New youth study on tattoos
A TTC Gathering Voices post
To tattoo or not to? That is the question. At least it is for many folks these days. Some estimate that approaching 40% of people under 40 have tattoos. While I don’t have one, many of my friends do — of crosses, words (in English, Hebrew, and Greek), Bible verses, logos. In fact, I almost feel left out. So, a few months back I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to write the study, “Tattoos. A Good Idea?” for The Thoughtful Christian. It’s recently out and available for download. Here’s a few reflections on the project.
First, I did some research via social media and as to why folks got their tattoos, and what significance they have. That blog post is here and still remains active. Overall, I was struck by the wide range of responses. For some people, their tattoo really helped their faith and even strengthened their discipleship. For others — even someone who got a celtic cross tattoo — it was more of a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Second, though it’s often said by some Christians that tattoos are bad or un-Christian, it’s difficult to make a direct Biblical argument for this. While Leviticus 19:28 includes a prohibition on tattoos, the prior two verses make the old-school purity code seem awfully odd (I have “rounded off the edge of my beard” (v. 27) many times without, in my view, offending God). Also, while 1 Corinthians 6:19 is often cited when it comes to purity of body — “your body is a temple of the holy spirit” — the context is actually Paul speaking not of an individual but of the whole community. So he’s saying, “you all together — your corporate body is a temple together” which makes tattoos on individuals sort of beside the point.
Third, I have to admit to before researching for this study I thought of tattoos as a modern phenomenon. I was way wrong. Tattoos have been around for thousands of years and are present in cultures all around the world. Perhaps tattoos are gaining popularity in the 2010s as opposed to the 1980s, but they’re by no means a new trend.
Fourth, like sex and a few other off-limits social issues, I feel the church really does a disservice to its members if it doesn’t have forums to discuss contemporary issues like the growing prominence of tattoos. As I say in the study,
The church does not operate in a vacuum, so it is not immune from tattoos’ popularity. Many pastors have tattoos themselves, and tattoos are found on the bodies of many congregation members—some you might know about, and some that might surprise you. (For a little experiment, ask the pastor of your congregation to mention tattoos in a sermon. It’s amazing how many members shaking hands with the pastor at the door after worship will discuss—or even show—their own tattoos!)Tattoos, perhaps once seen as something unfit or unmentionable for church folk, are now fairly common and gaining acceptance.
It’s important that the church model healthy ways of reflection and dialogue about tattoos and other issues of cultural import.
Finally, it was interesting to reflect how I might have written this study differently were it for an adult group as opposed to youth. To be honest, I imagined youth to be more open-minded and willing to discuss other points of view than an adult group might be. If my imaginings were accurate, what does this say about adults who attend church and their willingness to consider differences both moral and aesthetic?
So, I hope you’ll check out the study. As I wrote, it’s designed to have youth explore questions from many sides and think of different perspectives so that they can discern how God is leading them, not simply say tattoos are good or bad, right or wrong. As the study shows, tattoos are not a black-and-white issues (and not just because they come in color too).
Squirrels dying in your yard and people dying in Africa
A Thoughtful Christian.com post
My partner Megan and I have had shared some eery moments recently when we both independently had what we thought were unique thoughts only to find we were thinking the same thing. For example, we both had planned to bring the same risotto salad to a potluck. And we both liked the identical couch and accent chair from several vast furniture stores. Increasingly, a similar experience happens now with Internet ads, on Facebook, and via Google searches. I’ll look for some shoes on Zappos one day, and the next day a sidebar add on a random news site scrolls through similarly styled shoes that I really dig. Spooky? Handy? Both.
This type of niche marketing has happened for a long time, but with the bounty of information our Internet lives leave and with code improving, we’re getting close to the time when pop-up ads might mimic that lovely odd moment when you and a close friend have the same random thought at the same instant.
Eli Pariser cautions against this movement in Monday’s NY Times. This caution is particularly noteworthy coming from Pariser since he’s president of the board of MoveOn.org, a groundbreaker in using the Internet for social causes. Pariser acknowledges there’s no going back to the old time days when editors and social elite chose what was broadcast, but he’s uncomfortable with where we’re headed.
Apparently Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook fame once said, “a squirrel dying in your front yard may be more relevant to your interests right now than people dying in Africa.” I suppose that may be true, but it is not as it should be. The world should not be governed by Internet codes that filter out stories of African catastrophes.
