The Lost Coin

How would it be possible if salvation were ready to our hand, and could without great labor be found, that it should be by almost all men neglected? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.
-- Baruch Spinoza

Wow, its just seems like forever since I've had the time or been physically able to update this blog. Health issues, family and marital issues have weighed heavily upon me of late and I am thankful to still be alive and in the ring, still fighting and not down yet. One of my of my all time favorite Christian contemporary groups was a group lead by Bryan Duncan many years before his mega successful solo career: Sweet Comfort. They broke up back in the mid eighties and it was the end of an era to me.

Anyways, they had a song entitled "Contender." Its all about this fight going on between two matched and formidable foes. One has the resolve to say, I'm not quitting, I not giving up...." If you've never heard it, try YouTube and see if its available. Its well worth the listen. That's where I've been and while I must say that its not the most pleasant place to be, it is where you find what your made of, who you love, how strong you are or how weak....

With all this said, it make Spinoza's quote all the more applicable. Obviously, Spinoza was not a Christian in any traditional sense. He was an excommunicated Jew who said he found it difficult to teach philosophy without disturbing organized religion. So, suffice it to say that his idea of salvation was not the typical evangelical one employed by most today. But, regardless, his statement speaks to me, even if in a different way than he would of chosen.

I am reminded of the kingdom parables that Jesus shared along the Galilee countryside: the kingdom of heaven is like a woman who had ten coins and lost one (lk 15). She swept her whole house all night to find one lost coin, and finding it she rejoiced as much or even more for the one she recovered than the nine she had in her pocket. I wonder if that wasn't was Spinoza was meaning when he likened salvation to that which is excellent and rare? I also wonder how many things we allow to just fall into the cracks of our lives, like the lady's coin? How easy would it of been for her to simply say, "I have nine others, what's one lost coin?" Yet, Christ likened the entire kingdom of heaven to that woman's search for that one lost coin.

At forty-0ne, I realize today that I have let too many coins slide into the cracks of life and lost pieces of myself along the way: passions, talents, things I didn't even know were gone. Losing a coin or two here or there may not add up, but eventually, it can become your very soul that's at stake. Just as this woman stayed up all night searching for that coin as if it were her only one, there comes a time when you realize that you've lost too much of yourself... life, drugs, addictions, cynicism.... so many things went wrong that I never intended to go wrong.

Oh, don't get me wrong; I would rather offer to Him a coin left in my pocket. I mean, a coin is a coin, right? But, all I have left is rubbish and refuse from a life ill spent. How am I to take something that I didn't loose to bartar for His eternal love and forgiveness? So, I, like the woman with the lost coin have been sweeping and searching trying so desperately to find that one thing that will make me acceptable to dad.... to my God. Divinity? Resurrection? Infallibility? I found them all but even in all those things, I still did not feel like I found the right coin.

Then, the beauty and agony of Spinoza's words kiss in a moment of complete and utter clarity: surrender. I finally realized that he doesn't care whether I understand the incarnation. Hell, the church has been wrangling over it for milineums. It took them four hundred yearsto come to some definitive statement which ultimately split the church. He doesn't care whether I believe that every word in the cover of the 21st century bible is genuine reliable history. He could care less what I think of atonement theory or gay marriage. What he does care about, though, is surrender. The toughest, rarest, and most lost coin in my whole collection. I could fake the others if I had too.... but, surrender?

Surrender hurts; it forces me to say what I hate to admit. That is, I don't know. I don't have the answers. All my reading, all my learning, all my theological pursuits, think-I-know's, none of them could help me in the moment that I came face to face with the one thing I did not want to do: bow. Sounds so easy, at the hand of every person, so readily available, but so difficult and rare that it makes its price so far above value one could never substitute anything for it.

Well, to make a long story short, I am finally on my knees. I told my wife last night that I was not entirely sure what that meant (and you thought you were so far gone! LOL) All I know, is He is right here with me... and, that's worth more than theories, books, theology, cynicism, or anything coin I can begin to substitute in my collection.... thank you, Jesus!

