of God

When I say I see the presence of God in something, what I DON’T mean is that God wasn’t previously present but now IS. I don’t mean that God magically appears in one moment, and then disappears when the moment is over.

We often find ourselves saying things like,
“That was a God moment” or
“Then God showed up”

And while I get the sentiment (and find myself at times defaulting to similar types of expressions), we have to remind ourselves that that sort of language implies that other moments are NOT God moments, or that we are suggesting that God is not in a place most of the time but only shows up when we can see evidence of it.

But I don’t think, if we really stop to consider it, that THAT is what we mean. Or what we really think.

So when I make statements like “seeing God in a movie,” what I’m trying to articulate is that there is something in that scene that resonates in a more obvious and profound way with the things that make me think about God.

Or there’s something about that plot development that echoes with things that I feel represent the character or passions of God: be it the pursuit of justice, or the work of reconciliation, or the process of renewing and redeeming something or someone.

Or, perhaps in a specifically Christian perspective, I might say that there’s something in that character and her choices that reflect the type of life that I see modeled in and taught by Jesus: be it forgiveness or working towards peace or loving the outcast.

And all good movies (all stories, really), in someway or another, tap in to what is true about life. And when that happens, like David Dark says, when we see that all truthfulness somehow bears witness to God and God’s Kingdom, then we can say things like “I saw God in that film.”

The Absence of God

But I think another way we see God in Film is when we DON’T. You could call this seeing the ABSENCE of God.

The PRESENCE of God often lifts us up, inspires us, encourages us…  with things like love, redemption, sacrifice, joy, etc…

But films that deal with the ABSENCE of God are often the ones that unsettle us… disturb us… bother us and stick with us for days. Because we see, for instance, in movies like Schindler’s List a certain “that’s-not-rightness.”

When gross injustices are shown on screen, and we stare deep in the face of the evil and wickedness that humankind is capable of, we find ourselves knowing on a profound level that that is not the way it’s supposed to be.

Other times it’s more subtle.

And still other times we might be completely oblivious to it, or we might be downright deceived.

(I think that Romantic comedies often fall prey to this. We often witness a fairytale sort of ending where everything works out and the guy gets the gal, or vice versa, and we leave the theater feeling all warm and fuzzy, and our ears were tickled… but really, we just spent 90 minutes being lied to. Because life ISN’T that way. That’s NOT really love. That’s not how relationships work. And we find ourselves constantly unhappy in life because our brains have been re-wired to expect the world that cinema gives us. But anyways…)

That is the ABSENCE of God.
The telling of a story that wars AGAINST the Kingdom of God.

Looking for God in Film

The God in Film teaching series allows us to engage with the medium of film in a way that invites us to explore how the stories we watch might be tapping in to something beautiful and true about God  and God’s Kingdom, OR be exposing stories that war against God’s Kingdom.

This 6 week exploration allows us to exercise our vision to see how everything is spiritual, and to think critically about what it is we are consuming.

Hopefully some of you found this a little helpful with regards to why we do this series every year.

And, if none of that was interesting or helpful, it’s also just a lot of FUN!

So if you’re in the San Diego area anytime during the next 6 weeks, I invite you to join us at 9am or 11am for God in Film at Missiongathering. Or, head over to www.godinfilm.com each week to download the latest message.

 

by

To This Day Project: Anti Bullying

If you do anything today, watch this video.

It is matchless in its artistic expression, its collaborative creativity, and its beautiful message.

If you are a parent, I implore you that you don’t ever assume “my kid wouldn’t ever bully another kid.” We can’t just assume that if we raise our kids well then they won’t taste the sweet nectar of lording it over others. No, we must be pro-active in our messaging that every kid has worth, has value. That every life is beautiful. We must teach our kids to love the unlovely. But more importantly, we must show them.

We must never “accidentally” be bullies ourselves.

They must never see us treat anyone like less than they deserve.

We really can end the epidemic of bullying. But parents, don’t you dare for a second think that a school program, or a teacher, or a principal will make it happen.

It starts (and ends) with us.

To This Day from To This Day on Vimeo.

 

Visit the folks who put this together over at www.tothisdayproject.com

by

Jesus Stickers on a Hummer… Part Deux

Okay, so yesterday I posted this hastily written blog post where I stream-of-conscious’d my thoughts on to the keyboard.

I was in a bit of a hurry, both time-wise AND because I was planning to post my blog on to the comment section of my brother’s original post, as a way to interact with the commenters there.

Anyways, I feel like I did a poor job of, well, accomplishing much of anything. So here I offer three follow up thoughts to better complement (and clarify) what yesterday’s post was aiming to do.

1) Gut Reactions are Morally Neutral

Here’s the reality about gut reactions and initial responses to things: they happen. And generally, there is little we can do about it. And, for the most part, these gut reactions/initial responses/first look at things don’t usually have any sort of moral affinity to them. Meaning, they’re more or less neutral in terms of “good reaction” or “bad reaction.” At least, as far as I see it.

They just ARE.

The thing that matters (in terms of morality, that is) is what we choose to DO with those initial reactions.

An example from the world of sexuality: a beautiful woman walks in to the coffee shop where I’m reading. My eyes, which generally wander to every person that walks in to a place where I’m reading, fall on this beautiful woman. My first, gut reaction is, “wow, that is a beautiful woman.” The human brain is wired to notice beauty. So far you could argue this is a morally neutral reaction. But what happens next is entirely up to me, and THAT is where any conversation of “ethics” could be had. Do I choose to stare at her? Do I choose to look her up and down? And so on and so forth. How I HANDLE that initial gut reaction is what matters. (Admittedly it’s not a great analogy, but hopefully you get the point. There’s how we initially react to something, and then there’s how we continue to operate AFTER said reaction. And they are two separate realities.)

Initial reactions can be useful, don’t get me wrong. It’s not that they say NOTHING, but rather we should be careful to not judge to harshly how a person first reacts to something. Our gut reactions may betray certain things about us; our preconcieved notions about a given thing, or how we were raised, or how we think about certain situations. So we can learn things about ourselves based on how we gut-level react to things, but what is more important is what we then DO with that information.

Yesterday, in my post, I simply typed out all the different things that came to my mind about the idea of a tricked out Hummer being covered in Jesus stickers. Some of these gut reactions were indifferent towards the whole thing, others were supportive, and others were negative.

They just WERE.

And, because I like to blog and stir up conversation and get people thinking, I thought it’d be interesting to share it with all of you.

