Wednesday, December 22, 2010

A Pledge Against Bullying

A Pledge Against Bullying

We pledge that we will never again be silent about the value of each and every life.                
We pledge to communicate to our children and the children of the communities that God loves all of us.  Without exception, we believe bullying and harassment, making fun of someone for perceived differences, and taunting and harming others is wrong.  The Golden Rule is still the rule we want to live by.               
We pledge to urge our churches, our individual parishes or offices, our schools and religious establishments to create safe spaces for each and every child of God, without regard to sexual orientation or gender identity.                
We pledge to be LGBT and straight people of faith standing together for the shared values of decency and civility, compassion and care in all interactions. 


 *************************************
A Grand Rapids Faith Coalition Against Bullying

On October 13, 2010 a petition denouncing bullying was signed by national church leaders across denominational lines: including Reformed Church in America, Baptists, Episcopalians, Presbyterian, United Church of Christ, Methodists, Unitarian Universalists, and other leaders within the National Council of Churches.  What united these diverse faith leaders?  The belief that God’s first message to all humanity is Love not Hate.   What sparked the need to take a stand and make a statement was the recent and dramatic increase of teen suicides and hate crimes that have their origin in bullying. Those who committed suicide or suffered hate crimes were from varying faiths and races, they came from different regions of the nation.  According to the petition and news reports, one thing was found in common, “they were perceived to be gay or lesbian [and] each in their own way faced bullying and harassment or struggled with messages of religion and culture that made them fear the consequences of being who they were.”  
Our silence in the face of bullying against gays has given silent support to feed a fatal beast.   Too often the silence of faith leaders suggests compliance with the hateful language, taunting, belittling and spiritual condemnation that leads a teen toward a spiral of depression toward suicide.  Our silence also supports the bullies whose action can lead to death of those bullied and imprisonment for the bully. The sad fact is that many of those who “bully” believe they are not only justified, they believe they are supported in their ridicule and persecution of perceived gays or lesbians.  The bullies usually have been allowed to breed their insults at school, houses of faith, and even at home in the bed of social myths, traditional prejudices, and religious agreements.  Bullies whisper their taunts in the hallways, snicker at the odd kid in the classroom, exclude the undesirable boy in the play ground, tease the peculiar child on the bus and walk home.
 


We must stand up and speak for these kids, show them God’s love.   We ask you to join us in supporting the petition of Clergy Against Bullying:
  “We, as leaders of faith, write today to say we must hold ourselves accountable, and we must hold our colleagues in the ministry, accountable for the times, whether by our silence or our proclamations, our inaction or our action, we have fueled the kids of beliefs that make it possible for people to justify violence in the name of faith…. There is no excuse for inspiring or condoning violence against any of our human family.  We may not all agree on what the Bible says or doesn’t say about sexuality, including homosexuality, but this we do agree on:  The Bible says, “God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God and God in them.” Abiding in love—together—is the rule we must all preach, teach and seek to live by….The young people who took their lives a few weeks ago died because the voices of people who believe in the love of God for all the people of God were faint and few in the face of those who did the bullying, harassing and condemning.  Today we write to say we will never again be silent about the value of each and every life.              

      To that end, we pledge to urge our churches, our individual parishes or offices, our schools and religious establishments to create a safe space for each and every child of God, without regard to sexual orientation or gender identity.  And we ask you to join us in that pledge.               
       Today we personally pledge to be LGBT and straight people of faith standing together for the shared values of decency and civility, compassion and care in all interactions.  We ask you, our colleagues, to join us in this pledge.                  We want our children and the children of the communities we serve to grow up knowing that God loves all of us and that without exception, bullying and harassment, making fun of someone for perceived differences, and taunting and harming others is wrong.  The Golden Rule is still the rule we want to live by.”
We ask you stand up and be heard in the name of God’s Love.
Rev. Todd Farley, PhD
Intentional Interim Senior Pastor
Second Congregational UCC of Grand Rapids



“That’s so gay,” has become a common statement in school to describe that which is undesirable and to be ridiculed. Other insidious taunts are constantly flung without regard, care or critique. By the time the closeted gay son or daughter come home they have had a barrage of messages of their lack of worth and value.  When gay or lesbian teens are open about their orientation, they are all the more mocked and scorned.  Though this might not be by the general masses, those few who bully are usually not stopped, or spoken against.  The bullying snide remark, taunt, push and shove is overlooked by those in the hall, classroom, home and church.  Our silence permits the bully to continue.  Thus many a youth have heard these messages of rejection at home, in their churches and in their schools, they many times feel they have no place to turn. They have no safe haven from the storm.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Theatre in Debate: an ancient dialogue between Tertullian and Lucian

Theater in Debate
Between Lucian of Samosata and Tertullian 
By Todd Farley  (1994)




Characters:
   Narrator
   Lucian of Samosata
   Tertullian


Notes:
This account is created to illustrate the thinking of opposing factions on the topic of the theatre.
Most of the quotes are from their own writings:  however, at times they quote people who lived after their time and before the 700 A.D.


Quotes from Lucian’s “the Dance” and Tertullian’s “The Show’s” are in italics.


Narrator:  Come into the grave, where two unlikely figures met on the way. The ancient satirist Lucian has been looking for early church father Tertullian, having just read Tertullian’s book entitled “The Shows,” Lucian has a bone to pick with him.  Tertullian is familiar with Lucian, having read his book called “The Ass” and thinks little better of him.


Lucian: Tertullian! There you are. I've been looking all over for you. I've had the opportunity of reading over the indictment that you have so laboriously prepared against the theatre. I was hoping you'd spare me a moment to give me the pleasure of testing your thoughts. For is seems to me you have missed the mark, like Crato, and condemned to Hades that which is most noble in life. [1]


Tertullian: I'm afraid we have already divided paths, the only thing noble in Life is our Lord. I know of your speeches and your logic is not mine. You will win no debate with me, not with your foolish words and twisting. I will not play your fool or be your donkey.[2]


Lucian: Tell me, Tertullian do you pass judgment on me because I am not a Christian? Have you lost all your ability to talk on Human levels? Well, if that is so, we indeed have no grounds for conversation: for I am earth bound and not as heavenly as you. If you could condescend to my level for but a moment, we might even grow in our conversation.


