CONNECTING

Our local theatre featured One Upon a Mattress this summer as a “teen” musical. I put “teen” in quotes because a number of the actors are already in college. It was a well done performance with several of the actors performing far beyond what you’d expect in the typical “high school” musical where you’re just glad they got through the whole thing without a major disaster. No, this was much better than that.

I was speaking with one of the talented performers about a quality I called “connecting with the audience.” Now you have to understand I don’t know the first thing about acting. Yes, I do readers’ theater, but that only requires me to stand in one place and read the lines well enough so that no one in the audience says, “Are they nearly done yet?’ (That has happened.) I know a bit about the literary qualities of plays, I know a good bit about vocal music (having once taught it), I know when I enjoy a production, but I don’t know anything about the technique or artistry of acting. I just know what I perceive. As a result I don’t know exactly what I meant about “connecting with the audience.” According to the philosopher G. E. Moore, if you don’t mean exactly something, you don’t mean anything at all. Maybe I don’t mean anything, then again . . .

Let me give you a non-theatrical example. About 20 years ago I went to hear an American theologian speak at a conference. I had read his books, and found him very interesting. I should have stuck with his books. The speaker could not remember anything that was on his lecture manuscript, so he had to read what he had written. He was exceedingly near sited so he read bent over his pages, never looking up. He read in an absolute monotone without the slightest inflection other than a slight pause at a period. OK, the information was there. It was presented, but the processes of communication was laborious, far more opaque than if he had just passed out copies for us to read, which he wasn’t going to do because he was working the material into a book. This is the most egregious example I can think of “not connecting with an audience.”

Of course theatre isn’t the same as giving a lecture. Except in some types of theatre the performers don’t interact with the audience by waving to them or chatting with them. But that’s not what I mean by connecting with the audience. For the sake of simplicity, let’s just say that a play tells a story. (Yes, I know there is a lot more to it than that, but I’m not writing a dissertation here.) The actors don’t read the story, they act it. And we, the audience, watch and listen. The actors know there is an audience out there and we know they know. We aren’t just spying on real life.

Now, all sorts of things happen because there is an audience that wouldn’t happen if the actors were just doing the play for themselves. Actors have to use gestures that are broader than you’d normally use in ordinary life. They use makeup that looks outlandish off the stage. They speak so as to get their voices beyond the footlights. And the stage is set for the audience to see what’s going on. Look at the convention of sitting at only three sides of a table on stage. All for that is necessary for the audience.

There is something else to it, though, something harder to explain. The actors not only present the story, but they help the audience understand the story. Some of the actors on stage are actually standins for us. If one character is speaking and another rolls their eyes, we know that something outrageous is being said. If characters look frightened we know that fright is the proper emotion to have. For example, suppose a script called for a character to say, “Boo!” How the actor delivers that line communicates its intention, whether it is supposed to be really frightening or not frightening at all or just a nuisance like a little kid who sneaks up behind grandma to scare her. But we are also helped by the way other characters respond. Do they cower in fright or go on without noticing or give a little jump? All of that is necessary to connect with the audience. The big one in comedy is allowing space for laughter. If an actor talks right through the audience’s laughter, they disconnect from the audience. There’s probably all sorts of things like that going on that I’m not aware of, but maybe you get the drift. A good performance connects with the audience.

It’s not just in theatre where this is important. There are religious implications to this as well. Surprised? You shouldn’t be. Theatre has its roots in religion. Today’s theatre grew out of the mystery plays of Medieval Christianity. And the development of theatre has touched Christianity, especially worship. Even in so-called free worship there is structure. There is use of actions (ritual), stage setting, ways of speaking, costume, incidental music. The congregation has a fascinating ability to slip back and forth between being the audience and being actors. (The word “liturgy” means the people’s work.) I have sometimes speculated on whether a sociologist from another planet would be able to distinguish theatre from worship.

One of the most interesting areas where “connecting with” is important is in the Scripture. That’s going to take some explaining. Maybe you could connect back again next week for that topic.

Until we reconnect, may the Lord bless you on your journey, and greet you on your arrival.

