Browsed by
Tag: Spiritual

Fox’s 95 Theses

Fox’s 95 Theses

Comments 0 Comment

I first read the theologian-priest Matthew Fox as a graduate student in philosophical theology and ethics at the University of Iowa. He is perhaps one of the most controversial religious figures of our time. He’s a bit wacky in some ways (see techno-cosmic mass) but I tend to agree with much of what he says. My friend Grateful Bear recently discovered that Fox not only has his own blog, but that it includes a Luther-inspired “95 Theses” on it – in English and German!

In case you don’t know, Martin Luther nailed his own 95 Theses (don’t get it confused with “feces”) to the door of the Wittenberg Church on Oct. 31, 1517. The 95 Theses of Luther attacked papal abuses and the sale of indulgences by church officials – and argued for a return to the Gospel. It was a pivotal moment that led to divisions in the church – from the Protestant Reformations, to the Catholic counter-reformations.

“Since your majesty and your lordships desire a simple reply, I will answer without horns and without teeth. Unless I am convicted by scripture and plain reason–I do not accept the authority of popes and councils for they have contradicted each other–my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise, God help me. Amen.” – Luther, in Defence of his 95 Theses, April 18, 1521

Fox describes his version as “95 faith observations drawn from my 64 years of living and practicing religion and spirituality. I trust I am not alone in recognizing these truths. For me they represent a return to our origins, a return to the spirit and the teaching of Jesus and his prophetic ancestors.” Here are a few that I particularly like, but it is worthwhile to read and meditate on all of them – if nothing else, it will certainly help you focus your own belief-structure. My own view of authentic Christianity shares many traits with this. No – I am not an agnostic or an atheist. I just don’t believe in most of the standard doctrines and mythologies.

4. God the Punitive Father is not a God worth honoring but a false god and an idol that serves empire-builders. The notion of a punitive, all-male God, is contrary to the full nature of the Godhead who is as much female and motherly as it is masculine and fatherly.

6. Theism (the idea that God is ‘out there’ or above and beyond the universe) is false. All things are in God and God is in all things (panentheism).

7. Everyone is born a mystic and a lover who experiences the unity of things and all are called to keep this mystic or lover of life alive.

8. All are called to be prophets which is to interfere with injustice.

20. A preferential option for the poor, as found in the base community movement, is far closer to the teaching and spirit of Jesus than is a preferential option for the rich and powerful as found in, for example, Opus Dei.

23. Sexuality is a sacred act and a spiritual experience, a theophany (revelation of the Divine), a mystical experience. It is holy and deserves to be honored as such.

27. Ideology is not theology and ideology endangers the faith because it replaces thinking with obedience, and distracts from the responsibility of theology to adapt the wisdom of the past to today’s needs. Instead of theology it demands loyalty oaths to the past.

33. The term “original wound” better describes the separation humans experience on leaving the womb and entering the world, a world that is often unjust and unwelcoming than does the term “original sin.”

36. Dancing, whose root meaning in many indigenous cultures is the same as breath or spirit, is a very ancient and appropriate form in which to pray.

38. A diversity of interpretation of the Jesus event and the Christ experience is altogether expected and welcomed as it was in the earliest days of the church.

40. The Holy Spirit is perfectly capable of working through participatory democracy in church structures and hierarchical modes of being can indeed interfere with the work of the Spirit.

54. The Holy Spirit works through all cultures and all spiritual traditions and blows “where it wills” and is not the exclusive domain of any one tradition and never has been.

70. Jesus said nothing about condoms, birth control or homosexuality.

Matthew Fox 95 Theses – or Articles of Faith for a Christianity for the Third Millennium

(Thank you thank you Grateful Bear!)

What Kind of Thinker are you?

What Kind of Thinker are you?

Comments 0 Comment

You are an Existential Thinker

Existential thinkers:

Like to spend time thinking about philosophical issues such as “What is the meaning of life?”
Try to see beyond the ‘here and now’, and understand deeper meanings
Consider moral and ethical implications of problems as well as practical solutions

Other Existential Thinkers include
The Buddha, Gandhi, Plato, Socrates, Martin Luther King

Careers which suit Existential Thinkers include
Philosopher, Religious leader, Head of state, Artist, Writer

What Kind of Thinker are You?