Tertullian: I will talk to you as we are so oddly met, if only to convert your mind to true thoughts and from this devilry. Perhaps I shall deliver your soul from the clutches of Satan, whom you undoubtedly serve.[3]


Lucian: Heracles![4] You'd have me serve a god I don't even know. Well, you Christians are like that. Anyway, my first argument is this—dance and theatre are birthed by the gods: Rhea danced to save Zeus from Cronus,[5] the Indian God of Day danced and was danced to, [6] the Muses danced,[7] Dionysius and Aphrodite joined in the dance,[8] Ares learned to dance as a child-god,[9] the list goes on. To dance is to touch the art of the gods!


Tertullian: You point out your own falsity and perversion, and by your own words condemn yourself to fire! You claim your gods created dance. Listing the Titan Rhea as the first goddess that danced to save Zeus (the Devil Himself) from none other than Cronus (Satan himself) [10]—of whom even the other demon/gods expressed hatred![11] Dionysius or Bacchus, Aphrodite or Venus, These two evil spirits are in sworn confederacy with each other as patrons of drunkenness and lust; Venus wanton by her sex, and Bacchus with his phallic drapery.[12] While to dance's service is the voice, song, lute, and pipe which are the talents of Apollos, Muses, Minervas, and Mercuries.[13] These are names we execrate[14] from our midst, damned[15] names of evil idols!


Lucian: By Zeus,[16] your stubborn! I will change my argument to include your God. As I understand it[17] your God made the heavens[18] and your songs (Psalms) tell of the earth dancing (trembling or spinning) in awe of God,[19] our poets agree! They tell us, “the very Heavens dance in an interlacing of errant planets with fixed starts, their rhythmic agreement and timed harmony[20]are proofs that Dance was primordial. Dance then grew in stature until by the days in which we lived, she had reached a height of perfection and high diversification that was harmonious, a rich musical boon to mankind.”[21] Even your christian writers, in the Acts of John, speak of your Jesus as the dancer of the Universe, "I will pipe, Dance, all of you—to the Universe belongs the dancer—amen. He who does not dance does not know what happens—follow my dance, see yourself in Me who am speaking -- you who dance, consider what I do, for yours is this passion of Man which I am to suffer."[22] It sounds to me like your God even supports the dance![23]


Tertullian: Gods! Gods and heretics![24] With these you would support your claim. You must do better.


Lucian: Oh, but I can. Your Jesus uses references to dance: he and John piped to the Pharisees[25]—sounds like my Apollo![26] He also used dance in the story of the lost son.[27] I believe these stories meet your approval?


Tertullian: Don't profane the Lord’s name with comparisons to demons.[28] However, you surprise me with your knowledge of our Holy writings; or maybe I shouldn't be surprised at one who uses God's Words against humanity; so did the serpent in the garden! Your ignorance is also clear. These words were spoken as an allegory not as fact. Jesus never played the pipe nor condoned dance, He used it as a teaching tool.


Lucian: It seems strange that your God would use a teaching tool if it were evil. I would fear it would contaminate him—that is—if it were bad. I say, “all things were created by God, and given to man for his use, and that they must be good, as coming all from so good a source.”[29]


Tertullian: Yes, and the sun too, pours down his rays into the common sewer without being defiled.[30] God looks down on everything and every sin and is not polluted, that doesn't justify sin. Jesus used many strange illustrations such as storms and cruel judges; storms are not holy as allegories are not truth, they rather speak of truth.


Lucian: If you will not consider the gods, then consider humanity. Homer enumerates the dances with all that is sweetest and best, with dance alone blameless. A gift from God! "One man getteth from God the gift of achievement in Warfare. One, the art of dance, and song that stirreth the heart strings.”[31] The Delphic Oracle stated that whosoever beholds dancing must be able to understand the mute and hear the silent dancer.[32] Socrates in the Symposium commends dancing as a good exercize which he wants to learn.[33] Plato's Laws praises dance which is pleasurable and profitable and pyrrhic dances good for teaching form. Plato divided the human into three parts, with reason being disseminated through every potion of the dance. [34] Herodotus states that what is apprehended through the eyes is more trustworthy than hearing, theatre, therefore, appealing to the eye and ear is so much the better![35]


Tertullian: A gift from God! A tool of education? An expression of the spirit? Thedemons, predetermining in their own interests from the first, among other evils of idolatry, the pollutions of the public shows, danced with the object of drawing man away from his Lord and binding him to their own service, carried out their purpose by bestowing on him the artistic gifts which the shows require.[36] If these gifts were ever from God (which I doubt), then we must not only consider by whom all things were made, but by whom they have been perverted. There is a vast difference between the corrupted state and that of primal purity, just because there is a vast difference between the Creator and the corrupter. The theatre and dance in offending God, ceases to be His, it is in His eyes an offending thing for the creature has misused the creation.[37]As far as all of your philosophers and literature, we despise the teaching of secular literature as being foolishness in God's eyes.[38] Dance, as an expression of the Spirit, which gives pleasure? Pleasures as offered by this world are those of which we should abstain. We, being called to a higher Holy Call, strive imperfectly to be separated from this world's pleasures and embrace God's.[39]


Lucian: Did not your king David dance,[40] and what of Miriam?[41] Of this your holy brothers testified: Chrysostom said, “of those in heaven, those on earth, a unison is made, one General Assembly, one single service of thanksgiving, one single transport of rejoicing, one joyous dance.” Ambose wrote, “Everything is right when it springs from the fear of the Lord. Let's dance as David did. let's not be ashamed to show adoration of God. Dance uplifts the body above the earth into the heavenlies. Dance bound up with faith is a testimony to the living grace of God. He who dances as David danced, dances in grace.” The Bishop of Caesarea (407 A.D) asked, “could there be anything more blessed than to imitate on earth the ring dance of angels and saints? To join in our voices in prayer and son to glorify the risen creator.” Theodoret said, “I see dance as a virtue in harmony with power form above.” The Bishop of Milan (600 A.D.) taught to “dance as David danced.” St Gregory of Nazianzus expressed that to “dance as David to true refreshment of the Ark which I consider to be the approach to God, the swift encircling steps in the manner of mystery.”[42] With such a great cloud of witnesses how can you condemn dance?