Wayne






4058

THE FAMILY

I write this blog with some reluctance. I don’t want to be guilty of bearing false witness. I also am not fond of crazy conspiracy theories, although this isn’t a conspiracy per se. Furthermore, this is a subject that is very difficult to get information about except through secondhand sources. However, I have reason to think there must at least some truth behind it since articles have appeared on Harper’s and The Los Angeles Times and NBC devoted some time to it. There is also a book on the subject The Family by Jeff Sarlet. He has been interviewed by Terry Gross on Fresh Air, an NPR radio program, and by Hank Connor on Connor Calling on the University of Florida’s public radio station.

Every year there is in Washington, D.C., a National Prayer Breakfast. I never gave it much thought. I’m not sure exactly what a prayer breakfast is or why one would have one. Anyway, lots of important people including the President attend the prayer breakfast. On the surface it seems to be sponsored by groups from both houses of Congress, but this isn’t exactly true. The organizing force behind the National Prayer Breakfast is the Fellowship Foundation which is sometimes referred to as the Family.

So what? The history of the organization is spooky. It was founded in 1935 by Abraham Vereide. He claimed to have received a vision from God that Christianity had gone wrong by focusing on the poor, weak and suffering. The focus should have been on the those in power because that’s how things could be changed. Among things that needed to be changed was getting rid of Communists, labor unions, and Roosevelt’s New Deal. Vereide had an admiration for Adolf Hitler. Leadership of the Family today still use Hitler as an example of someone who got thing done.

Scared yet? Well, there are a lot of kooks out there with nutty ideas, only these kooks seem to have attracted a lot of very powerful connections. Through some sort of twisted relationships with various non-profits they own a house on C Street in Washington. They rent out rooms there for a low, low $600 a month. Know who lives there? Senators John Ensign (R-Nev.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), and Representatives Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.).

I can’t begin to explain how intricate the relations among the power brokers in Washington and this organization. And beyond that, they seem to make contact with numerous foreign leaders and even engage in back-channel diplomacy.

The Family isn’t a church. As a matter of fact, they don’t like churches much. It’s all about Jesus, but it doesn’t sound much like the Jesus I’ve read about who hung around with fishermen, a tax collector, and an assortment of sinners. King Herod and the Pontius Pilate and others in power were bad guys in the Jesus story.

Maybe I am paranoid, but I always worry when religion tries to use the power of the state for its own ends. Christianity has always been strongest and closest to the truth when it has been the underdog. As soon as it is advantageous to be a Christian, we’re in trouble.

Take a look for yourself at these sites and see what you think.

LA TIMES

NBC

HARPERS


Let me know if you start looking over your shoulder for well-dressed, smiling Jesus people following you. Then again, unless you’re got power and influence, they probably don’t care about you. If I suddenly disappear, put “I told you so” on my grave marker.

May the Lord bless you on your journey and greet you on your arrival.

Wayne









4046

SIGH

I’m just a common place parish pastor. I try as best I can to help people grow in the grace of God, spread the Good News to others, and reach out in compassion to people in need. I have a fair understanding of theology and a very good understanding (I think) of Scripture. I know what I believe, reject some beliefs as completely inconsistent with Christianity (reincarnation, for example), but acknowledge that there is a broad scope of beliefs that are embraced by Christians who I consider brothers and sisters even if we aren’t 100% in agreement.

It grieves me, then, to see so much virtual ink spilled online by Christians who deny that most other people who bear that name are indeed Christians. The last couple of weeks I have fallen into a number of strange sites devoted to telling people what’s wrong with other people who claim to be Christians. The issue is almost always Biblical truth, but what the proponent really means is their particular version of Biblical truth.

I ran across one site, which I will not identify, that has long lists of people and groups that are heretical. I wasn’t surprised to see Mother Theresa on the list, for these people usually declare all Roman Catholics as heretics, nor was I surprised to find Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller, and Rick Warren on the list, but was surprised to find numerous conservative Christians included among the heretical–Donald Wildom, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson. Billy Graham is a heretic as is C. S. Lewis. Martin Luther also falls into the heretical class.