One Priest, Two Faiths, and Lots of Questions - News

One Priest, Two Faiths, and Lots of Questions - News

Pluralistic ideology can often be abstract and rhetorical. The above article on belief.net's news section highlights two Episcopal priest: one who is both an Episcopal priest as well as a follower of Islam; the other is an Episcopal priest recently voted in as the Bishop of the Upper Michigan Diocese who also practices Zen Meditation and has received lay ordination from a Buddhist community. The controversy over these two priest is stirring up much debate and is threatening to create a 21st century version of the Syncretistic Controversy.

Among those of us who have a positive view on religious pluralism, I wonder how many would feel comfortable with multiple faith confessions? It is true that many of the beliefs of the world's major religions contradict one another. How can these differences be reconciled? One of the priest involved states that Christianity and Islam (her additional faith interest) inform and compliment one another more than they collide with each other.

I must admit that the idea gives me some pause, not really idealistically, but more of a practical nature. The demands and conflicting ideas of, say, Islam and Christianity, would be very difficult to reconcile in my opinion. To the contrary, to have an eclectic faith where one can be a part of a specific faith community, one that best suits or fits their spirituality, but also is free to take from any religion to inform and enhance their understanding of God and responsibility to the world, seems to be a more manageable propposition. For instance, I am an Episcopalian and am most comfortable in a Christo-centric, bible related practice of faith. However, I allow myself the freedom to search for God in the sacred scriptures of many religions: buddhist, Islamic, earth based spirituality, etc, they all have something of value to offer the soul that is searching. Some fit with my spiritual disposition and where I am at the moment better than others. Some day down the road I may be able to find value in things that can not recieve from today.

What is your opinion on this matter? Is it really possible for a person to be a part of two completely different faiths and be equally as faithful to both? This is a very interesting question and one that is likely to become more relevant as our postmodern age proceeds. Leave a comment through which you can follow me to Disqus and we can discuss this topic further. Be sure to vote on the poll related to this post that is included in the right side bar. Thank you for your participation!

For Those Who are Pained by My Changes

For Those Who are Pained by My Changes

The above link is one that I found in an article entitled "Losing Your Religion? How to Talk to your Kids", written by Valerie Tarico in the Living section of the Huffington Post. Tarico is best known for her book, The Dark Side: How Evangelical Teachings Corrupt Love and Truth and the founder of WisdomCommons.org. As the title of the article suggest, Tarico is addressing the issue of how to approach your children when your quest of faith has led you in an opposite direction than what they are used to seeing. This is no doubt a very serious issue and one that is oftentimes neglected at the demise of children's faith.

Children need to understand that faith is a journey and that in this journey things often change; we often change! This change does not negate the reality of the faith that we once held, it informs that faith and it is important that children understand this. There have been many cases where children wake up one day to find that things have changed drastically in the spirituality of their parents. Perhaps, this brings about a move from one church to another, or, even a change in the family's church attendance altogether. Where the family used to attend church on a regular basis, now the family only attends sporadically, if at all. This is not always a bad thing, it may just be a phase in a person's spiritual journey where relationship or solitude, etc, is more important at the time. However, children may see this and get confused and this confusion can breed disillusionment and an eventual migration away from all religious faith.

In the article, Tarico links to a piece she wrote and that is what is linked above and referenced in the title of this post. It goes beyond the need to speak to children about this and extends to family relationships and those persons in one's life that can be affected by change in a person's spiritual disposition. Tarico is writing for the benefit of loved one's who are worried about her change in faith and she is telling them what she sees as important about her change and what she wants them to know. Its a great piece and one that I wish I had stumbled upon a long time ago. She really does a great job of explaining the process she is going through; this process is indicative of what many of us, whose faith has been reshaped and redefined and who are constantly in a state of flux regarding matters of faith and spirituality, go through.

At the end of this post written to Tarico's loved ones, she says the following:

For a long time, I have known that the answers I had were not quite right. But I didn't really know how to explain this whole process or how to articulate a better set of answers, so mostly what I talked about was the flaws in the old way of thinking.