Tertullian: As you will note, each made reference to David's dance with qualification: ‘Dance as David danced’—suggesting that to do otherwise is to invite error. As Augustine said, “to keep the sacred dances, discipline is most severe,”[43] David danced to God. The dances you've mentioned and the dances of theatre are to gods and humanity! They are acts of idolatry not praise and are therefore sinful and should be cast out. Judged as the Children of Israel before the Golden Calf,[44] they should be swallowed in judgment by the earth andperish in eternal fire![45]


Lucian: Can you fail to see the nobility of the theatre? When people go away form the theatre they have learned that they should choose and what to avoid, and have been taught what they did not know before.[46] Homer says, you know, of the golden wand of Hermes that he charmeth the eyes of man with it,  whomsoever he wishes, and others he wakes that are sleeping—Odysseus ... says that dancing does just that: it charms the eyes and makes them wide awake, and it rouses the mind to respond to every detail of its performances.[47]Pantomime is such a science of imitation and portrayal, of revealing what is in the mind and making intelligible what is obscure.[48] Athenaeus said of Memphis, the dancer, “he discloses what the Pythagorean philosophy is, revealing everything to us in silence more clearly than those who profess themselves teachers of the art of speech.”[49] The praise of theatre will be consummate when each of those who behold him recognizes his own traits, or rather sees in the dancer as a mirror his very self, with his customary feelings and actions. Then by so seeing oneself, follow the Delphic monition to 'know thyself’.”[50]


Tertullian: I grant that you have there things that are pleasant, thing both agreeable and innocent in themselves; even some things that are excellent. Nobody dilutes poison with gall and hellebore: the accursed thing is put into condiments well seasoned and of sweetest taste. So, too, the devil puts into the deadly draught which he prepares, things of God most pleasant and most acceptable. Everything there, then, that is either brave, noble, loud-sounding, melodious, or exquisite in taste, hold it but as the honey drop of a poisoned cake; nor make so much of your taste for its pleasures, as of the danger you run from its attractions.[51]


Lucian: You argue well, and I fear I cannot win you over either with my words or words of your saints. I have piped and you would not dance!


Tertullian: Don't blaspheme![52]


Lucian: I'll save it until we meet again!


Narrator:  And there you have it.  A debate with no real resolution, for indeed neither one would seem to bend.  Thus it is for you to decide the winner.  Should the theatre be admitted into our churches, or do we too fear that in attending the theatres—or the cinemas—of our present world, that we are entering into the domain of demons who lurk in the isles?  Shall we open our ears to the piping-song of a Siren or Christ? 






[1] Crato is the antagonist in Lucian’s The Dance. This dialogue opens in the manner found in The Dance, by quoting parts of Crato’s condemnation of dance (pantomime).
[2] Lucian was a famous satirist who was well known for his satire The Ass,wherein the protagonist is portrayed as a donkey.  It is possible that Tertullian would be acquainted with Lucian’s works.
[3] Tertullian repeatedly states that the actor and those who go to the theatre are in the devil’s kingdom and serve his realm, see chp XXVI.
[4] Crato in The Dance, par., 4.
[5] The Dance, par., 8.  Cronus was a titan and father to Zeus.  A prophecy had been given to Cronus that one of his children would kill him, thus, Cronus ate all of his children in an effort to stop the fulfillment of the prophecy.  When his wife Rhea (mother of heaven) gave birth to Zeus, she hid him in the midst of dancing women.  These women danced with swords and shields in a pyrrhic dance called the Curetes.  The clashing of the shields covered the noises of the crying baby god, saving him from his fathers Cronus. 
[6] The Dance, par., 17.  The natives of India where said to welcome their god with silent dancing and mimetic movement in imitation of “the god of Dance” in honor of the “god of Day.”
[7] Lucian is quoting from Hesiod’s Theogony
[8] Ibid., par., 22.
[9] The goddess Hera was called the queen of Heaven and was the wife of the god Zeus. Her son was named Ares (the god of war, Latin: Mar). Hera had Ares trained in the dance to better his skills of war. She had him learn the dance and art of war from the titan Priapus.
[10] Throughout The Shows, Tertullian mentions the gods as personifications of demons and “the Devil.” In chapter XXIII Tertullian refers to Satan as the creator/director of the theatre, the ludi.  In consideration of Tertullian’s penchant to ascribe parallel the gods with demons, I have paralleled Zeus to “the Devil” and Cronus to Satan.
[11] Cronus is hated by the other gods because he devoured them, they continued to live in his stomach until delivered by Zeus.
[12] The Shows, chp X
[13] ibid.
[14] ibid.
[15] ibid., Tertullian states that the theatrical arts, artists and god/demons of the theatre are all damned.
[16] The Dance,  par., 85
[17] Lucian is thought to have converted to Christianity for a brief period in his life and could have be familiar with Christian teachings: evidence of this is found in Lucian’s book The Passing of Peregrinus.
[18]  Gen. 1; Isa. 42:5; 45:18; Rev. 10:6
[19] Ps. 18:7; 68:8; 77:28; 96:11; 114:7
[20] The Dance, par., 7
[21] ibid., paraphrased from Lycinus’ arguments.
[22] Ron Cameron, ed., The Other Gospels, “The Acts of John,” p 91-93, lines 94-96.  The Acts of John is a Gnostic gospel rejected by later orthodox Christianity for its presentation of Christ as having only “appeared” human in the body of Jesus. However, it was in circulation during the times of the early church and is quoted by St. Augustine.  What is interesting in this quote is that a “dancing Christ” is pictured without outrage from the church.
[23] Ps. 149; 150; Luke 15
[24]  “God’s” referring to Zeus, Bacchus, et al., “heretics” referring to the writers of The Acts of John.  Tertullian would have been against this Gnostic presentation of Christ.
[25] Matt. 11:17; Luke 7:32
[26] The Shows, chp X, Tertullian correctly states that it was believed that Apollo played the pipe (flute).
[27] Luke 15
[28] Tertullian would have seen the mention of Apollo being compared to Jesus as a comparison of a Demon to Christ.  It is ironic that in the Renaissance Apollo will be compared to Christ and used as a “symbol” of that which is good, see Leoni de Somi’s dialogue on theatre. 
[29] This is a paraphrase from Tertullian, The Shows, chp XX.
[30] Ibid.
[31] The Dance, par., 23
[32] ibid., par., 62
[33] ibid., par., 25
[34] ibid., par., 34
[35] ibid., par., 80
[36] The Shows, chp X
[37] ibid., chp II
[38] ibid., chp 
[39] ibid., chp I
[40] II Sam. 6:14-16, I Chr. 15:29, David danced “before the Lord” manifest in the Art of the Covenant.
[41] Exo. 15:20, Miriam leads the women of Israel in a antiphonal chorus—mimetic dance—in praise to God after the crossing of the sea and the death of Pharaoh’s army.  Victory dances were traditional in the lives of the Israelites; also see Jdg 11:34; I Sam 18:6.
[42] These quotes of early Church fathers are cited by Sam Sasser in “The Dance: to be or not to be,” a paper presented to the faculty of ORU, 1984. pp 10-11
[43] ibid.
[44] Exo. 32
[45] The Shows, chp XXX
[46] The Dance, par., 81
[47] ibid., par., 85
[48] ibid., par., 36
[49] ibid., par., 72 
[50] ibid., par., 81 
[51] The Shows, chp XXVII 
[52] The blaspheme here is Lucian comparison to his own truths as parallel to those “piped” by Jesus.  Lucian is stating that Tertullian is as closed minded to the truth as the Pharisees of Jesus’ day.