You will do well to mark that Alcoholics Anonymous is heretical, and so is self-esteem, martial arts, Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE), psychology, Christian rock, and hypnosis. And Christian Schools are heretical. Why some have put on sinful musicals like Fiddler on the Roof, Sound of Music, Hello Dolly, and Oklahoma. And, gasp, Bob Jones University even allowed the “Don Cossacks,” to perform on campus. They are a Russian dance troupe! And it has an art gallery that has religious art!

Oh yes, a warning: you’d better not have a mid-life crisis because that’s heretical also. I have to say a list that condemns palmistry, the Institute for Creation Research, and the Salvation Army is might comprehensive. It’s probably a good thing that Andrew, Philip, Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus and some of the other Apostles never wrote anything or they would have been declared heretical as well. I think the only two people who are counted as Christians are the husband and wife team that run this site (which-must-not-be-named), and I don’t think they’re entirely sure about each other.

The final straw was Christmas. Naturally Christmas was condemned as pagan, but when the carol “Silent Night” was also put on the condemned list, I quit. Of course “Silent Night” must be an evil, heretical song because it was written by a Roman Catholic priest, but it was also rejected on the basis of its first word, “silent.” Where in the Bible does it say the night was silent? It doesn’t, so this beloved carol must be heretical. And “O Come, all ye Faithful” is heretical. It calls Jesus “King of Angels” and says he was born in the morning. More heresy. Give me a break!

Given these nutso views about who’s going to Heaven, I think I might prefer Hell. As a Lutheran I am pretty sure that’s where I’m supposed to wind up, but I will enjoy being there listening to Martin Luther preach, C. S. Lewis tell stories, and hearing Father Joseph Mohr sing Stille Nacht on Christmas Eve. And then we’ll all sing “O Come, all ye Faithful” accompanied by a Salvation Army band. The Devil, who hates the joyful noise of music sung in praise of the Lord, will probably kick us out of Hell.

“Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God” (1 John 4:7).

May the Lord bless you on your journey and greet you on your arrival (in HEAVEN).

Wayne








4029

BIBLICAL CONTRADICTION

Let’s talk about contradictions in the Bible. Actually I only want to talk about the theory of contradiction in the Bible. You’ll see why. You can go anywhere on the Internet and find lists of contradictions in the Bible. These are given as proof that the Bible isn’t true. You can find just as many sites refuting each example thus showing there are no contradictions in the Bible. To my mind, that’s entirely unnecessary. To show you why, I have to demonstrate some logic.

Logic works with propositions, statements that are capable of being true or false. What logic is really interested in is arguments. An argument is a set of propositions of which one (the conclusion) is said to follow from the other propositions (the premises). In other words, the premises give evidence or support the conclusion. In certain types of arguments, logicians (logic geeks) are concerned about whether the argument is valid, that is whether the argument is structured in such a way that if the premises were true, the conclusion would have to be true.

Here’s one valid argument.

If it rains it on Friday we will not have a picnic.
It rained on Friday.
Therefore, we did not have a picnic.

We could use some short hand to say that. R will mean "it rains" and P will mean "we have a picnic." So we could write the argument,

If R, then not P
R
Therefore, not P

Every argument of this form is valid. That is, if the first 2 statements were true, then the conclusion would have to be true.

So here is another argument. We’ll call it the Pro-contradiction argument.

If there are contradictions in the Bible, then the Bible is not true.
There are contradictions in the Bible
Therefore, the Bible is not true.

Same form as the first argument so it must be valid.

Here’s another one. We’ll call it the Anti-contradiction argument

If the Bible is true, then it does not have contradictions.
The Bible is true.
Therefore, the Bible does not have contradictions.

Also a valid argument. And even more intriguing, the first statements or premises in each argument are logically equivalent. I know it looks odd, but under the rules of logic, these two statements say the same thing. “If there are contradictions in the Bible, then the Bible is not true,” and ‘If the Bible is true, then it does not have contradictions.’

Well, this isn’t getting us anywhere. But there is more to an argument than being valid. There is also soundness. An argument is sound when it is valid and the premisses are all true. Since both the Pro and Anti argument are valid, The Antis want to show that one of the premisses of the Pro argument is false. They won’t try to prove the first Premise is false because that would undermine their own argument. Instead they want to show that there are no contradictions in the Bible and thus show that the Pro argument is not sound. So off we go to the races with competing lists, one side saying “this is a contradiction” and the other side saying “oh no it isn’t.”