But I did not, in the end, offer any sort of insight in to where I was GOING with those gut reactions. And so it ended up sounding like all 7 or so of those reactions were how I truly felt (which is funny, because many of them cancel each other out and are mutually exclusive. But anyways…)

The truth is, I don’t really know HOW I feel about the concept of slapping a bunch of Jesus stickers on an incredible expensive automobile.

2) Talking About Money is Dangerous

People do not like it when you talk about money. Specifically, when you talk about THEM and THEIR money.

As Pastors we know this all too well.

Which makes for a funky dynamic because, well, it was one of the things Jesus talked about MOST! So here we are, people who study the words of Jesus, and whose jobs it is to help communicate those words, and we end up avoiding or dancing around some of the most poignant sayings of Jesus.

Because it’s uncomfortable. And people don’t like it.

WE don’t like.

So yesterday, during my not-very-well-thought-out and even-more-poorly-executed blog post, I treaded into the murky waters of personal wealth. And that’s always going to unsettle people. And I know that, and I did not do a good job of navigating that.

I can be flippant about a lot of things, because a lot of people don’t really care deeply about Ray Lewis and the Super Bowl, or the Wild Goose Festival, or Where the Wild THings Are. But to be flippant and casual about the issue of money is a whole other ball game.

Which leads me to…

3) Judging Other People’s Spiritual Lives is UnCool

I don’t like judging. I think it’s generally a bad practice, and try to avoid it when I realize I’m doing it.

Yesterday’s post ended up sounding a lot like I was judging people that choose to drive expensive cars.

Let me be clear: If you drive a fancy car, or own fancy things, or make lots of money, I do NOT view you as a second-class Christian.

The very fact that I have to say that frustrates me, but I brought it on myself. So I NEED to say that, so that you all hear me.

Of course, in my own mind I didn’t feel I was doing that yesterday at all. Especially since I didn’t even SEE the original car, nor do I know anyone who fits that bill. But reading my post a second time (and hearing wise words from my wife) helped me to see that some people would certainly feel like I was “judging” them for driving fancy cars.

Not at all.

But (and this is a big but), this is NOT the same thing as saying, “I will always be about the business of challenging people to think through what it means to follow Jesus in their lives.”

Meaning this: I won’t judge you for owning a fancy car, but I might just find myself asking you if you’ve thought through all the ramifications of what it might mean to own something like that AND to plaster it with the name of Jesus.

And THAT is a conversation NOT about you and your spirituality, but about things like values, and priorities, and perceptions, and so on.

Can we have a meaningful conversation about our  money and our spirituality, and how they intersect, without feeling personally attacked?

I wonder if, instead of posting what I did yesterday, I would have simply blogged an innocuous post with some of Jesus’ sayings about money:

“blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the Kingdom of God” -Luke 6:20

“if you wish to be complete, go and sell your possesions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven” -Luke 18:22

“Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”  -Luke 12:33,34

“Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” -Luke 18:15

“No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” -Matt 6:24

And so on and so on…
But the point being, if I would have JUST POSTED THAT, I wonder if anybody would have reacted. If anybody would have felt like they were being judged.

Do those words alone have any sort of pause-and-consider power to them, anymore? Or have we grown a bit calloused to them. They’re too familiar, and we’ve decided long ago that they don’t apply to us.

Jesus said some harsh things, and I believe it’s worth our time and energy to dive in to those at times and see if they might say something to us, here today.

Is there a way to contextualize those sayings.
To place them in today’s world.
To re-package those words in such a way that steals our breath… that speeds up our beating heart… that opens our ears to wonder, “wait, WHAT are you saying?!?!”

Does a vehicle that screams “I cost a lot of money” covered with stickers declaring an allegiance to Jesus stir up any of the things Jesus was getting at in the above verses?

Maybe.
Maybe not.

But I think it’s a unique enough juxtaposition of commerce and spirituality to, in a fresh way, talk about Jesus and money.

Of course it doesn’t have anything meaningful to say about the owner of the car’s spirituality.
That’s beside the point.

But I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that Jesus might have been walking by the equivalent of a Hummer/Jesus mobile in the first century and took advantage of the illustration to say, “no one can serve two masters… you cannot serve both God and Money.”

On this blog I like to get in people’s kitchens from time to time. Not in a way to judge or condemn (for who am I?), but in a way to get people to think about things they might not normally have thought about.

Even if it’s difficult.
Especially if it’s difficult.

In conclusion, I want to apologize for yesterday’s post, because it was hasty, poorly written, and did not accomplish what I think I hoped to accomplish.

I wanted to simply share my gut reactions to the situation, and be fully honest (even if the honesty was ugly… which it was in part). But I should have clarified to say that.

I wanted to suggest that this unique juxtaposition of commerce and spirituality could be a springboard to look anew at Jesus’ perspective toward material things and money.

I did not want to alienate readers and make them feel like I think less of them or their spirituality if they choose to own nice things.

Thanks for reading this follow up.
I welcome any and all questions or comments below.

—–

Now… let’s talk about Bumper Stickers in general, shall we???
;)

by

Jesus Stickers on a Hummer?

(this is not the Hummer he saw… just another Hummer-with-Jesus that I found online.

 

(UPDATE: I have removed this blog post. What began as an attempt to share how human I am, and how I have cynical and judgmental thoughts at times, turned in to a misunderstanding about how I feel towards people with means. I was hoping to stir up discussion on things like commerce and spirituality, but instead I disenfranchised some people that I care about. Rather than leave the blog post up (which wasn’t well written, and was far too easy to misinterpret), I’ve decided to just take it down. I will leave my follow up blog, because it actually has value.)

by

Fifty Shades of Gay

The Power of Photography to Break Ignorance

iO Tillett Wright is an artist. As a child-actor growing up, she spent many years living as a boy. Convincing everyone (friends, teachers, fellow actors and directors) that she was a boy. She even turned her shoes around in the bathroom stall to make it look like she was peeing standing up.

She gave this TEDx talk a couple months back.
In it, she describes a project she undertook called the Self Evident Project.

Her goal was to travel across the country and photograph people who identified as “not 100% straight.”

Why?

She describes how Proposition 8, and the ensuing country-wide discussion about equality for LGBT folk, caused her to realize that she had become, in her own country, a minority based on one facet of her character.

She was legally a second-class citizen.

“How can anyone vote to strip the rights of the vast variety of people that I knew based on one element of their character,” she asks, “and had these people ever even consciously MET the people of their discrimination? Did they know WHO they were voting against and what the impact was?”

Her idea, then, was to present the world with the reality that non-straight people are, well, people.

Just like me.
Just like you.