Friday, April 23, 2010

The World in Which I Live

The following is copied from an article I wrote for my church. I wrote it in response to the struggles and attitudes I have seen over the past year or so, so many people wrestle with the hardships of life (we have about 20 people a year who die and a depressed economy, thus hardship is a reality of our present day).


My mom was what some would call an eternal optimist, life was always greener on her side of the fence. At times she would wrestle with the harsh reality the was her life and she would face the hardship as if it was a demon she could slay. Her faith in God was the sword by which she killed her demons and if she was defeated by the demon of hardship, it was just the devil persecuting her. In the midst of any life hardship (e.g., persecution), she knew all that needed to be done was to hang on and rest in Christ--who also was persecuted. In the morning, she would wake up, grab a hold of her sword of faith and fight another day. Later in her life her view of "reality" seemed "unrealistic," overly optimistic and we would say that she lived in a world of her own creating. She did not deal realistically with finances or other worldly realities. Oh, she wasn't crazy, she was happy. Her lack of care for the "things of this world" also meant that she didn't leave a penny for us kids when she left this world: for all of her treasures were found in the flesh and blood of her kids and those treasures that are found in heaven.

My dad is also an optimist, I think it is a "Farley" thing: the Farley's would said it is the Irish way. He doesn't believe he is wrestling with demons when things go wrong, but he does believe the "universe" will sort itself out when we hold fast to a positive attitude and work hard to figure things out. My dad is also the type of man you want beside you in the middle of a sad struggle, because somehow he will make you laugh, encourage you to take a life filled breath and somehow help you find hope for tomorrow. Both my mom and dad have taught me something very important--to live life, not just survive it.

You can define your world and your life by your attitude and approach. Your attitude might not change the reality that you are going through a hardship, but it can change the way in which you "live" through it. There are many reasons to be down and even pessimistic. But pessimism doesn't add a day to your life--in fact, pessimistic worry is more likely to cause your hair to fall out and your life expectancy to be shortened. I have seen the hardest reality of life--which is death. I have watched as some have gone through life kicking and screaming, bitter at the world and its emptiness. In their last years or days they were mad at everyone and everything. When they die it is with a great sorrow holding little joy. I have also watched others (such as my mom), whose days certainly held sorrows, but what was focused on in life was its love, laughter and joy. And when I look back on a life so lived by this philosophy, I see a life filled with incredible sorrows and struggles, but one that shines all the brighter through those struggles of life, for such a life overflows with love and joy, incredible experiences, and a richness of life I hope everyone can have.

So, though I will weep with those who weep, and rejoice with those who rejoice, I will always remember that sorrow may endure for the night but joy comes in the morning. There are many things in life I can change, and I will work on those things with a positive attitude, just like my dad. There are things I cannot change, for those I will wake up thinking of my mom and grab my sword of faith, know that God and the Universe is "for" me and live my life to the fullest. Call me crazy, but I am happy.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Staight Christians who Talk to Gays and Gay Christians

CHRISTIANITY AND GAY TALK

Many of my friends and I have noticed the difficulty of the dialogue between the language of Christianity and the experience of the gay person.  I have many straight Christian friends who don’t understand the reaction they get when talking to gays.  The straight Christian says something “in the name of love” and all the gay hears is “hate” and BAM the walls go up.  The gay brother or sister says something about their lover  to the straight Christian and BAM the walls go up.  Hum—it would appear that we have a impasse, and one that most churches are not doing anything about.  Many people say they “love” but all they communicate and all that is heard is “hate” or “judgment”, this leads to alienation—language can create a total disconnect, making it as if you are talking to someone from another world.  I am going state the most common “hurtful” and alienating language, then respond from a gay point of view (NOT that there  is “one” single view—just some common thoughts).  Please note that I’m not trying to argue theology or biblical studies in this document (I do have other rather expansive documents that discusses the Biblical support for gays if you want to read those!), herein I’m simply trying to help understanding of why the Christian-language is so often alienating to many gays.

7 ALIENATING PHRASES!


1.       “Love the sinner, hate the sin” 

       Variations:  “ I love you unconditionally, I just don’t agree with your life style,”  “ I love you, but I don’t    support your life style”  “I  love you, but you need to know that I don’t believe in homosexuality,”  “God loves you even though you are a sinner,”  etc
Here’s the problems. 
a.       First:  you’ve qualified your love.  That’s not unconditional.  Do you qualify your love for others you speak to:  to the proud son do you say , “I love you son, but hate your pride” or to the person of a different political view, “I love you, but hate that you’re a democrat” or to the friend who is a girl “I love you, but wish you were a boy, but since you’re a girl we cannot hang out.”  More profoundly, the qualification is seen as a hate toward something the person cannot change, it’s like hating that a person is a girl or boy, black or white. 
b.      Second:  the view that homosexuality itself is a sin.  That will always be a problem in Christian language.  I would remind you that there are less homosexual acts listed as “sin” than there are heterosexual acts that are listed as “sin.”  I would also argue that homosexuality itself is NOT a sin.   Selah. Hum… Ok…so you see already, the fruit of many persons’ “love” will start an agreement about the “terms” of that love, and the judgment of its qualification.  No longer will the conversation be about “love” it will be about the “hate” or the definition of “sin.”