Unless you’ve changed your settings, chances are your Internet moves are being tweaked as we speak. If you search, “Christian church” on Google you (assuming you’re a Christian) may get very different results from an atheist who searched the same words. As companies filter search results for personal relevance, they help shape our point of view.
Similarly, a friend of mine recently lamented that Facebook’s newsfeed is set to prefer the friends with whom you interact most. This friend complained that Facebook seemed to inappropriately narrow her awareness of her social connections to a small select group.
[By the way, you can change both Google’s search and Facebook’s newsfeed functions. Go here for Google and here for Facebook instructions.]
I’m of two minds about all this. On the one hand, I do enjoy Zappos helping me choose the coolest shoes. On the other hand, I don’t want my political thought or access to information governed by an algorithm that prefers certain perspectives.
But it’s not as if this is a totally new phenomenon. Post college and grad school, I’m increasingly aware that beyond extended family gatherings I rarely socialize with people of widely varying political views. Even my choice of coffee shops and grocery stores narrows my awareness to people who tend to look (and buy) like me. And, honestly, congregations I know are looking more homogenous by the day.
So here’s an idea (maybe there’s already an app for it, and I just don’t know it). Could someone please develop a website that intentionally seeks diverse views, one that does so not by grabbing an idea from the left and an opposing one from the right, but a site that looks carefully at my search history and Facebook friend list and fills in the gaps with what I’m missing. Now that’d be a website that’s relevant to my interests.
image by Giuseppe Acquaviva
A Lutheran, a Presbyterian, and a Zombie walk into a bar…
a Thoughtful Christian.com post
The question was on the tip of my tongue last weekend when Rev. Mark Hanson, the Presiding Bishop of the ELCA, spoke at a town hall forum in Moorhead, Minn. But I didn’t ask it. I feared my question wouldn’t be taken seriously. And, looking at the five hundred or so Lutherans gathered, it was probably the right call. I mean, let’s be honest, there’s a certain type of crowd that comes out to a standing-room-only event on a Friday night to hear a church bureaucrat speak. Folks had burning questions about church social statements, denominational strategy, and why it took their rural congregations 18 months to find a new pastor. I get that. But, even so, I so wanted to ask the question. Maybe I should have.
You see, Fargo-Moorhead last weekend hosted two VERY different events. Both synods on the Fargo and Moorhead sides of the Red River hosted their annual assemblies, so Lutheran pastors and lay leaders gathered to worship, conduct business meetings, approve budgets, and learn from speakers and workshops. On Saturday, though, downtown Fargo hosted something rather different than the Lutheran assemblies — the Downtown Zombie Pub Crawl. (The fourth annual Downtown Zombie Pub Crawl no less!) More than 1,000 people responded “Yes” to the Facebook invitation. They dressed-up like zombie — lots of blood and guts and scary makeup — and visited various downtown pubs. I have no way of knowing what percentage of synod assembly participants joined the ranks of the undead, but I have a good guess it was closer to zero than two.
Which leads me to my unasked question. Of course, it’s ridiculous because we can’t know. But, let’s consider it briefly. Ok, so here it goes: where would Jesus have been — the synod meetings or the Zombie Pub Crawl?
I mean, Jesus was all about getting people together and having a good time. He was certainly for more than a little imbibing — his first sign in John was turning gallons of water into wine — and I can totally see him rocking out to a disco ball. Who did Jesus tend to hang with but the outcasts, the folks on the margins, the folks for whom respectable society had no time or energy. Does that remind you, even a little, of zombie culture these days?
And, the synod meetings, as good as they were (much better than most Presbytery meetings, but that’s another post), didn’t push me to those margins. They didn’t send me into that uncomfortable space where I questioned my faith or my assumptions. They affirmed how to be a good Lutheran — boy they did that — but not as much how to be an edgy one. They told me about denominational resources and entertained me with hunky-dory illustration-filled preaching, but they did not convict me.
In my position as mission developer for The Project F-M I meet with lots of 20-30 somethings who aren’t connected to faith communities. Often, I hear stories of folks who view the institutional church as not open to questions, as expecting its members to fit a certain mold, folks who see the church as either dishonest or unaware of its own failings. And while I could give counterexamples here or there, usually I just listen because their experiences speak for themselves. Many many young adults in Fargo-Moorhead see the church as out of touch and not for them.