This really explains a process that I know I've been through and actions of mine that I sincerely regret. It is just so easy for us to think that since we are unhappy with or questioning what we believe then surely everyone must be feeling this way, or if they are not, they should be. The fact is, however, that some people never question their faith; they are happy and content in what they believe and it would not be healthy for them to have their faith challenged. I think what happens is that we become so invested in 'faith as a journey' and we want everyone to respect our navigational decisions in this journey, but we are not so free in giving others space to plot their own course in matters of faith.

We are all at different places in our spiritual quest and we should learn how to respect that my revelation may be a stumbling block to another. Paul, in the 14th chapter of Romans, speaks to this very issue when dealing with eating meat that was sacrificed to idols and respecting certain holy days. Paul acknowledges that our feelings of freedom and such are not shared by everyone around us. Damage can be unnecessarily done to another's faith if ideas and concepts are pushed upon them that they are not ready to receive. They may never receive it, and that should be okay with us. I can look back and see where I was totally irresponsible with my religious ideas and intentionally challenged others who should not have been challenged. I mean, my faith changes often; it is okay with me if I do not have all the answers and if I take a position that is totally opposite of one that I took in the past. That's me. But, others find security in the answers they have and when one of those answers are attacked or challenged, it becomes personal. I should understand this, especially since I have been there.

Whether it is our children or family members or friends, all should be given the respect to grow in their faith and understanding in a manner that is appropriate for each individually. Variety is a good thing; no one has to be just like me, or just like you. This is a great lesson to be reminded of and Tarico does a wonderful job of bringing our attention to this important reality.

On Faith Panelists Blog: Religion is Being Redefined - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

On Faith Panelists Blog: Religion is Being Redefined - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

Kenneth E. Bowers, a Baha'i Faith represenatitve and an On Faith panelist wrote the blog post linked above on Tuesday the 17th. I did not notice it until today but I am glad I did. While its a short peice, I like allot  of what Bowers has to say. Also, I really like a represenative of a somewhat obscure but popular religion being featured as well. Beyond a few powerful yet controversial statements that Bowers makes, statements that we will get to in a moment, reading this post gave me an intellectual itch to scatch, so to speak. Not, knowing much about the Baha'i faith, I spent a little time familarizing myself with it and found a religion with a rich heritage and a great way of looking at the world. 

Rising up within nineteenth century Persia, the religion has a modern flavor. Monotheistic in essence, it accepts the world's mutilplicity of religious faiths as reflections of  a single divine force or power that uses these seperate faith renditions as a chorus of a single composer. Such as the symphony is made up of its various parts and musical instruments, it all works together to present a unified musical ensemble. So, the world's main religions reveal a single truth about a unified and singular divine; at least, that is what I understood the Baha'i religion to say and I must admit that the approach is very appealing and refreshing.  

Equally refreshing is that many of the values and social principles of the Baha'i faith call for justice and a complete elimination of predijuce and inequality. Humanity is called upon to live in peace and unity, both religiously and politically. World peace is a prominent doctrine. The equality of man and woman as well as a harmony between religion and science are both fundamental beliefs as well. 

Given the time this faith was born it is amazingly progressive. While its monotheistic emphasis or its theism in gneral may turn many people off, its unlying principles are very in tune with post modern notions of justice. I see in it a wonderful opportunity and platform for religions to meet on equal footing and engage in respectful dialog. It is no wonder to me that millions follow this faith worldwide and that many see it as the answer to religious plurality. 

As promised, there are several statements in the above mentioned blog post that I would like to briefly comment on. First, Bowers sees globalization and the free and exhaustive exchange of information in today's world as an antidote to religious fanaticism and dogmatism. He states the following:

"It is natural that, exposed to an array of choices, many would either change religious identity, opt not to commit to any one religion, or even abandon religion altogether." 