2.       “Homosexuality is a choice” 

Variations:  “have you tried to not to be gay?”; “have you tried to be heterosexual?”;  “have your tried to choice what Christ believes you to be instead of what the world says you are?”; “You need to believe the Truth of who you are in Christ, not your old man nature”; “you should try seeing yourself as a heterosexual and realize that being homosexual is a lie”;  “choose to be celibate”
(this argument is echoed in X Man, when Iceman came “out” as a mutant to his mother and father, and the mother asked  “have you tried not being a mutant?”  Boy did I laugh!)
Here’s the problems

a.       Homosexuality is not a choice.  If you use choice language you will alienate anyone who believes there are “born” this way—which is most gays.  Most gays believe that they are gay because of the way they are born.  Most gays will say they are not made “gay” by culture or by recruitment  and are certainly not “gay” by choice: any more than straights  “choose” heterosexuality, or Caucasians choose  to be white, or Africans to be black or brown, etc.  It is simply the way you are born.  To argue against the way they “are” causes a fundamental crisis of identity, and challenges something that is fundamental to the person’s being. Using “choice” language only increases the duress.

b.      Homosexuality itself is not an “old man” “fallen” behavior.  It is a natural behavior and orientation which occurs in other places in nature.  Selah. If you argue against this you have come to an impasse and will only succeed at alienation. 

c.       On the flip side.  We cannot choose our sexuality, but we do choose how we realize our sexuality with integrity.  Most people cannot be “celibate” (St. Paul says only the very few have that “gift”), don’t expect the gay population to be any more celibate than the heterosexual population.  Don’t require of gays what you don’t require of straights.  Trying to “contain” or “restrain” homosexual ‘behavior’ only increases its lack of control.  Gays should be encouraged to have healthy relationships as they grow up as much as other kids discovering their sexual identity—and with as much grace.  When you try to make gays be celibate or “straight”, what you produce is a system of failure that will only increase the guilt and shame, and at times create duel lives in those “trying” to be “good.”  You create a system that encourages lying, subterfuge, and “seduction,”  those gays who “try to choose” to be straight will often only fail, repent, fail, repent… and enter into a cycle of failure the ends up driving the person into a divided state of being. 
                                                               i.      Christianity too often produces the “sinners” they condemn. 

The idea of “choice” leads only to failure.  It encourages a false process and has gay men getting married only to find themselves unable to sustain the “choice” they have made.  The result is that there are many many gay men who tried to be Christian by getting “married” and “choosing” for Christ. They are told this is the righteous choice, and the right choice and they “choose” to live a lie in the name of truth.  As a result the gay person many times live a divided life, a half-life, or lives a lie, and a few divorce in order to try to live more integrally (though they are judged as “choosing wrongly.”).  The language of “Choice”  is one of the great sins of the Church parlays against homosexuals and families. 

3.       “God can heal your homosexuality”

Variations:  “have you prayed about it?” “I’ll pray for you to overcome this,” “God can help you overcome this,”  “Have you fasted?” “come to the healing rooms, you just need to be washed with God’s love,”  “tell me about your father,”  “have you gone to Exodus International, there are a lot of people who have overcome homosexuality,” “You know I have a friend who overcame their homosexuality, you can too!” “Your gay because you were molested, so if you just get healed from that you’ll overcome your homosexuality,”  “God can deliver you from this”  “isn’t God able to do anything?...so he can help you with this!” ‘with God anything is possible”
This is especially cruel to say to a gay person.  Because the truth of the matter is God doesn’t heal or deliver people from being gay.  Oh, there are a very few that say that God has, and many  many more who said “God healed me!” only to fall back into “homosexuality.”  Most gays who are or were Christian, prayed, cried, tried not to be, fasted, counseled, and “believed” in God: only to wake up the next morning—gay.  You cannot heal homosexuality, it is not a sickness, it is not a possession of evil.  Anytime you use this phrase or its variations you are only condemning them to failure.  God can do anything…but doesn’t.  Well, if you follow that line of thought it only leads to a very cruel God: for if God CAN heal gays and DOESN’T  heal gays of something that you perceive is destroying  a life and that of a families… what a cruel God.  So, I hope you can see how wrong and evil this statement is to make to a gay person. You can drive a wedge between them and God with your hopeful words.

4.       He/She says, “I’m gay,”:  you say, “I’m sorry!”

Homosexuality is not something to mourn; it should be celebrated as much as our heterosexuality.  We should celebrate their first boyfriends/girlfriends.  Their first kiss, the first time they held hands, etc..  We should be able to talk about what they “like” and who is “cute.”  We should encourage everyone to find heroes and mentors that help gays live a good gay life.  I’m not saying that we have to parade about, but if you want to, sure…parade as much as straights parade.  Kissing or holding hands in public should be as qualified or as “appropriately” done as it is for straights. Currently, most gays would be judged as “pushing it in our faces” if they showed public displays of affection—this is inconstant and hypocritical: are straights pushing heterosexuality “in our faces” when they hold hands in public?

5.        “Quit pushing your homosexuality in our faces”

Variations:  “every time we get together you talk about being gay…” “I don’t want to hear again about your gay boyfriend, cann’t we talk about something else!” “I don’t want to hear what you think the Bible says in support of gays”  “I don’t want to hear about what you did last night”

I’m going to repeat response 4:  I’m not saying that we have to parade about, but if you want to, sure…parade as much as straights parade.  Kissing or holding hands in public should be as qualified or as “appropriately” done as it is for straights. Currently, most gays would be judged as “pushing it in our faces” if they showed public displays of affection—this is inconstant and hypocritical: are straights pushing heterosexuality “in our faces” when they hold hands in public?   All humans talk about those people they love, their friends, their successes, their struggles, if you cannot talk about a gay persons loved one, then this is a problem not with them “pushing it in your face” but with the fact that you don’t actually accept their life.  If you cannot celebrate a person’s successes and struggles, loves and heart-breaks, you aren’t really a close friend—you’re just an acquaintance.  It is a great sorrow when a gay person cannot share significant successes and advances in life with a friend who sees such as a life as “sinful.”