And a photograph embodies the power to communicate precisely that.

“If they could look in to the eyes of the people they were casting in the category of second-class citizenship, it might make it harder for them to do… it might just give them pause.”

I love her insight in to photography. She says, “photography is about exposing the viewer to something new… to people they might otherwise be afraid of.”

So she is traveling around, taking people’s pictures, to show the world there is nothing to fear.

And if you watch the video, the most poignant moment comes when she shares what she has learned thus far: while many people might identify as 100% straight, and others identify as 100% gay, there are many, many people who just fall somewhere in between.

The impact, then, on the discussion of civil rights and equality for all becomes very muddled. For where do you draw the line on who is considered “gay,” and by extension, who can (for instance) be fired for being a “homosexual?”

Where, on the spectrum of sexuality, does one BECOME a second-class citizen?

Keep snapping those pics, iO, and keep helping break down people’s fears and ignorance.

Eshet chayil!

by

Louie and the Prayer (that wasn’t)

Last week it was announced that Louie Giglio would deliver the benediction prayer for the upcoming Presidential Inauguration.

The following day Thinkprogress ran a story titled, “Inaugural Benediction to be Delivered by a Pastor Who Gave Vehemently Anti-Gay Sermon.”

This set the interwebs ablaze with questions regarding whether or not Louie would still give the prayer.

Giglio, if you don’t recognize the name, was one of the founding pastors of the Passion movement (which greatly shaped my own life over a decade ago) and is now the founding and lead pastor of Passion City Church in Atlanta.

Then, two days after the announcement of Giglio’s selection, and a day after the “anti-gay sermon” stories ran amuck, Giglio informed the White House that he would “respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President’s invitation.”

And I don’t know how I feel about it, yet.

But for now, here are 6 thoughts that come to mind as I sort through this morass.

1) Hey, that’s OUR litmus test, not yours!

Sometimes I get the feeling that some Christians in the more conservative end of the spectrum want to be able to utilize the issue of “homosexuality” as a litmus test for who’s in and who’s out, but if people on the OTHER side suggest a similar move, then all hell breaks out.

For instance, here’s some excerpts from a blog post from Albert Mohler on the Giglio situation:

The imbroglio over Louie Giglio is the clearest evidence of the new Moral McCarthyism of our sexually “tolerant” age. During the infamous McCarthy hearings, witnesses would be asked, “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

In the version now to be employed by the Presidential Inaugural Committee, the question will be: “Are you now or have you ever been one who believes that homosexuality (or bisexuality, or transsexualism, etc.) is anything less than morally acceptable and worthy of celebration?”

The Presidential Inaugural Committee and the White House have now declared historic, biblical Christianity to be out of bounds, casting it off the inaugural program as an embarrassment.

By its newly articulated standard, any preacher who holds to the faith of the church for the last 2,000 years is persona non grata. By this standard, no Roman Catholic prelate or priest can participate in the ceremony. No Evangelical who holds to biblical orthodoxy is welcome. The vast majority of Christians around the world have been disinvited. Mormons, and the rabbis of Orthodox Judaism are out. Any Muslim imam who could walk freely in Cairo would be denied a place on the inaugural program. Billy Graham, who participated in at least ten presidential inaugurations is welcome no more. Rick Warren, who incited a similar controversy when he prayed at President Obama’s first inauguration, is way out of bounds. In the span of just four years, the rules are fully changed.

*cue the eye rolls*

Singling out one issue as being a sort of litmus test to determine if you’re ‘in’ or ‘out’ is infuriating. So with that said, perhaps on some level I DO see what Dr Mohler is saying, and I semi-sorta-agree (ouch! please don’t quote that…) with the principle behind his words.

Because this is precisely what happened to me. And ironically it was precisely on this issue. And even more ironically, perhaps, it was those who would stand in solidarity with Mohler who executed the same sort of litmus test.

I was fired from my pastoral job because I don’t hold to what Mohler says is “historic, biblical Christianity” on this issue. Interesting that “they” (and I use that term loosely) can use this issue to determine who is ‘in’ or ‘out,’ but if the OTHER side wants to employ similar tactics? Well, then, it’s the new Moral McCarthyism! How dare they!

Interesting.

2) I wish people on the “left” would relax a bit.

I type these next words with great caution: Might I suggest that those who are fighting for LGBT rights and equality perhaps lighten up a bit on this?

Don’t get me wrong. I totally disagree with the sermon that Giglio gave 20 years ago. He was wrong, and his words were/are very damaging to many people and they perpetuate very damaging theology. So of course the LGBT community and us straight allies would stand up and say, “that’s not okay!”

But for one, that sermon was 20 years ago. And for two, the dude is doing some pretty amazing things in this world.

Are any of us in the same place on this issue (or any issue, for that matter) as we were 20 years ago? I understand that he hasn’t necessarily come out and renounced anything, or said he thinks differently. But that’s his own prerogative and he has to calculate that carefully for himself, his ministry, his vocation, his family, etc.

I just have to believe that many of the same people who were appalled that this guy could be chosen by the President to say a prayer because of what he said 20 years ago, might not ALSO have a history where they believed radically different about homosexuality decades ago. Let’s proceed with caution any time we use someone’s own words against them when they came from two decades prior.

Furthermore, does Louie receive any good graces for the work he has done to help eradicate sex slavery? The sex slave trade is a stain on our planet, and Louie and his ministries have worked tirelessly for years to fight against it. One need not be theologically accurate in the areas of sexuality to DO good work for the Kingdom. And evidently it was primarily on this basis, because of Giglio’s amazing efforts, that inspired the President to even extend this offer.

So sure, he’s not “your kind of guy,” but relax.

3) I wish people on the “right” would relax a bit.

People from the LGBT community and other straight allies are NOT ridiculous for being opposed to Louie Giglio’s selection. The President has made some significant strides towards equality for all, and it feels a bit counter productive to enlist a guy who seems so opposed to such equality. So it’s only natural for some people and organizations to stand up and say, “hey, wait a minute… the President chose WHO?! What the… do you all KNOW what he said about gay people?! That’s not cool… and we don’t think he should’ve been chosen by the President. It communicates something different than what he has been saying.”

This is not some sort of attack on the First Amendment. Louie has not been denied his freedom of speech (for a great write up on that, see Rachel Held Evans’ blog, Four Myths about Louie Giglio’s Inauguration Prayer).

Like Rachel says in her post, if the President would have chosen, say, Bill Maher to say the benediction, chances are that many on your side would be up in arms as well. And that’s your right to do so. Just as it is Thinkprogress’ and others rights, as well.