Abuse of Patriot Act Again

Abuse of Patriot Act Again

Comments 2 comments

Abuse of the Patriot Act – Professor Tariq Ramadan

I am a member of the American Academy of Religion, and have been since at least 1990 (maybe earlier). The American Academy of Religion (AAR) is the major scholarly society and professional association of scholars and teachers in religion. With 10,000 members, the Academy fosters excellence in research and teaching in the field and contributes to the broad public understanding of religion and religions. The AAR publishes the flagship scholarly journal in religion and books in five series through Oxford University Press. I used to be the editor of their Religious Studies News, and I often attend the annual and regional meetings. My former advisor Professor Robert Detweiler had been President of the AAR. So it is with an especially deep sorrow that I read about the news of this year’s keynote speaker for the annual meeting. It was bad enough that a local journalist was visited by the FBI after reading an article called “Weapons of Mass Stupidity” and being reported for it (at a local Starbuck’s no less). However, this situation is much much more serious.

Dr. Tariq Ramadan is prevented from presenting his plenary address at the November Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Religion because of a controversial decision by the U.S. Homeland Security to revoke his visa to the United States under the Patriot Act. AAR responded to this decision in a letter to the U.S. Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security.

Please visit the AAR site to read all about it.

Dr. Ramadan was supposed to have started a position in the religion department of the University of Notre Dame. As Professor of Islamic Studies (and as a prestigious Luce Professor) he was to direct the “Religion, Conflict and Peacebuilding” program. After going through the rigorous visa process, he had received his visa in April 2004, only to have it rescinded, without explanation, in early August. The Department of State’s decision was reportedly taken on the basis of information provided by the Department of Homeland Security. Neither department has made public any reason for the decision. After accepting the offer and resigning his position at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland, registering his children in a public school in Indiana, and shipping his furniture and belongings, Prof. Ramadan was informed by the US embassy in Switzerland, a few days before his departure, that his visa had been revoked. He is now stuck, bewildered, with his family, in an empty apartment in Switzerland.

Scholars and reputable universities have testified to his academic credentials and his character as a researcher and teacher. The American Association of University Professors, based in Washington, has strongly criticized the decision made by the Homeland Security Department with respect to T. Ramadan, stating that “foreign university professors to whom are offered the possibility of coming to work in an American institution of higher education should not be impeded by our government from entering the United States because of their political convictions, their associations, or their writings.” We need the help of people like him.

Prof. Ramadan is one of the best-known and most popular Islamic scholars and leaders on the planet today. Few other leaders connect to the disaffected Muslim youth of America, Europe and the Middle East like he does. He offers hope and a vision for living as Muslims in the 21st century, for being true to Islamic heritage, culture, and faith while embracing modern, progressive, and democratic values and ideals.

The Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy describes him “as a moderate and reform-minded Muslim scholar” and goes on to say:

“He has written over 20 books and 800 articles, including “To Be a European Muslim” and “Western Muslims and the Future of Islam”. He was described by Time magazine as one of the “100 most likely innovators of the 21st century.”

“Revoking Dr. Ramadan’s visa will not only deprive Notre Dame students of a great educational opportunity, it will also deny the American people and institutions a much needed opportunity to engage the Muslim world in a real and serious dialogue. In addition to his teaching commitments, Dr. Ramadan was invited to participate in a number of high profile conferences including the France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, at Stanford University, a meeting with former President Bill Clinton, and another in Florida with former Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen. Although Dr. Ramadan has voiced criticism of some U.S. and Israeli policies in Palestine, the war in Iraq, and U.S. support for authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, such opinions constitute no reason to deny him a visa.”