Telling Story:  When a person first comes out, there is a life time of thoughts, feelings and experiences they have to share: and a new world to discover.  At first they will talk about it, share it, and explore its truths and realities.  This is the most important time for you to be involved in the discussion (with NO judgment).  This is when gays will find out what they will or will not do—like a teenager discovering the world.  They need to talk about it… encourage them and you can be part of a powerful process and redefinition of life.  You can be an advocate of a very important change for a new integrated and authentic person.  But if you are going to “judge” what they share—or share it with shame, then they will not tell you and you will not be part of one of the most important changes in their life…and possibly not part of their life afterward (for you weren’t there when they really needed you).

6.        “Just give me some space! I just need some time to deal with you being gay”

“I cried when I heard you were gay, so just let me heal before we talk about it”, “I cannot believe it, you cannot be gay” “just let me think about it for a while, then we will talk” “Can’t we just be friends like we were before?” “I don’t want to talk about it, just leave me alone”  “please don’t tell my friends (family members) your gay…I don’t want them to judge you”

Shame.  Are you ashamed of your gay friend?  Well, that’s going to only hurt you both.  They are not going to feel comfortable with your family, and everyone is going to be oversensitive to things that appear or come across as “too gay.”  So you will all behave falsely and things will become strained and fake.  Not a good foundation for any relationship or true public interchange.

Hurt.  You feel “hurt” by the confession of homosexuality.  Ok…so you need time to deal with the shock.  But while you deal with it, they are dying, afraid and alone.  I’d get over yourself quick and be a friend as soon as possible.   Most gays fear coming out to their family and friends because the most common reaction is rejection.  Your silence and “getting over it” will many times simply be understood as another form of rejection.  In truth, the “World” is much MUCH better at loving gays through the transition the most Christians I know.   Most Christians are too “shocked” “hurt” “betrayed” and biblically conflicted to be helpful, and usually have been more hurtful—saying the things I’ve listed herein.  Many Christians are so busy being “righteous” that they forget that the first rule of Christianity is love, even self sacrificing love.

The sad truth of the matter is that most gays find they lose most of their fundamentalist Christian friends.  Many gays lose their friends during this time because they no longer “relate” or they are “distanced” from them during the most important part of their life.   Some Christians “distance” themselves from the openly gay people because of “guilt by association,”  even if they think being gay is “ok” …. Frankly that is seen as a fair weather friend.

7.       Straight Christian says, “Why am I the one who is made out to be wrong, why do I have to change the way I talk?”

     Variations from Christians:   “Why do I have to apologize for what I said, I’m also hurt” “Can’ they see  that they are hurting me, that I feel betrayed by their lie”  “Can’t they give me the same grace they expect from me?”  “Why do I have to change? They are the ones that lied about being straight” “Don’t I have the right to an opinion?” 

Hum, you could also ask “Why did Jesus have to die for me?”   It’s the true Christ-like thing to do. 

                When Christians speak they speak from a position of privilege and power.  Many times it has be Christians who have oppressed gays and judged them as “sinners” and “hell bound.”  This means Christianity has some extra work to do to overcome what has been historically a position of great harm and cruelty.  It is Christians that have burned gays at the stake, Christians that have told society to hate gays, fear gays, not trust gays, and who say being gay is a sin, sickness, evil, possession.  It is the Christian’s interpretation of the Law that denies gay-rights, that teaches that homosexuality is a danger to the family, and is a perversion and aberrant behavior.  For these reasons, Christians should change their language and understand that it will take twice as much work to overcome the hurts gays have suffered.  That gays strike back is not a surprise, it is their very life they are fighting for,  not just doctrine or dogma.   

There are more phrases…and perhaps those reading can add some they have come against or have been hurt by, and let us also mention those that have been helpful!

“I love you, always and forever!”
"God loves you and says you are wonderously made"
“Tell me what you have been going through”
“What can we celebrate?”
“Can you introduce me to your friends?
“So, how can I support you during this time?”
“Hey, when can we hang out? The place is your choice!”

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

The God of Peace




The God of Peace

NOTE: The following is part of a series written for a my Church and their views.  It was written in balance with the opposite study on "the God of War"  which presents the pervasive use of warfare in the Old Testament and the use of warfare analogies in the New Testament.  These both are part of a day long event discussing the differences between "Just Peace Theory" and "Just War Theory"

I will be publishing notes on Just Peace Theory with in the next week, as follow up on this article.


Notes of Todd Farley

 OLD TESTAMENT AND THE GOD OF PEACE—THE GOD OF SHALOM

In the Old Testament the understanding of  “Peace” was first and foremost understood as being from God and part of  God’s “Shalom.”  Shalom is a very complex concept of the healthy wholeness of God out in our lives.   Out of Shalom all of our comings and goings are blessed, we exist in peace, we are healthy and whole, we exist in good relationship with our family, friends and society.  Shalom brings balance in life and all of its dynamics.  It is also understood as the “rest” of God, that concept of God’s rest on the 7th day, wherein God saw all that God created and said it was good.  It is resting in the Goodness of God.  Shalom as Peace  flows through the healthy state of being.  Shalom can be understood as God’s Spirit in the midst, or as the Hawaiian’s understand Aloha—being in the breath of God. 