To be honest, I still don’t know how to answer the question. I don’t have any idea how Bishop Hanson would have responded. But here’s my hope — for my call, and for my church. I dearly hope that next year the synod assemblies and the Zombie Pub Crawl once again occur on the same weekend. And, if they do, I want to be edgy enough, to respond to Christ’s call enough, to be downtown instead of at the synod business meetings. And, there I’ll stand on a street corner with a bottle of wine and some bread, and I’ll preach of a man who too is undead. Jesus Christ. Jesus who cured the sick and caused the dead to rise. Jesus, whose blood was poured out for the salvation of the whole world. Jesus who lived on the edge and died there because of it. Jesus, who is promised to be present when we share the bread and drink the wine remembering him. Jesus, who loves Lutherans, and zombies, and a good party.
image by lusi
Additional Resources from www.TheThoughtfulChristian.com
-
Everyday Parables: Learnings from Life, by James Taylor
-
Parables as Subversive Speech: Jesus as Pedagogue of the Oppressed, by William R. Herzog II
-
“Parables of the Lost: Luke 15,” by Thomas W. Walker (Adult Study)
-
“Understanding God’s Grace through Parables,” by Adam Fischer (Youth Study)
Beyond boxes: imagining how to move well
Also posted at Gathering Voices a blog for TheThoughtfulChristian.com
Oh, moving. Cardboard boxes. Back strains. Getting the furniture arranged just right. In a few short weeks, I’ll be doing it again. In the past five years I’ve lived in four different places (Decatur, Ga; Ayr, Scotland; Grand Forks, N.D., and now Moorhead, Minn. — and that’s not even counting time at the manse in Hallock, Minn.). As a young adult, I’m not particularly unusual. Statistics show slightly different numbers, but on average young adults move around every three years or so.
That’s a lot of boxes, and back strains, and arranging furniture. But it also makes me think: how does one move well? I mean, beyond the fancy ways to load boxes on the truck and managing to hang pictures on the wall within the first month of arriving in a new place. How does one move well in terms of integrating into a new community, getting to know one’s neighbors, and working for justice in a new place?
I don’t know. But I’ve been thinking about moving, dreaming about moving even. And here’s a little list I’ve concocted. I’m not saying I’d have the gumption to carryout all the list. But, as I consider how to move well, here’s a few ideas beyond the boxes.
Top ten things to do after moving to a new place:
- bake your new neighbors cookies and have a conversation when you deliver them
- attend worship at the closest church to your new place, whatever the denomination
- go to the nearest coffee shop, find a regular customer, and buy that person a cup of coffee and/or go to the nearest bar and do the same
- host an ice cream social at your new place, deliver invitations to all your neighbors
- spend an entire Saturday in your front yard (or apartment courtyard) — do yard work (without headphones), read a book, play with a puppy, whatever you do be visible and available for conversation
- attend a school board meeting and/or city council meeting
- seek out your local elected representatives and schedule an appointment to simply meet them and get to know one another
- subscribe to the local newspaper and read it, every day, for at least a month
- get a library card, use it once a month, and spend a day at the library
- within the first six months, volunteer with three different local non-profits
In Christianity, caring for one’s neighbor is at the heart of the faith. But I’m the first to admit that caring for folks at the local homeless shelter is much more comfortable for me than actually befriending the neighbors next door with the obnoxious yard signs, or smiling at cheapskate who steals the local coffee shop’s wireless Internet connection without even buying coffee or leaving his car. While I’m all for a broad interpretation of what Jesus meant when he said “love your neighbor as yourself,” I think his words most definitely must apply to one’s literal neighbors too.
Our culture makes it very easy to treat one’s house as one’s castle, to not venture beyond one’s garage unless in the car with the windows tightly rolled up. What if we were to measure moving well not by boxes and back aches and furniture, but by neighbors loved?
image by CBIdesign
Additional Resources from www.TheThoughtfulChristian.com
-
“Movin’ Out,” by Kara Lassen Oliver (Youth Study)
-
“What Community Will You Seek?” by Martha Miller (Youth Study)
Slow coffee, slow Internet, slow everything
Originally posted at the Gathering Voices blog
A recent story on NPR’s All Things Considered explored a curious new craze: the slow internet movement. In hipster enclaves like the coffeehouse Drip in Washington, D.C., counter-cultural types are claiming a more calming and intentional way of enjoying the Internet by using slow 28.8K connect speeds. Drip brews each cup of coffee individually (slowly), and they sell time on their slow dial-up computers for $1 per hour. Their motto: “Slow coffee, slow internet, slow everything.” Related to Alice Waters’ “slow food movement,” these folks say they want to experience the Internet in the same way they experience a slow intentional well-paced meal. One scientist even says that slow Internet speeds affect people’s brainwaves in ways similar to meditation. That’s what the NPR story reported, at least, on April 1.