The world is not ending, and Christianity won’t become illegal… even IF that might be the best thing to happen for us.  ;)

4) Let’s not lose sight of the OTHER people scheduled for the Inauguration

All this brouhaha over Louie seems to be at the expense of celebrating the other people scheduled to participate in the Presidential Inauguration.

Like the President’s selection of Richard Blanco to be the Inaugural Poet.
He is Latino… oh, and also openly gay.

Or what about who is scheduled to do the prayer of invocation? Myrlie Evers-Williams, 79, is the former chairwoman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the founder of the Medgar Evers Institute in Jackson, Miss. She is the widow of Medgar Evers, who was murdered by a white supremacist in 1963. She’s not clergy, either, marking the first ever non-clergy to deliver the invocation.

So I kind of  feel like adding in a white, evangelical, decently conservative pastor actually created a pretty beautiful and diverse balance for this historic and sacred event. And choosing to focus so much energy on trying to get Giglio uninvited, or on crying about how Christians can’t be in the public arena anymore if they’re anti-gay, is really an adventure in missing the point.

5) I wish Louie and Obama would have stuck with their plan.

When I was fired over my theological differences, I desperately wanted my pastor to stand up to the church and say, “This is my friend, Colby. And we agree on a LOT of things, and have done some great work together these past 5 years. Recently, I’ve learned that we disagree on a few things. And although those issues we disagree on are, in my opinion, pretty significant issues, they are not cause to break fellowship over or to break Kingdom partnership over. So I invite us all to lean in to this moment and practice unity. Focus on the things that unite us, not divide us.”

Or something like that, anyways.

And I guess I feel like this could have been a really cool opportunity for something like that as well.

6) This issue isn’t going away, so we’re going to have to learn to dialogue about it.

The issue of same-sex marriage in our nation, and gays in the military, and the theological discussion of God’s feelings towards gay people are not going away any time soon.

The world is changing. The church is changing.
As I’ve written elsewhere, I think we’ll look back on these years with a sort of frustration… like, “how in the world could we have been so wrong, and what TOOK us so long!?”

But in the meantime we are going to have to learn to talk about it. And even more importantly, to listen.

This invitation-that-got-accepted-then-rejected moment is just the latest, and trust me there will be more on this issue. So let’s do our best to stop lobbing fear grenades over the wall at our opponents, and start laying down our own agendas from time to time in an effort to find peace and a way forward.

__________________

What about you?

What are YOUR thoughts on this whole thing?

by

From Name-Dropping God, to Dropping God’s Name

In case you haven’t heard, Democrats are godless s.o.b.’s.

Headlines this week were quick to announce: DEMOCRATS DROP GOD FROM PLATFORM! Leaving readers to gasp in horror at the audacity that some Americans would commit such an atrocity. Conservatives for years have accused Dems of wanting to destroy Christianity and run America into the godless-ground.

And this week we got confirmation that those liberal hippies once and for all declared their anti-religious sentiment, and just ripped the Divine right out of the very document that communicates who they are and what they stand for.

Yes, they took God out of their platform.

Last election season, in 2008, God got name dropped one time.

This election, God’s name just got dropped.

In case you haven’t actually seen it yet, here’s how the paragraph from the 2008 platform read that contained the single reference to “God.”

“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

Hmmm… I’m curious. Was your reaction the same as mine?

Based on the headlines and the talking heads, I was expecting something, I don’t know, much more substantial. A statement that, perhaps, clearly indicated that the Democrats were firm believers in and acknowledgers of “God.”

I was expecting something more along the lines of, “we as democrats believe in the Almighty God.”

Because then I could understand why people would express such an outrage that a sentiment like that was dropped.

That would be significant and worth discussion.

One election season the party states in its platform that it believes in God.

And then the following election season the party no longer states such a thing. It drops it completely.

Okay, at THAT point, it makes sense to wonder if Democrats are truly the godless party.

But THIS is not THAT.

Last election’s platform only mentioned God one time, and even then it was almost in passing. It was acknowledgment that humans have potential to do stuff, and that potential comes from God. “God” was used more as an adjective than as an object of belief and surrender. And isn’t it true, anyways, that not everyone in American even believes that our talents are God-given?

Nonetheless, here is that same section as it was rewritten for this year:

“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”

This time around the section just says, “our talent and drive,” instead of something similar to last year like, “our God-given talents and drive.”

The word “God” was dropped.

But let me ask you this: if you had just stumbled upon this second paragraph in any blog or piece of literature, would you AT ALL think to yourself, “wow, this sentence really is missing something… it’s really missing a God-component. Whoever wrote this must be a godless person.”

Not a chance.

It’s actually a very nice sentence. Pretty much every person would see value in it, and possibly even agree with it.

The only problem people have (or “problem they are creating”) is that this section in the Platform previously acknowledged God as the supplier of talents. It used to have the word “God” in it. And that word is very important to many people.

But still, the point remains. Ultimately this “dropping” of God is hardly a momentous thing when you consider the context that it even existed in the first place.

Furthermore, it’s not like “God” was mentioned 10 or 15 times and then all of sudden nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Again, THAT would be understandably jarring. But just going from one very casual mention of the name “God” to no mention at all (even though the exact same sentiment is communicated) is hardly worth the nationwide freak out that ensued.

To make matters worse, though, the Democratic Convention Chair awkwardly tried to poll the delegates on Wednesday in an attempt to possibly put the word “God” BACK in the platform language. Three times Antonio Villaraigosa wielded the gavel and attempted to discern the “ayes” from the “nos” before finally deciding that the majority was voting in favor of reinserting “God,” even though evidently it wasn’t clear at all. All of this was because of the backlash they received from dropping “God.” (and the ensuing pressure put on them by the White House BECAUSE of the ridiculous backlash)

Sigh.

I wish they would have simply taken the time to A) anticipate the ridiculous overreaction, and B) actually have an articulate reason WHY they chose to word this one section differently.

Instead we had to watch awkward and cringe-inducing moments like this, because the party wasn’t adequately prepared to handle the backlash.

But, the world we live in is all about headlines and news cycles. And the headline “GOD DROPPED FROM THE PLATFORM” is really, really interesting. The shock factor works. And the majority of people won’t bother considering what it actually means.

For me, I have no problem with the original wording (God-given talents), nor do I have any problem with the re-write. The language of the Democratic Platform is ripe with values and principles that clearly indicate a shared value with the Creator. Needing to have the word “God” put in there is sort of trivial in my mind. And to freak out just because it wasn’t “used” this year is even more petulant. (Sidenote: anytime you talk about “using the word God,” you should probably hesitate. Perhaps God’s name isn’t meant to be “used.” For what it’s worth.)