The American Academy of Religion argues that “to win the war on terror, the US needs the support of the majority of the 1.4 Billion Muslims around the globe. It must convince them that it holds neither ill feelings nor designs towards Islam or Muslims. Doing so requires:

reaching out to moderate Muslim leaders everywhere, establishing trust, engaging them in a dialogue, and understanding their issues and concerns,

supporting moderate Muslim leaders (both religious and secular) who are calling for a modern, tolerant, peaceful, and democratic interpretation of Islam,

exerting political, diplomatic, and economic pressure on current regimes in the Arab and Muslim world to establish a truly democratic form of government, thus giving millions of people hope for a better future,

Showing the United States as a bastion of freedom, tolerance, and democracy where people of all faiths, including and especially Muslims, can live and thrive in peace, respect, and harmony within a multi-religious, multi-ethnic society.”

For us to win the post-9/11 ideological struggle within Islam and bridge the gulf between the West and much of the Muslim Ummah (community), we desperately need the help of people like Professor Ramadan.

Read the signed statement of American and European Scholars.

“The university professors who have signed this statement are particularly committed to the fundamental freedoms and the policies that welcome foreign scientists and university professors. This permitted, in the past, many European intellectuals, persecuted for their political, religious or philosophical beliefs, to find “asylum” in American universities and to pursue in security their scientific activities.”

This is another example of The Patriot Act being used to control information, quash dissent and even open discussion. The American values of free exchange of ideas and freedom of expression have not been honored here. Welcome to the machine.

2nd Lamentations (Mom’s Bible)

2nd Lamentations (Mom’s Bible)

Comments 1 comment

I haven’t made a "Mom post" in a while. My friend Jacque sent me this, and it had me laughing. Variations on the theme are posted all over the internet, but I finally found a very similar piece by Ian Frazier, which seems to have been the original source. You can read his original version at the Atlantic Monthly site (The Atlantic Monthly; February 1997; Laws Concerning Food and Drink; Household Principles; Lamentations of the Father; Volume 279, No. 2; pages 89 – 90).

Laws Pertaining to Dessert
For we judge between the plate that is unclean and the plate that is clean, saying first, if the plate is clean, then you shall have dessert.
But of the unclean plate, the laws are these: If you have eaten most of your meat, and two bites of your peas with each bite consisting of not less than three peas each, or in total six peas, eaten where I can see, and you have also eaten enough of your potatoes to fill two forks, both forkfuls eaten where I can see, then you shall have dessert. But if you eat a lesser number of peas, and yet you eat the potatoes, still you shall not have dessert; and if you eat the peas, yet leave the potatoes uneaten, you shall not have dessert, no, not even a small portion thereof.
And if you try to deceive by moving the potatoes or peas around with a fork, that it may appear you have eaten what you have not, you will fall into iniquity. And I will know, and you shall have no dessert.

Laws When at Table
And if you are seated in your high chair, or in a chair such as a greater person might use, keep your legs and feet below you as they were. Neither raise up your knees, nor place your feet upon the table, for that is an abomination to me. Yes, even when you have an interesting bandage to show, your feet upon the table are an abomination, and worthy of rebuke.
Drink your milk as it is given you, neither use on it any utensils, nor fork, nor knife, nor spoon, for that is not what they are for; if you will dip your blocks in the milk, and lick it off, you will be sent away.
When you have drunk, let the empty cup then remain upon the table, and do not bite it upon its edge and by your teeth hold it to your face in order to make noises in it sounding like a duck: for you will be sent away.
When you chew your food, keep your mouth closed until you have swallowed, and do not open it to show your brother or your sister what is within; I say to you, do not so, even if your brother or your sister has done the same to you.
Eat your food only; do not eat that which is not food; neither seize the table between your jaws, nor use the raiment of the table to wipe your lips. I say again to you, do not touch it, but leave it as it is.
And though your stick of carrot does indeed resemble a marker, draw not with it upon the table, even in pretend, for we do not do that, that is why.
And though the pieces of broccoli are very like small trees, do not stand them upright to make a forest, because we do not do that, that is why.
Sit just as I have told you, and do not lean to one side or the other, nor slide down until you are nearly slid away. Heed me; for if you sit like that, your hair will go into the syrup. And now behold, even as I have said, it has come to pass.