I bought it hook, line, and sinker. April Fools’ on me.
I wanted the story to be true. Even as I caught the “mistake” introduction to the scientist who teaches at the “University of Southern Minnesota Duluth campus” (which doesn’t exist and never would since Duluth is up north), I longed for his claims about enjoying the Internet slowly to be true. Personally, I can’t stand slow Internet connection speeds. But, I hoped some folks had found a way to rise above my eagerness.
There’s a number of ways to read this April Fools’ trickery. Sure, some people will complain about a legit news show making fake news, even for one day a year. Others will take the Internet point — our quest for faster and faster Internet to save us time just makes us busier and busier. As Sherry Turkle has written, as we seek connectedness via technology we also risk losing the joys of actual embodied togetherness (I’ll review Turkle’s book “Together Alone” soon). But, here’s another take: the NPR story brought out the benefits of counter-cultural movements.
Even though I enjoy my smartphone, I totally respect people who eschew smartphones – even cell phones at all. Even though my music is in iTunes, I love an old-fashioned record collection. Even though I find solace in traditional hymns, I appreciate a brand new praise song that helps someone else connect to God in ways I don’t often experience.
For me, the NPR story was exciting because it suggested that some people are pushing-back on our need for speedy Internet, but also our need for constant contact and connection. Our society needs that type of person who, often from the edges of the culture, calls into question what others value so much.
In fact, the NPR story reminds me of the tradition of “Holy Fools,” jesters and oddballs who, through their pranks and silliness, reveal a larger truth that’s difficult to address through everyday interactions. These fools for Christ, through disruptive behavior, through mockery and vulgarity, get at the true uncomfortable nature of the gospel and the oddity to which we are called. Thank you, NPR, for reminding me of my Christian duty to respond to the foolishness of the cross.
image by Leslie Wong
Additional Resources from www.TheThoughtfulChristian.com
-
99 Things to Do between Here and Heaven, by Kathleen Long Bostrom and Peter Graystone
-
“Simplicity as a Spiritual Discipline,” by Diane Stephens
I’m no man for a “wife”
Your bride. Your better half. Spouse. Old Lady. Other half. Wifey. Missus. Little woman. Ball and chain. Wife.
I have a confession: I dislike every phrase or word above when it’s used to describe the woman to whom I’m married. Some phrases I strongly dislike; others I approach with more mild distain. For going-on five years I’ve been married to Megan and I still don’t even like the word “wife” to describe her.
Be it an English language problem or just a personal issue, I just can’t stop myself from flinching when I use even the word “wife” or “spouse.” Most often these days, especially when writing, I use the word “partner,” but even that has its issues.
Though I’ve thought about it a lot, I’m not sure exactly why even the traditional and straightforward “wife” annoys me. Perhaps it’s that I don’t see Megan in that traditional role at all. Sure, there’s some wife/husband stereotypes present in our relationship — Megan buys more shoes than me (just barely), I’m the fix-it guy around the house (or, I call the real fix-it guy) — but there’s enough untraditional about our relationship that I still don’t like the phrase “wife” (Megan asked me to marry her, after all, and I do most of the housework). Perhaps, instead, it’s that I’m self-conscious about being seen by others in a conventional wife/husband relationship. Perhaps it’s just that the word “wife” has an ugly sound to it (like “moist,” “magma,” and “panties”).
Then there’s the LGBTQ rights angle. I’m certainly aware, when referring to anything about my marriage, that the same rights Megan and I enjoy are not afforded to people of the same gender. And that pains me deeply. So, a part of me wants to say, “Until all people have the right to marry the person whom they love, I’ll refrain from flaunting my marriage with the term ‘wife’.” I accept that that’s a pretty flimsy step towards justice, but for some at least, it’s a start.
Of my 20/30 something friends who’ve been married for a few years, most have come to use the words “wife” and “husband” without any bother. While it brought them up short early in their marriages, they have become accustomed. For some, they accept “wife” and “husband” as terms that needed a certain rehabilitation for them, but after some time, the job was done. I’m not immediately aware of any couples who totally avoid the words, but I may be forgetting some. In any case, it’s not many.