What I have a problem with is how the conservatives freaked out and decided that this was proof, once and for all, that Democrats are godless people who want to destroy faith in America.

What I have a problem with is how we are addicted to creating problems and making mountains out of mole hills.

What I have a problem with is the fact that this following statement is ALSO in the Democratic Platform, and it’s beautiful, and full of God language and faith language, but it is completely ignored because a certain three-letter word was left out of a different section. Read this and tell me if you think it is written by godless people who want to destroy faith in our country:

“Faith has always been a central part of the American story, and it has been a driving force of progress and justice throughout our history. We know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. Faith- based organizations will always be critical allies in meeting the challenges that face our nation and our world – from domestic and global poverty, to climate change and human trafficking. People of faith and religious organizations do amazing work in communities across this country and the world, and we believe in lifting up and valuing that good work, and finding ways to support it where possible. We believe in constitutionally sound, evidence-based partnerships with faith-based and other non-profit organizations to serve those in need and advance our shared interests. There is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution, and a full commitment to both principles is essential for the continued flourishing of both faith and country.”

If you read all that and STILL think it’s the end of the world that the English word “God” is not listed somewhere at some point, then I’m not sure what to tell you. Perhaps your own insecurities and fear are the real issue.

What do you think?

Were you bothered by the “dropping” of God?

If so, does it make a difference to you now that you know HOW it was even used last year?

Were you glad that they didn’t “use” God this year, and bummed that they were pressured back in to it?

Fire off in the comment section.

by

The Bible is Tricky; Love Shouldn’t Be

(This is the 4th and final post on my series: Why I Write/Post So Much About the “Gay” Issue. Thank you for taking the time to better understand where I’m coming from and why. Make sure to check out Part I: Gay Balloons and Star Wars Legos, Part II: Speaking of Jesus…, and Part III: And Yet it Moves)

THE BIBLE IS A TRICKY BUSINESS

If you think the Bible is easy to understand, you probably haven’t read it.

If you think that historically Christians have basically gotten pretty close to agreeing on how to interpret the Bible, you probably haven’t studied much church history.

If you think that historically Christians have, more or less, not been majorly wrong on some pretty significant issues, then you probably haven’t been paying attention.

At the risk of offending your intelligence right at the beginning, I want to make sure we are not naïve about something. Or, as it likely could be, ignorant.

The Bible is a complex compilation of literature that ranges in different styles; from historical narrative, to poetry, to metaphor, and everything in between. It was composed by humans over the span of possibly a couple thousand years and written in many different cultures and contexts. It was not written in English, so our English copies are a translation of Greek manuscripts (a dead language) which was either trying to translate Hebrew manuscripts (also a dead language) or it was the written recording of the spoken word in Aramaic (also, you guessed it, a dead language). Translators, for the most part, have done their best over the centuries to help the people in their historical context to understand the words written hundreds/thousands of years ago. It’s a tricky business, and we’d be kidding ourselves if we didn’t think that sometimes people’s biases (theology?) influenced their choice on which English words to use to translate the Greek that recorded the Aramaic that translated the Hebrew.

Furthermore, as if the translation process itself weren’t difficult enough, virtually no two people in history have ever agreed completely on how to interpret every single word/phrase/sentence/verse/passage/chapter/book of the Bible. Followers of Christ have splintered in to thousands of different variations of what it means to be a “Christian.” New ideas and altered interpretations pop up in the scholarly world all the time. The church of 100 years ago would barely recognize the church of today. The church of 200 years ago would barely recognize the church of 100 years ago. And so on. As a result, if you study Church History, you will discover that the Church has been wrong so many times on such major issues that even the drunk old uncle at the family reunion would blush. Just to name a few (in no particular order): polygamy, patriarchy, slavery, witch hunting, astronomy, Inquisition, Nazi Germany, American Colonialism (i.e. Native American genocide), more slavery, various predictions of the End Times, denying women rights, denying colored people rights, beating our children, more slavery, etc, etc, etc. Yes, I realize some of these “misfires” are from what you might call “fringe groups.” But most of them are not. Most of them come from the majority position. And most of them are a result of misunderstanding, misinterpreting, and misapplying the words of the Bible.

It is a tricky business, Bible reading/interpreting, and millions upon millions upon millions of men, women and children have suffered throughout human history as a result of God-fearing Christians missing the point. Don’t ever think, for one second, that you or I are immune to missing the point. That you or I are immune to misunderstanding, misinterpreting, and misapplying the words of the Bible. None of us are. This is serious, serious (and tricky) business, and SO MUCH IS ON THE LINE.

If you read yesterdays post (And Yet it Moves) then you know that I would add to the above list: “homosexuality.” Millions of us are convinced that the church has misunderstood, misinterpreted and misapplied the Bible when it comes to sexuality and same-sex attraction. And as a result, millions upon millions upon millions of men, women and children have suffered throughout human history.

So why do I write/talk about this issue so much?

Because I think we’ve been wrong long enough.

HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE BIBLE

Many of you have followed my series called UnClobber: The Bible and Homosexuality. Frustratingly I paused that series as we picked up and moved to San Diego and I have not yet gone back and finished it. But I promise within the next month that will happen. For those of you who haven’t read it yet, UnClobber is my effort to go passage by passage through the texts in the Bible that have been used to formulate the position that any expression of same-sex attraction is a sin. Or, to put it simply, that “homosexuality is a sin.”

The bottom line is that this simply is not true.

The Bible does not communicate this message.

We have erred on this just as we have on slavery. Just as we have on astronomy. Just as we have on segregation. Etc, etc, etc.

I won’t try and summarize my thoughts on the Bible and homosexuality here. You’ll have to come back for UnClobber. But I do want to share one insight from the Bible as I close up this series. (For this insight, I am indebted to Matthew Vines and his incredible 1 hour and 7 minute talk on the Bible and Homosexuality. Definitely worth your time.)

TO BE, OR NOT TO BE (Alone, that is)

If you are Christian and still think being gay is a ‘choice’ then I’m here to tell you that you are in the minority position within your own clan. Most conservative Christians have moved or are moving away from that position because it has repeatedly been demonstrated to be false. The prominent position nowadays within the conservative Christian world is this: if you are gay then you are called to be celibate. Just being gay is not a sin, but any expression of gay love is.

In other words, if you are gay then we invite you to be alone.

It is now your cross to bear.