What’s the big deal about contradictions anyway? It’s another issue of logic. The rules of logical hold that a proposition can’t be true and false at the same time. We might not be able to tell if it is true or false, but it is never true and false. That means a statement and its negation can’t be true at the same time. The statements “This apple is red” and “This apple is not red” cannot both be true at the same time. Contradictions drive logic geeks crazy, so they aren’t allowed in arguments. That adds one more thing to arguments–goodness. An argument is good if it is sound and has no contradictions in its premisses. It’s sort of like when they told you that you can’t divide by zero. Try it on your calculator and it will go nuts. Arguments with contradictions in them make the argument go nuts. You can prove anything with a contradiction so they are against the law. Don’t try using it or the logic police will get you. (I hope all you politicians out there are listening.)

So the battle goes on about contradictions lest the Bible be not good or nuts or something. Except–it’s the wrong battle. What people ought to be looking is the first premise of the argument. “If there are contradictions in the Bible, then the Bible is not true.” Oh yeah? Who says so? I insist it is THIS premise that is false (and for that matter it’s equivalent “If the Bible is true, then it does not have contradictions.”) But didn’t I just say how bad contradictions are? Of course, they are bad in ARGUMENTS, but the Bible isn’t an argument. Furthermore the Bible can’t be true or false in a logical sense at all. It’s not a proposition.

There are all sorts of things we talk about that can’t be dealt with in logic. Commands, for example, can never be propositions because they can’t be true or false. (Try this is the sentence: “Sit down!” True or false?). So the commands in Scripture can't be true or false. Questions can’t be true or false. Exclamations can’t be true or false. And even a whole lot of things that sound like propositions in the Bible aren’t. For example: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho.” Is the sentence true or false? It doesn’t make any sense to ask that because it is a parable, a story Jesus tells. Or how about this from the Song of Songs: “Your neck is like the tower of David, built in courses; on it hang a thousand bucklers, all of them shields of warriors.” Is that true or false? It’s metaphor so logical questions don’t apply. (Personally, I think it’s a terrible metaphor. Who would dare to say their girl friend’s neck looks like a tower?)

There are things in Scripture which seem to say opposite things, but if the Scripture isn’t merely a collection of propositions, then we don’t have to worry about logical contradictions. Why should apparently opposing ideas necessarily be incorrect outside of a logical system. Do we expect that God conforms to human logic? If not, why should the revelation of God be subject to logic? In fact, what if the nature of God is such that we can only speak of God in paradoxes? It sort of the thing that exists in physics where light seems to be both a particle and a wave, and yet it can’t be both.

Life is full off things that don’t seem to make sense. Allow me to give you a mathematical one, the birthday paradox. Put 23 people in a room, and the odds are better than 50-50 that two of them will have the same birthday. Put 57 in a room and there is a 99% chance that two will have the same birthday. That can be proved mathematically, yet it astonishes people when you demonstrate it. Why should God be any less astonishing? Why should we be upset when the Word of God leads us to things we can’t wrap out little pea brains around? We mental midgets are going to “explain” contradictions in God’s revelation? Not likely.

I think it is useless to “explain” contradictions in scripture. Rather than trying to show off how clever we are at proving contradictions aren’t really contradictions it would be far more beneficial to meditate on what God might be showing us through the contradictions.

Whew! Got that out of my system for now.

I can say with out contradiction that wherever you go on your pilgrimage, God will be with you. Don’t sweat stuff that doesn’t matter.

May the Lord bless you on your journey and greet you on your arrival.