On Screaming
Do not scream; for it is as if you scream all the time. If you are given a plate on which two foods you do not wish to touch each other are touching each other, your voice rises up even to the ceiling, while you point to the offense with the finger of your right hand; but I say to you, scream not, only remonstrate gently with the server, that the server may correct the fault. Likewise if you receive a portion of fish from which every piece of herbal seasoning has not been scraped off, and the herbal seasoning is loathsome to you and steeped in vileness, again I say, refrain from screaming. Though the vileness overwhelm you, and cause you a faint unto death, make not that sound from within your throat, neither cover your face, nor press your fingers to your nose. For even not I have made the fish as it should be; behold, I eat it myself, yet do not die.

Laws of Forbidden Places
Of the beasts of the field, and of the fishes of the sea, and of all foods that are acceptable in my sight you may eat, but not in the living room.
Of the hoofed animals, broiled or ground into burgers, you may eat, but not in the living room.
Of the cloven-hoofed animal, plain or with cheese, you may eat, but not in the living room.
Of the cereal grains, of the corn and of the wheat and of the oats, and of all the cereals that are of bright color and unknown provenance you may eat, but not in the living room.
Of quiescently frozen dessert and of all frozen after-meal treats you may eat, but absolutely not in the living room.
Of the juices and other beverages, yes, even of those in sippy-cups, you may drink, but not in the living room, neither may you carry such therein. Indeed, when you reach the place where the living room carpet begins, of any food or beverage there you may not eat, neither may you drink.
But if you are sick, and are lying down and watching something, then may you eat in the living room.

Concerning Face and Hands
Cast your countenance upward to the light, and lift your eyes to the hills, that I may more easily wash you off. For the stains are upon you; even to the very back of your head, there is rice thereon.
And in the breast pocket of your garment, and upon the tie of your shoe, rice and other fragments are distributed in a manner wonderful to see.
Only hold yourself still; hold still, I say. Give each finger in its turn for my examination thereof, and also each thumb. Lo, how iniquitous they appear. What I do is as it must be; and you shall not go hence until I have done.

Various Other Laws, Statutes, and Ordinances
Bite not, lest you be cast into quiet time. Neither drink of your own bath water, nor of the bath water of any kind; nor rub your feet on bread, even if it be in the package; nor rub yourself against cars, not against any building; nor eat sand.
Leave the cat alone, for what has the cat done, that you should so afflict it with tape? And hum not the humming in your nose as I read, nor stand between the light and the book. Indeed, you will drive me to madness. Nor forget what I said about the tape.

Complaints and Lamentations
O my children, you are disobedient. For when I tell you what you must do, you argue and dispute hotly even to the littlest detail; and when I do not accede, you cry out, and hit and kick. Yes, and even sometime do you spit, and shout "stupid-head" and other blasphemies, and hit and kick the wall and the molding thereof when you are sent to the corner.
And though the law teaches that no one shall be sent to the corner for more minutes than he has years of age, yet I would leave you there all day, so mighty am I in anger. But upon being sent to the corner you ask straight-away, "Can I come out?" and I reply, "No, you may not come out." And again you ask, and again I give the same reply. But when you ask again a third time, then you may come out.
Hear me, O my children, for the bills they kill me. I pay and pay again, even to the twelfth time in a year, and yet again they mount higher than before.
For our health, that we may be covered, I give six hundred and twenty talents twelve times in a year; but even this covers not the fifteen hundred deductible for each member of the family within a calendar year. And yet for ordinary visits we still are not covered, nor for many medicines, nor for the teeth within our mouths. Guess not at what rage is in my mind, for surely you cannot know.
For I will come to you at the first of the month and at the fifteenth of the month with the bills and a great whining and moan.
And when the month of taxes comes, I will decry the wrong and unfairness of it, and mourn and rend my receipts.
And you shall remember that I am that I am: before, after, and until you are twenty-one. Hear me then, and avoid me in my wrath, O children of me.