All people are born with certain pre-dispositions to certain sinful behaviors. Our calling is to learn to live in a way that does not give in to those temptations. (I saw this clip from John Piper about homosexuality. After cleaning the vomit off my keyboard I realized this summarizes pretty well the ‘conservative’ position).

Of course, no decent Christian would put it so bluntly (“if you are gay then you are called to be alone”). They would probably point out how a relationship with Jesus can fill that lonely-shaped-hole, or how friendship and Christian fellowship can help us not be lonely, and so on. And all of that is true… sort of.

But check this out.

Although it’s not technically a clobber passage, many people will point to Genesis chapter 2 (and a hyper-literal interpretation to boot) as foundational evidence that heterosexuality is the only God-blessed union. Here’s the perennial nail in the coffin:

21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” 24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

And there you have it. God’s design is for one man and one woman. Clear and simple.

However, when was the last time you backed up a few verses and reminded yourself of why God created the woman for the man?

15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will certainly die.” 18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” 19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

Did you catch that?

Man had relationship with God. But still, God said “it is not good for the man to be alone.” So God set about to make a suitable helper for him.

After making a community of creatures for the man, the man still felt alone. None of them were suitable helpers for him. And at that point is when God makes a woman, who is a suitable helper for the man.

Man was alone. In spite of a relationship with God and other creatures. Man was alone.

And God said, “this is NOT good. Many other things have I created lately, and I’ve called them all very good. But this? This loneliness? This emptiness? This lack of relational connectedness I’ve discovered now exists within the pinnacle of my creation? It ain’t good. I got more work to do!”

God himself was not okay with man being alone.

But this is precisely the message that so many in the church say to those in the LGBT community: “Since you are attracted to someone of the same sex, and since that is not a “Biblical suitable helper” for you, then you need to remain celibate. You need to remain alone.”

See the irony?

The church stays hyper-focused on “a man will leave father and mother and be united with his wife” to the detriment of the fact that this relational environment was instituted precisely because it is not good for a person to BE ALONE.

Some would even suggest that a gay person learn to live with (and marry?) a person of the opposite sex. Be a homosexual that lives out a heterosexual life. But I ask you, is that a “suitable helper” for them?

Why do I write about and talk about these issues so much?

Because the Bible has been used for too long to suppress and oppress our LGBT brothers and sisters. It has been used to fabricate an anti-gay theology. It has been misunderstood and misinterpreted and misapplied to the homosexual community. Not only have we ripped the clobber passages out of their historical, cultural and textual contexts (and endured terrible English translations of some words), we have also missed the beautiful thread of relational love that was sewn in to the fabric of what it means to be human: it is not good to be alone, thus saith the Lord. (sidenote: some people throughout history have sensed a special call to celibacy. Nuns, priests, missionaries, etc. This is a unique calling that we dare not impose upon someone else and force them to manifest or try and convince themselves that it is true. Heck, Paul even wrote that “it is better to marry than burn with passion,” but once again we say to our LGBT brothers and sisters, “you CANNOT marry, sorry, you must burn with passion.”)

As a result of my convictions and conclusions about what the Bible says and doesn’t say regarding human sexuality, I am compelled to be a part of sharing the good news of God’s grace and love for all.

THEY’RE REAL, PEOPLE

When I first met Rich, my very dear friend/pastor/boss, and told him my story of how I was fired over my views on sexuality, he asked me this question: “so who is it?”

“Who is what?” I replied.

“Who in your family came out as gay? A brother? Cousin?”

“No one,” I said in return. “I have no gay family members or friends, that I know of.”

He went on to tell me how unusual that is. Most straight folk like myself who experience a transformation in their theological and ideological positions on this issue do so as a result of having to reconcile with the fact that someone close to them has come out of the closet. But that wasn’t the case for me. My path of transformation was not launched by the discovery that someone close to me was gay. Embarrassingly, I had no experience with the gay community and had no gay friends. Instead, it was through prayer, study, contemplation, and being open to God’s guiding Spirit that led me through the years it took for my head and heart to change.

But now? Now I know gay people. Now I have gay friends.

And guess what…

They are REAL PEOPLE, people.

With real stories. Real families. Real passions and loves. Real interests. Real gifts and talents. Real likes and dislikes. Real jobs and real lives.

They are not simply abstract concepts that we can discuss in our ivory towers. That we can pretend to know more about who they are and what they want and what they need than they do.

When you sit and listen to someone share with you how their own family rejected them and kicked them out of the house because they came out of the closet, your heart simultaneously breaks a little and grows a bit bigger.

When you sit and listen to someone tell you about the years they spent running from anything and everything that is good, and wasting their lives on destructive behavior, because they bottled up so much for so long and then fought the most extreme identity crisis you could imagine, your heart breaks a little and grows a bit bigger.

When you have coffee with someone who has to choose between either staying in a relationship with the person they love OR staying a part of their own family, your heart breaks a little and grows a bit bigger.

When you break bread with two women who have been in a loving, committed, monogamous relationship for 20 years and watch them love each other in the same exact way you love your own spouse, but they CAN’T call each other “spouse,” your heart breaks a little and grows a bit bigger.

You want to know why I write so much about this? Why I talk about it, post about it, focus on these issues?

Because my heart has broken too many times, and because it’s also grown three times its size.

After my theological/sociological/philosophical/political transformation was complete, but before I met all my friends in the LGBT community, I was convinced the issues and the theology was worth fighting for.

Now that I’ve met, loved, and befriended the real people behind these issues, I am convinced THEY are worth fighting for.

Yes, the work of the Bible is certainly tricky business.
But the work of Love? That should be far less tricky.

Paul wrote these words to the Philippian church, “in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.” 2:3,4

Why do I write/talk so much about these issues?

Because I’m tired of looking out for my own interests. I’m a selfish person and Lord knows I’ve done plenty of that in my life thus far.

These are my friends. And they, along with countless others, have experienced enough pain, marginalization, shame, guilt and fear. It’s time that I, and you as well, start looking out for THEIR interests.

IN SUMMARY

Well, I’d like to thank you for spending this week with me. Reading as I share from my head and heart some of the reasons why so much of my online presence has been consumed with the “gay” issue over these past 9 months.

A quick recap:

Why do I write/talk so much about the “gay” issue?