Wayne












4009

FUN BOOKS

AT 60* I have reached the age when it is permissible to read children’s fiction again. You can’t do it in your teens because you’d be humiliated by your peers. Then you go to college and have to read Important Books, books that teach Big Ideas, but aren’t all that pleasurable to read. Next you’re starting in a career and have to confine yourself to Professional Books. Then suddenly you have children who demand you read aloud Lumpy Lewie and the Gooey Kazooie at bed time every night for 47 weeks. When the kids get old enough for the good children’s books, they can read for themselves and would resent it if you trespassed on their particular favorites. When they finally leave home to go to college and you could at last get hold of the children’s books for yourself, you have to worry that the kids might come back from college (where they have been reading Important Books with Big Ideas) and catch you with the fun stuff. That would confirm their view of you as hopelessly weird. Finally you reach the age when it is safe to read what you want, but you’d better do it in hurry before you forget how to read and the only stories you’ll hear are the ones your great-grandchildren read to you like Dumpy Dewy and the Zooey Gablooie which they will read over and over again, but that won’t matter because each time you’ll have forgotten you’ve ever heard it before. Sit back in your rocker, Grandpa, and I’ll bring you a nice bowl of gruel.

In any case, this old codger came back from vacation with several nice books for children and young adults which I am enjoying thoroughly. This is only between you and me, though. Not everybody sympathizes with my taste in literature. The last time I mentioned a Harry Potter book in a sermon, a member groaned, “Oh, no!”

The first fun book was a gift from my cousin, The View from Saturday by E. L. Konigsburg. The author manages to tie together several short stories she had written in an artful way. The characters are fifth-graders who are bound together as an Academic Bowl team. Now I happen to like fifth-graders. I used to teach a fifth grade Sunday School class. Kids that age seem to be interested in everything and have becoming themselves interesting. They can relate to adults without the surly attitude of teenagers who regard adults as adversaries. It’s intriguing how the four children in the story are tied together and how their teacher happens to pick them to be on the academic team. Mystery: they call themselves “The Souls.” Hmmm. And they have tea together. What book with tea in it could be bad?

Second fun book, Holes by Louis Sachar. I read a bit of this one once in a book store. The basic plot has to do with a boy who has been sentenced to serve time at Camp Green Lake which is nothing more than a nasty desert where the lake dried up years ago. Ever day each boy has to dig a hole five foot deep and five feet around. There’s a back story that intrudes bit by bit and finally explains how everything is connected and why they boys have to dig holes. Another clever story.



Third fun book, Roald Dahl’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory . People know this from the movie Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, but I’ve never seen the movie, either the one with Gene Wilder or Johnny Depp. The book is a hoot. I don’t think anyone could have captured the nuttiness of this book. I was born to soon to be caught up in Dahl’s many, many humorous books, but I mean to make up for that. I’ve read The BFG, Matilda, James and the Giant Peach, The Witches, and I’ve seen a British televised version of Danny the Champion of the World. Absolutely no profound thought in any of them, although all the rotten kids get their comeuppance in the Chocolate Factory.



Fourth fun book, Pirateology. This is one of a series of books that has all sorts of neat stuff in it. Like it has a real compass in the cover and genuine plastic jewels inside the back cover, and maps, and a bag of fake gold dust and other keen stuff. Now, these books usually sell for $19.95, but I found it in a resale shop for $1.00. Just couldn’t pass it up. Funny, when I was a kid, I was never into pirates, but now I have a costume and eye patch and everything. And I can say, “ARRRR!” real good. And I wrote a skit that has a pirate in it (not to mention a witch and a wolf). AND I know all the words to “Never Smile at a Crocodile,” but nobody wants me to sing it.

The last book is more than a fun book. It is a SERIOUS children’s book. Actually it is a collection of fifteen children’s books from around the world. The Best Children’s Books in the World reproduces the entire original book with illustrations in the original language and provides a translation in the margins. The illustrations are amazing. Here’s a picture of the dragon and his wife from Dragon Feathers.
And the weirdest illustration is the Hamesh Mechashefot Halchu Letayu (The Five Wacky Witches) from Israel.



I’ve been having fun. Hope you’ve had some fun on your life-travels. May the Lord bless you on your journey and greet you on your arrival.

Wayne


*I know a lot of my friends say 60 is nothing at all, but this summer someone mistook me for my sister’s father. My sister is only three-an-one-half years younger than I am. If my Dad were still alive, he’d be 87. My garsh! Do I look that old? Just when is that whippersnapper going to bring me my bowl of gruel? I can’t be wasting time waiting around at my age.

W.


3994