That which fights against Shalom is Sin and its practice which break down the human spirit and leads to depravity.  Sin is the absence of Shalom in action, or the absence of God in an activity.  Sin is that self-seeking deception that leads away from God and God’s Shalom.   There is also a false peace that happens in the Old Testament, a false peace that blinds and deafens the human spirit to truth.  When we accept a false peace, the fruit is many times a temporary prosperity, and more often than not a prosperity that oppresses others.   A false peace is what we have when people call out for “peace” when we are actually at war.  War is the fruit of sin, and an agent of counterbalance that brings correction, suffering or judgment.  At times Israel existed in false peace and entered into the brokenness of war:  war itself at times functioned as a corrective, a ‘wake-up call’ that made physical Israel’s spiritual depravity, and by being made physical it helped correct Israel in a physical way.  Time and time again Israel was awakened by war and captivity for the need to change and called once again to seek true shalom, to repent and return to God.  War is not the fruit of righteousness; it is a way in which sin and brokenness was dealt with in human actions.   However, War is NOT part of Shalom.  War exists because of ‘sin,’ because of the human willful depravity that walks away from Shalom. 


God goes to war?   This topic is covered in another review.  But does the warring activities of  Israel justify present day war?   From a traditional Christian view,  the Old Testament is read as a natural symbol, in other words what they did in the natural actually is symbolic of spiritual truths.  If this is systematically kept as a rule of interpretation, than phsycial warfare in the Old Testament is only valued as an example of  spiritual warfare (as spoken of by Paul and John) in the New Testament.  Old Testament warfare therefore does NOT justify present warfare (nor does it discredit it).

NEW TESTAMENT AND THE GREEK CONCEPT OF  PEACE

JESUS… BRINGER OF PEACE ON EARTH AND GOOD WILL TO ALL…Jesus is known as the Prince of Peace.  In Jesus’ actions in the Gospels, Jesus certainly confronts sin and falsehood.  And in one case gets angry and “turns over the tables” in the temple, when he sees the temple of his Father being “defiled.”  However, that is the only “violent” act of Christ.  He never kills, he never fights back.  He stands his ground “righteously,” he certainly stands up to his accusers and addressing them with great authority.  But he never fights.  At the end of the day, Jesus allows himself to be falsely accused by culture and society and is murdered.  God’s ultimate plan was not a war, but a sacrifice.  God’s ultimate concern was not about the temporary society or culture’s rules and wars, but the eternal Kingdom of God.  A Kingdom won not by fighting but by Love.   Peace was bought for us in the Blood of Christ given for us by the Love of God.  Peace was not won by a war waged amongst human beings. Peace was not strong armed, imposed, or forced on another.  Christ’s peace is given to those who do not deserve it!  It is given not won.

PAX ROMANA  captures the idea of a more common Greco-Roman concept to “peace”—peace through warfare and conquest.  Peace exists for the Roman because Rome kept the peace, they conquered their enemies and enforced peace.  Thus during the times of the New testament Peace was understood by Roman culture as mostly a social rest from civil strife or war.    It is less about the totality of being and more about the specific lack of war.  Peace is an absence of violence (after violence and sustained by violent threat against those who would break it).  Peace can be a state of rest between violence, Peace doesn’t not bear its own fruit, it must be made.   Peace avails the opportunity for rejuvenation, but it does not bring rejuvenation itself.  It is not an active agent.   


CHRISTIANS MIXING ROMAN AND JEWISH IDEAS: Christians reached back into Jewish conceptualizations of Peace (Shalom) when they created the concept of the “Peace of Christ” and our current day “passing the peace. ”  In both of these ideas Christ is seen as our Peace.  Christians acknowledge we should have peace (no war or violence) between our brothers and sisters, but sometimes miss the deeper concepts of Shalom.   Furthermore Peace as Shalom is weakened by a  Christianization of the Greco-Roman idea of  Peace .  the Spirit of Christ brings peace (in a process): now there starts to be echoes of the concept of the Pax Romana, the idea of a Peace as represented in the book of  Revelation— where Christ comes as a Warrior God to first judge and subdue all enemies then brings Peace (like the Roman concept of conquest first then peace). 


WAR AND REVELATION!
Answering the Warring figure of Jesus in Revelation:  the Book of Revelation is written to the Christian/Jew using Roman and Jewish imagery.  If understood as being written before the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD, it was a prophetic warning of what was to become of Jerusalem.  For those who see it as after the destruction of Jerusalem it is read a prophecy of the end of times (or the cycle of evil).  In both cases, the Book of  Revelation, offers a symbolic hope for a spiritual kingdom beyond the depravity and cruelty of  Oppressive and Evil Regimes, and it offers the restoration not of a physical Jerusalem but a new spiritual Jerusalem to come.  It is primarily symbolic, but is often taken “literally” or mixed in its interpretation.  Having Jesus as the “Captain of the Host” is akin to us being dressed in Roman Armor and fight a “spiritual” battle, Paul never intended for us to actually wear Roman Armor and fight!  So these texts are poorly used as a justification of war as a earthly activity (in contract to the many texts on war in the Old Testament).

SUMMARY
Shalom—God’s given peace wherein we are whole
Pax Romana—Human peace achieved by war
The Gospel of  Peace—given by the Prince of Peace, Jesus












OTHER STUDIES ON PEACE  BY OTHER AUTHORS
PEACE
Achtemeier, Paul J. ; Harper & Row, Publishers ; Society of Biblical Literature: Harper's Bible Dictionary. 1st ed. San Francisco : Harper & Row, 1985, S. 766