Reading Michael Jackson

Reading Michael Jackson

Comments 7 comments

An Ex-JW’s Take

Ok, so here’s my opinion on the Michael Jackson story, offered from no particular professional perspective, but only from my observations of him over the years and my intuitive understandings of the strange psychology of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Michael Jackson does need psychological help. He needs guidance to navigate through the fantasy of magical princehood into some sort of functional adult status. But I do not believe that he is a predator, nor do I believe that he is (at least by any conventional profile) a pedophile.

The most sensitive and talented child in an authoritarian and ambitious JW family, his fame and wealth gave him both adoration and escape. Like an artificial castrato, when he reached a certain age, he became less able to access that escape and tried to reinvent himself. The black glitter glove, like a magic wand, became an early sign of his independence and will, but also reflected a darker side of his psyche. He wanted everything he touched to turn to gold, but he also wanted … protection.

He is, essentially, still a child. He wants to be loved and adored. He is narcissistic. He is playful – all of that is his private world. He is horribly hurt when he is not understood, but he doesn’t have enough touchstones in reality to understand why others can’t understand him, nor to clearly define for himself where the fantasies end and reality begins.

He is a gentle soul – a sweet soul who plays at being bad with a kind of innocence that has always touched me. He really seems to believe that in bringing magic to others’ lives he can avoid becoming a pied piper. If he had left it at the music, it would have been possible – but he wanted to make his reality into his fantasy. His wealth allowed him to do that to some extent, but his world needed a population of children to be complete.

Clearly he has tried to retain the outer image of his youth to match the way he seems to feel inside. He would do almost anything to avoid looking too much like his abusive father, too much like a black man, too much like a man at all. He has wanted the freedom of infinite possibility, without developing mature faith.

The results are plain on his clownish face, but it is a tragic story. He would actually have been quite handsome. If he does have the skin disease, it would be better not to emphasize it with the makeup – his own face has become a mask. His eyes still make me cry.

I have wished for many years to talk with Michael – there is something inside of me that yearns to help heal him.

When I was in high school, I was Hodel in the drama club’s production of Fiddler on the Roof. I got into a little bit of trouble over that, since my JW elders considered it to be exhibitionist, and – at the same time that the Thriller video was coming out – there was some discussion of the appropriateness of participating in the dream sequence that contained “a depiction of the supernatural.” That the whole dream sequence was an elaborate story about a false visitation from a dead wife, told to release Tevye’s oldest daughter from a planned wedding, was irrelevant.

Michael Jackson’s ghoulish face in the video made me laugh, and gave me courage to try all kinds of new roles – and it was also the Thriller video that started his eventual distancing from the JWs. The metamorphosis sequences of spectrums of transposed race and gender – those amazing faces in the later video – were perhaps the best example of morphing technology of the day. And again, I felt he was trying to transcend identity expectations and limitations. It could have been a story of liberation.

And yet somehow it wasn’t. It broke down. Perhaps he’s just in the closet. Perhaps he’s ADHD. Perhaps he just didn’t get enough education. Perhaps it is a version of self-loathing, to try to make everything, absolutely everything, different. Perhaps he has delusions of grandeur. I don’t pretend to understand.

Michael Jackson is one of a kind. I feel so sorry for him.

If he is indeed guilty of something like rape, he should (of course!) be brought to justice. But it’s probably not that simple. I suspect that there is some kind of truth in the charges. Perhaps he was too close physically to some of his child friends and made some of them uncomfortable, especially if they were warned about him – children don’t miss much. Or perhaps this is a way of distancing the child from Michael.

The presence of children is what makes him feel safe – but maybe precisely because of that, he may not really have understand them as true others – maybe to him they are more like pets. It does seem a bit that way with his own children (who I hope will be cared for by some of Michael’s siblings). Or maybe it just started to get too weird for the children themselves to be so near such a charismatic child trapped in an adult’s body. Or perhaps, to be most charitable toward Michael, he’s not really guilty of anything except being a temptation for financial gain by unscrupulous parents.

Normally, I would be offended to see a story such as this take precedence over discussions of the energy bill, medicare, or even the reaction of the British populace to Bush’s visit – but Michael Jackson’s story continues to haunt me. Hang in there, Michael.