  • Because, practically speaking, this is the first time in my life I’ve been “allowed” to do so. That’s a lot of bottled up energy!
  • Because I’ve discovered I’m passionate about it. And just like you, when I’m passionate about something it tends to be more prominent in life.
  • Because my commitment to follow Jesus has taken me to this place.
  • Because I believe Jesus’ life demonstrated a posture of love, grace, and mercy for the lowest, the outcast, the marginalized.
  • Because I want future-me to be proud of present-me.
  • Because I want to be on the right side of God’s history.
  • Because I believe we’ve gotten this issue wrong as it relates to what the Bible says and doesn’t say.
  • Because I’ve met enough LGBT folk to be convinced they are REAL people, and they are worth fighting for.
  • Because my heart has broken for them, as well as grown for them.

If I may, I offer the following prayer of St Francis of Assisi as a Benediction to close this series.

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.

Where there is hatred, let me sow love.

Where there is injury, pardon.

Where there is doubt, faith.

Where there is despair, hope.

Where there is darkness, light.

Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,

grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console;

to be understood, as to understand;

to be loved, as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive.

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,

and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.

Amen.

by

And Yet It Moves

BLACK SHARPIES AND WHITE SHEETS

Two years ago, while still working at The Grove, I attended Catalyst West Coast with the other pastors. One of the things the folks at Catalyst like to do is set up an interactive arts area in the chapel for people to spend time meditating, reflecting, worshiping, and doing some hands on interactive stuff. While wandering through the chapel two years ago I was drawn towards a large display of three sheets that created a three-walled box. One side of the ‘box’ was open so that you could walk in and be surrounded by three giant white sheets. Scattered throughout the display were black sharpies, and participants were encouraged to write out a ‘confession’ anywhere on the sheet. There were super bright lights that back lit the sheets and made the box translucent, so that you could read all the confessions from outside the box, but they were all backwards. You had to go IN the box to read them properly. I decided to pick up a sharpie and participate.

Just moments before I visited the interactive stations in the chapel I listened to a keynote address by Dr John Perkins who had marched with Martin Luther King Jr in the Civil Rights Movement. His speech reminded me that the stain on our nation’s history of segregation is still so fresh. People are still alive and walking around who witnessed first hand a country who treated African Americans like second class citizens. I found myself weighed down by the gravity of that thought.

We want to believe we’ve come so far as a nation. But we haven’t.

We want to believe we’ve come so far as a church. But we haven’t.

Sadly many, many conservative churches supported segregation. And prior to that, supported slavery. The Bible was even used to buttress such absurd positions.

And I got to thinking that afternoon of how many followers of Jesus there were during the days of segregation that knew it was wrong, knew that we should not discriminate against people because of the color of their skin, but did nothing about it.

Stayed silent.

And if those people are still alive today (which I’m sure many are), oh how their hearts must break at the stain on their own history. Could you imagine being 80 some years old and having to live with the reality that you were adamantly opposed to racial segregation but you did nothing and said nothing about it back in the 60’s?

I imagine the weight of that guilt and shame would be crushing.

Or, imagine those who were in favor of discrimination at the time (because their church told them to be, or because they interpreted their Bibles so poorly). And now that we “know” how wrong we all were, they must also be crushed under the pain of knowing they allowed a few verses in the Bible to trump their human capacity for reason, compassion, and love.

Anyways, so all those thoughts were fresh in my mind when I walked through the chapel, made my way to the white sheet art installation, and picked up a black sharpie.

Without really thinking much about what I was going to write, I popped off the cap, found a spot high up on the wall (benefit of being almost 6’3”), and followed the lead of my inner spirit as I wrote:

God, I do not want my future self to be ashamed of my present self. I do not want to remain silent and do nothing about discrimination towards the LGBT community. As the world continues changing and we look back on these times 50 years from now and wonder how we could have gotten this issue so wrong, I do not want to have been one of the fear-filled silent ones.

I stepped back from what I wrote and cautiously (fearfully?) turned my head from side to side to see if anyone else saw what I wrote. I don’t know why, but writing that out was somehow a formative moment for me. Even though I only told a white sheet how I felt, it seemed as though this gesture was significant. To actually externalize something like this, to put it out there, outside of simply my own heart and mind, somehow made it more real.

And I realized I couldn’t turn back from that moment.

Even though no one at my church and none of my family or friends knew how I felt on this issue, suddenly I was willing to put this out there for complete strangers to read.

I’m not even certain I knew that I felt this way until I entered that three-walled white sheet box and popped off the cap of that lone black sharpie.

It became evident in that moment that a significant crossroad had not just presented itself in my life but that I had also already chosen the path down which I’d follow.

Why do I talk about this issue so much?

Because I could never live with myself if I didn’t.

I believe with all my heart and mind that history will show the church to be on the wrong side of this issue just like it was with segregation, women’s rights, slavery… heck, we even swung and missed on astronomy! It is imperative that future-Colby is able to look back on these days, when so much is at stake in the LBGT community and people are finally beginning to lessen their grip on homophobic behavior and actions and legislation, and be able to look his grandkids in the eyes and say, “I helped fight for this. I spoke out when it wasn’t popular. I challenged people’s assumptions and helped educate their ignorances. I took an honest look at the Scriptures are realized how badly we’d missed it. I opened my eyes to the discrimination that had run rampant against our brothers and sisters and stood with those who said ‘no more.’”

AND YET IT MOVES

In 1514 the German astronomer, Copernicus, proposed the idea of heliocentric cosmology (which is the view that the Sun is fixed in space and the planets orbit around the sun). This was the complete opposite of geocentric cosmology (which was the view held up until that point, that the Earth was the center and fixed in the universe and the sun orbited Earth).

100 years later the Italian physicist/mathematician/astronomer/philosopher named Galileo agreed with Copernicus’ assessment. The Sun was indeed (and scientifically proven to be) fixed, and it was in fact the Earth that moved in space.

Unfortunately for him, the Bible says otherwise.

According to Scripture, the Earth is fixed and does not move. (Psalm 93:1, 96:10, and 1 Chronicles 16:30, just to name a few). Therefore the official position of the church was geocentrism. So for Galileo to suggest the opposite was heresy.

In 1633 Galileo was summoned to Rome and stood trial by the Inquisition for writing literature that revealed the truth about cosmology. He was found “vehemently suspect of heresy,” forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life in house arrest while all of his writings were banned. (quick side note: lest we just blame the Catholic Church for suppressing the truth and silencing people like Galileo, the Reformer himself, Martin Luther, also rejected the evidence of heliocentrism in favor of the above Bible verses.)

Legend has it that, after his recantation in front of the Inquisition, he muttered the phrase, “and yet it moves.”

As if to say, “though I’m forced to reject what is true because of your insistence on a few clearly misunderstood Bible verses, that does not change the reality that the earth moves.”