But here I am, going-on five years of marriage and still not comfortable with how to refer to the person to whom I’m married. A simple “Megan” works in many contexts. I think “partner” works alright sometimes, but using “partner” leads some people to believe we’re not actually married, just dating. An old minister professor of mine who was married to a pastor used to refer to his spouse as “my partner in life and ministry,” but that’s a mouthful and just weird. Alternatively, the phrase “life partner” just lacks the gravitas I’m looking for.
Maybe I just need to get over it. Maybe, after a few more years, I will. But, for now, that’s my confession: I’m no man for a “wife.”
Feminists go to the movies
Originally posted at Gathering Voices: Faith Conversations from TheThoughtfulChristian.com
I love how blogs make me think.
Last week, teacher/writer/friend Ellie Roscher posted here about the sexism present at the Academy Awards. Ellie said that her high school students, when asked what female figures they look up to in life give personal examples like mothers, grandmothers, family members. But, when the boys give examples of folks they look up to, they tend to give examples from public life — musicians, athletes, politicians. Ellie then traces this thread of sexism through last weekend’s Oscars.
Ellie says,
Colin Firth, a brilliant man of integrity who I have been deeply in love with since he played Mr. Darcy in the five hour long BBC version of Pride and Prejudice, rightfully won best male actor in a lead role for playing a man who overcame a stammer to become a powerful king. That is a story I would want my young men to know.
But Natalie Portman, while perhaps deserving of the Oscar for her performance in Black Swan,
plays an anorexic ballerina who is a victim of sexual and emotional abuse, achieving perfection by simultaneously embodying virgin and whore only to commit suicide after physically harming herself along the way. What is more, the film perpetuates our society’s tendency to blame the victim.
Who do you want your child to look up to, the king who overcame adversity to lead his people through war or the masochist with an eating disorder?
Ellie’s post reminded me how my worldview is shaped by the films I enjoy, even well-made award-winning ones. Then, a few days later, Melissa Wiginton posted “The King’s Speech” and Feminism, exploring how the feminist notion of “finding one’s voice” is portrayed in helpful ways by men in The King’s Speech.In fact, Melissa argues that The King’s Speech even has a new masculinity about it:
To see it as a story of men dealing with difficulty through mutual vulnerability that brings transformation begins to suggest something other than patriarchy. It points to the possibility of new archetypes, metaphors, models and ways of being through which men of all colors can flourish, for their own souls and for the vitality of our common life.
Now my turn. Several other Oscar-nominated films for Best Picture are ripe for feminist pondering, at least three in largely positive ways.
The Kids Are All Right tells the story of a lesbian couple’s challenge to keep their relationship strong amidst pressures of work, raising children, and questions of the anonymity (or not) of their sperm donor. The main conflict of the movie is infidelity and the pain it causes the couple’s relationship and the family in general. But, in the main, it’s the story of a relationship persevering even though the partners have hurt each other deeply. It’s sensitive, thoughtful women trying to live out forgiveness.
True Grit, a Coen brothers remake of Charles Portis’ novel of the same name, showcases the wittiest fearless 14 year-old you’ll ever see on film. Mattie Ross is hellbent on finding her father’s murderer, and she goes to extreme lengths to do so, employing a Deputy US Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to get the job done. Mattie’s peculiarities may stop some women from wanting to emulate her — though her vocabulary is tremendous — but she’s a female character that breaks barriers and finds her way in a broken male-dominated world.
Finally, my favorite female from this year’s Oscars is surely 17 year-old Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence) in Winter’s Bone. Again, Ree shows courage beyond anything I could ever muster, but also wisdom, insight, and perseverance. She is an every woman’s woman, loving as a mother, kind and gentle, ruthless and pugnacious when necessary.
But. But, there’s still a problem. Each of the three films The Kids Are All Right,True Grit, Winter’s Bone, have leading women who shine because of their ability to navigate society’s brokenness. Responding to Ellie’s opening query: I’d love for high school girls to emulate the positive attributes of any of these women and I wish they didn’t have to.
Additional Resources from www.TheThoughtfulChristian.com
- “Juno,” by Gina Yeager-Buckley (Youth Movie Study)
- There has been much debate over the role women play in the books and movies in the Twilight saga. Click here to see a list of Adult, Youth, and Parenting studies on Twilight and New Moon.
Connect Online