peace, a word with a wide range of meanings in both the ot and the nt. Its root meaning in the ot (Heb. shalom) is wholeness or well-being, and it can be used in both religious and secular contexts. It is used as a general greeting (Judg. 6:23; Ezra 5:7; Dan. 4:1) and as a farewell (Exod. 4:18; 2 Sam. 15:9). In these uses, it seems to indicate good wishes for the people addressed and friendly intentions on the part of the speaker. It is also used to indicate peace between nations as opposed to war (Josh. 10:1, 4; 1 Sam. 7:14; 1 Kings 5:12).
Peace is often associated with other terms. The ot speaks of ‘peace and security,’ usually from invasion (2 Kings 20:19; Ps. 122:7) and ‘peace and prosperity’ (Deut. 23:6; Ezra 9:12). Here, peace is associated with material well-being, good harvests and safety from wild beasts and enemies (Lev. 26:6-10; Zech. 8:12). Peace is also found in conjunction with moral concepts. It is associated with truth in the sense of faithfulness (Esther 9:30; Zech. 8:16, 19). Above all, it is found in parallel with righteousness (Ps. 85:10; Isa. 60:17). Righteousness will bring peace (Isa. 32:17), but there is no peace for the wicked (Isa. 48:22; 57:21).
Peace is the gift of God (Lev. 26:6; 1 Kings 2:33; Pss. 29:11; 85:8; Isa. 26:12). The false prophets cry, ‘Peace, peace,’ at times when the true prophets know that God is not sending peace (Jer. 6:14; 8:11; Ezek. 13:10, 16). The ot speaks of God’s covenant of peace in connection with priests (Num. 25:12-13; Mal. 2:4-6) and in connection with God’s promises to Israel (Isa. 54:10). In Ezekiel, God’s peace is the future or eschatological blessing (Ezek. 34:25-31; 37:26), and, in Isaiah, the Messiah will be a Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6).
Throughout the various ot uses of peace as material well-being, righteousness, and as having its source in God, the emphasis tends to be relational: peace exists between people or between people and God. The idea of peace as individual spiritual peace with God or internal peace of mind is not an ot notion.
The Greek word for ‘peace’ normally means simply the absence of war or conflict. In the nt, however, the word also acquires much of the range of shalom and some new, specifically Christian understandings. As in the ot, it is used in the Gospels as a greeting and farewell (John 20:19, 21, 26; Mark 5:34; Luke 7:50). This peace appears to be a concrete blessing which the disciples can give to others, but, if the others are unworthy, it returns to the disciples (Matt. 10:13; Luke 10:5, 6). Virtually all of the nt Letters include ‘peace’ in their opening greeting, usually paired with ‘grace’ (e.g., Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3).
The term is used in the nt to mean absence of strife among individuals or nations (Luke 11:21; 14:32; Rev. 6:4). It is also used for order and concord within the Christian congregation: Paul frequently exhorts Christians to be at peace with one another (Rom. 14:19; 1 Cor. 14:33; 2 Cor. 13:11; 1 Thess. 5:13; cf. also Mark 9:50). Christians should strive for peace with all people, Christian or not (Heb. 12:14). Paul writes, ‘If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God’ (Rom. 12:18-19). Here and in Jesus’ commands on not resisting evil and on loving one’s enemies (Matt. 5:38-48; Luke 6:27-36), the nt advocates a nonaggressive stance.
The association between peace and material prosperity found in the ot is not stressed in the nt; rather, the connection between peace and spiritual blessing is emphasized. Peace occurs in association with righteousness (Rom. 14:17; Heb. 12:11; James 3:18), grace (Phil. 1:2; Rev. 1:4), mercy (Gal. 6:16; 1 Tim. 1:2), love (Jude 2), joy (Rom. 14:17; 15:13), and life (Rom. 8:6).
The spiritual blessings are from God. God is a God of peace (Rom. 15:33; Phil. 4:9; 1 Thess. 5:23; Heb. 13:20). The gospel can be described as the gospel of peace (Acts 10:36; Eph. 6:15). Christ’s work is to bring peace. Christ’s death has accomplished peace between God and humanity (Rom. 5:1; Col. 1:20) and peace between Jew and Gentile (Eph. 2:14, 17). Yet of greater value than peace is obedience to God’s will. That is why in the Gospels Jesus also speaks of bringing not peace but a sword, creating division in families where some obey God’s will by following Jesus, and others do not (Matt. 10:34-36; Luke 12:51-53).
Finally, in the nt, the notion of individual spiritual peace or peace of mind is found in a few passages. The peace of God (Phil. 4:7) or the peace of Christ (Col. 3:15) may rule people’s hearts; a mind set on the Spirit is life and peace (Rom. 8:6). The God of hope may fill one with joy and peace (Rom. 15:13).
















Peace
Torrey, R.A.: The New Topical Text Book : A Scriptural Text Book for the Use of Ministers, Teachers, and All Christian Workers. Oak Harbor, WA : Logos research Systems, Inc., 1995, c1897

1.     God is the author of. Ps 147:14; Isa 45:7; 1Co 14:33.
2.     Results from
a.     Heavenly wisdom. Jas 3:17.
b.     The government of Christ. Isa 2:4.
c.     Praying for rulers. 1Ti 2:2.
d.     Seeking the peace of those with whom we dwell. Jer 29:7.
3.     Necessary to the enjoyment of life. Ps 34:12,14; 1Pe 3:10,11.
4.     God bestows upon those who
a.     Obey him. Le 26:6.
b.     Please him. Ps 16:7.
c.     Endure his chastisements. Job 5:17,23,24.
5.     Is a bond of union. Eph 4:3.
6.     The fruit of righteousness should be sown in. Jas 3:18.
7.     The church shall enjoy. Ps 125:5; 128:6; Isa 2:4; Ho 2:18.
8.     Saints should
a.     Love. Zec 8:19.
b.     Seek. Ps 34:14; 1Pe 3:11.
c.     Follow. 2Ti 2:22.
d.     Follow the things which make for. Ro 14:19.
e.     Cultivate. Ps 120:7.
f.     Speak. Es 10:3.
g.     Live in. 2Co 13:11.
h.     Have, with each other. Mr 9:50; 1Th 5:13.
i.     Endeavour to have will all men. Ro 12:18; Heb 12:14.
9.     Pray for that of the church. Ps 122:6-8.
10.     Exhort others to. Ge 45:24.
11.     Ministers should exhort to. 2Th 3:12.
12.     Advantages of. Pr 17:1; Ec 4:6.
13.     Blessedness of. Ps 133:1.
14.     Blessedness of promoting. Mt 5:9.
15.     The wicked
a.     Hypocritically speak. Ps 28:3.
b.     Speak not. Ps 35:20.
c.     Enjoy not. Isa 48:22; Eze 7:25.
d.     Opposed to. Ps 120:7.
e.     Hate. Ps 120:6.
16.     Shall abound in the latter days. Isa 2:4; 11:13; 32:18.
17.     Exemplified
a.     Abraham. Ge 13:8,9.
b.     Abimelech. Ge 26:29.
c.     Mordecai. Es 10:3.
d.     David. Ps 120:7.


ot Old Testament
nt New Testament