Fine, we can all participate in this cosmic comedy of errors… and yet it moves.

Sometimes that which is true has a way of hiding itself for centuries. And when it is uncovered, should it threaten the way we’ve always thought/believed about something (or, even more dangerously, should it threaten a few Bible verses), we find ourselves poised in a difficult place. Forced to make a choice between three paths.

Do we, like the Religious Elite, dig in our heels and insist we have not been wrong. Insist that the Bible clearly says such and such and so all other evidences of logic, reason, science or alternative interpretations must be wrong. Insist on protecting the “truth” as we’ve always known it.

Or, do we, like Galileo, open up our hearts and minds to the possibility that we’ve gotten it wrong. We develop new convictions that reject what we’ve always known to be true even though it could be dangerous. But, like Galileo, do we ultimately acquiesce to the powers that be. Do we ignore our conscience, ignore the guiding of the Spirit inside us, and stick our heads in the sand. Not wanting to rock the boat. Not wanting to invite the wrath of the Inquisition. Fearful of what might be lost.

Or, thirdly, do we choose the path of people like Descartes, Keplar and Isaac Newton who boldly moved forward in life within the newly revealed “truth.” Regardless of the cost, there were those that knew that the Bible was wrong (or, more accurately, had been wrongly interpreted) and weren’t afraid to support heliocentrism. Weren’t afraid to speak out and do their part to move the conversation forward.

Homosexuality is not a disorder.
It is not a choice.
It is not something that can be cured or reversed.
A loving, committed, monogamous same-sex relationship is not forbidden in the Bible.
Gay people are not abominations.

These “truths” have been hiding for centuries but have now been uncovered.

The “church” is doing what it has often done throughout history: dig in its heels and insist it is right. Clinging to archaic science. Insisting on weak interpretations. And threatening anyone who dares oppose it.

There are many Christians who have taken the route of Galileo. They have been exposed to these “truths,” have met actual gay people and heard their stories, read material that challenged what they’ve always believed, and discovered how wrong we’ve been. And yet they remain silent. They would rather remain in house arrest, imprisoned within their own consciences, if it means they don’t have to endure the wrath of the Inquisition. Or lose their job. Or lose relationships.

I won’t do that. I can’t do that.

People’s lives are at stake with this issue. This is way more important than the order of the planets and stars. This is about the livelihood of our fellow brothers and sisters. About their mental health and inner happiness. About the rights that have been denied them that all straight people enjoy. About the destruction of their souls as they’ve been told over and over again that they are rotten sinners who invite the wrath of God on their lives and on our nation. This is about saving the lives of thousands of young people each year who would rather kill themselves than face this world that hates them, fears them, tells them they cannot love or be loved, tells them they are broken and deformed, tells them they have failed in their efforts to surrender to God.

IT’S NOT THE SAME, BUT IT IS

I understand that people don’t like comparing the LGBT movement with the Civil Rights Movement. I get it. It’s different in some ways.

But at the same time there are enough parallels, I think, that render it apropos to take principles from one and apply to another. However, even if you disagree and think they don’t belong in the same comparative sentence together, then I still want to ask you this question: imagine you are living back in the mid 1960′s and a friend of yours was spending all her free time at Civil Rights rallys. They were writing their local paper and calling out for equality. They were attending churches and begging people to re-read their Scriptures. They were focusing enormous amounts of time and energy in to ending discrimination in our country. Would you say to them, “hey friend, I know you’re passionate about this, but can you scale it back a bit? It’s like all you ever talk about anymore. I know it’s important, but there are other things in life that are important, too.”

I don’t think, looking back through the lens of history, you would say that.

You would root them on. You would tell them to not shut up until blacks were considered equal with whites. Until all people could eat in the same restaurant and drink from the same fountain. You would encourage them to never give up.

Well then, if you agree with me on some of the issues relating to the LGBT community, then I propose to you that this is THAT important. And I think future YOU would want to say to present ME, “don’t give up. Don’t stop talking about it until gays are considered equal with straights. Until all people can know the same basic rights. Until churches start to open their doors and their hearts to the gay community, and come to see how wrong they are.”

And if you disagree with me on these issues then perhaps you could step back and respect the fact that I, and many others, think this is THAT important. You may not understand it, but you can choose to respect it.

If you’re not tired of reading yet, I invite you to go here and read this amazing blog post from Richard Beck called “The Fence of Matthew Shepard.” He also discusses the commonality between Civil Rights, the Holocaust, and events like the killing of Matthew Shepard. He says this at the end,

Let me tell you what keeps me up at night. My deepest fear in life is that I’m going to end up on the wrong side of God’s history. Like so many Christians before me. My fear is that a moment will come when I am asked to stand up for those hanging on the trees, literally and symbolically, and I’ll respond with “That has nothing to do with me. That has nothing to do with the church.”

UNDERSTANDING MY PRIVILEGE

I am straight. And white. And a male.

These are three things that are true about me, and three things that grant me certain privileges that I did not earn nor ask for. But I have them nonetheless.

Those who have done study in the world of “privilege” have remarked that those in the majority position (i.e. myself) can speak out for minority positions without the immediate assumption or critique that we are speaking out of self interest.

While I certainly don’t want to take away or replace the “voice” of the LGBT community, I must acknowledge the “privilege” that I have in this arena. I can speak out against discrimination of gays and NOT be waved off simply because “I am gay.”

I don’t deserve and didn’t earn this privilege, but I have it nonetheless.

And for whatever reason I have gained a very tiny sliver of influence over an even tinier sliver of people in this vast universe. I have a platform (regardless of how small it is), I have white/straight/male privilege, and I have the firm conviction that we the church have been wrong on this issue for too long. My voice is needed in this conversation. For every 20 people that wave me off as a heretic there might be one young gay guy or lesbian girl who discovers that they are a child of God. Who learns for perhaps the first time that the Bible does not condemn them, that they are not an abomination. And even though they’ve felt that or tried to say that for years, now they have someone else who is saying it with them… for them.

I won’t be like the person who never stood against racial segregation and lives their remaining days in shame.

I won’t be like Galileo who knew the truth about cosmology but chose to renounce it and live alone.

The earth MOVES, people. It MOVES! And I’m not going to utter it under my breath as I walk away in fear. There are too many hurting people in this world for me to sit by and do nothing. Say nothing. Not use my privilege, my influence, my study, my voice.

Why do I talk so much about this issue?

Because it is moving… and I’m moving with it.
While also telling you its moving.
And inviting you to move with it.

I don’t want to be on the wrong side of God’s history.
And I don’t want you to be, either.