I wish that he would have elaborated on his source here for these powerful projections. I suspect that there is some truth to his proposals, although I certainly would not take his word for it. Two of his statements here assume prior religious understanding/belief: changing religious identity and abandoning religion altogether. I'm not so sure that his certainity here does not overlook the power of one's native faith or religious system. Opening one's mind to other religious ideas and systems will no doubt challenge a person, but it often has the opposite effect in that it can threaten one's ideas and thus invoke a departure from religious sampling. Additionally, doing research on the religious faith and ideas of another group of people or culture does not always mean that a person is searching for an alternative religious system or theory. So, while I like his statement and am inclined toward it, I am not convinced that the current information age is going to overcome fundamentalism or that the existence of religious pluralism will necessarily render the "my faith is right" mentality obsolete. I think this is more wishful  thinking than rational thought. 

Here is another statement that Bower makes that I think demands attention:

"...many have not so much abandoned faith as the narrow definitions of faith that often come with membership in a specific religious tradition. They see something universal and common to all religious expereince, and are therefore ready to accept such divesity as a necessary, even desirable, aspect of life. They appreciate faith and spirituality, but choose not to confine themselves to one particular choice."

Once again, I like this statement. But, one has to wonder if Bower is looking at the world through the eyes of a religious historian or an echatalogical prophet of his own doctrinal beliefs. Religion is being redefined here but is it not being redefined toward that which is consistent with the beliefs and eschatology of Bower's Baha'i religious belief system? Certainly, this religious mentality is consistent and conducive with Bower's beliefs but I am not sure that the world's religious population is becoming more tolerant and on a path to merge ecumenically anytime soon. 

There are some merits to Bower's thoughts here so I am not trying to dimisss him altogether. Obviously, I am a proponent to religious pluralism or this site would not exist. But, I am not sure that I am as optimistic that the world is on the verge of getting along in spite of religious differences or that the Baha'i  faith, although fascinating in itself, is the absolute platform for unity that the world is going to simply adhere too. 

Perhaps, the day will come that the world operates under a single dictum or religious mandate. Even Christianity has such a persuasion in its eschatalogical view of the world. If religious harmony is to ever be achieved, it will definitely take some unifying force or require some platform or system of belief to triumph emphatically to the absolute exclusion of all others. Perhaps, and hopefully, a syncretistic logic similar to that porposed by Bower will eventually be the answer. It's a lofty ideal and would definitely stop all the killing and religious wars and bigotry that even today, in this post modern age, characterize such a large portion of religious faith. I nodd my head with Bowers in hope that he and his ideas are at least headed in the right direction.   

Losing My Religion' by William Lobdell - Los Angeles Times

Losing My Religion' by William Lobdell - Los Angeles Times

Several news sources picked up this story yesterday, promoting Mr. Lobdell's new book about his faith journey and how it related to his profession. It always pains me to hear or read of something as tragic as a person losing faith. As a reporter for the LA Times, covering religion in the LA area and abroad, this reporter was disenchanted by what he saw and it lead him away from his one time enthusiastic belief in God. While the numerous articles did not go into much detail about the events that he witnessed that led him to his current position, one can easily imagine that they were not in the least bit flattering to Christianity or to religion in general.

While it always disappoints me to hear or read of such things, I can not do so without thinking about the religious climate that Jesus himself was born into. Much of his recorded ministry in the gospels is confrontational; confrontation with the religious elites of his day. In fact, historically, Jesus was killed by these Jewish elites because of his ongoing and incessant criticism of their misdeeds and self-righteous conduct. Reference was made in the above article about how Mr. Lobdell was disgusted by seeing Bishops and such getting out of limosuines and having their rings kissed while thier constituency suffered tremendous injustices, often perpetrated by the very people these Bishops were known to protect. Similarly, the gospel story tells of leaders who wanted the best seats, brought undue attention to their giving, and loaded their subjects down with religious burdens that they themselves were unwilling to bear.

I look forward to reading Lobdell's book, but I do hope that he will one day rediscover faith. Fortunately, for me, I learned a long time ago that my faith, if it was to survive, could not rest in others and its validity had to exist solely upon what it meant for me and what it did within me as a person. People will fail; the visible respresentations of all the world's major religions are not always perfect examples of the principles they are supposed to represent. Personal faith, however, looks beyond this and is able to gain value even where there is failure and compromise. My prayers are with Mr Lobdell and the many thousands of disillusioned people who legitimately can relate to him.