Thursday, April 27, 2006

Worth a Try!

This makes a lot of sense ~ read to the end!!! –(gets repetitive, but the last 2 paragraphs make up for it-lesson in supply/demand.

A man eats two eggs each morning for breakfast. When he goes to the grocery store he pays 60 cents a dozen. Since a dozen eggs won't last a week he normally buys two dozen at a time.
One day while buying eggs he notices that the price has risen to 72 cents. The next time he buys groceries, eggs are .76 cents a dozen. When asked to explain the price of eggs the store owner says, "the price has gone up and I have to raise my price accordingly".

This store buys 100 dozen eggs a day. I checked around for a better price and all the distributors have raised their prices. The distributors have begun to buy from the huge egg farms. The small egg farms have been driven out of business.

The huge egg farms sells 100,000 dozen eggs a day to distributors. With no competition, they can set the price as they see fit. The distributors then have to raise their prices to the grocery stores. And on and on and on. As the man kept buying eggs the price kept going up. He saw the big egg trucks delivering 100 dozen eggs each day. Nothing changed there.

He checked out the huge egg farms and found they were selling 100,000 dozen eggs to the distributors daily. Nothing had changed but the price of eggs.

Then week before Thanksgiving the price of eggs shot up to $1.00 a dozen. Again he asked the grocery owner why and was told, "cakes and baking for the holiday". The huge egg farmers know there will be a lot of baking going on and more eggs will be used. Hence, the price of eggs goes up. Expect the same thing at Christmas and other times when family cooking, baking, etc.happen.

This pattern continues until the price of eggs is 2.00 a dozen. The man says,"there must be something we can do about the price of eggs".

He starts talking to all the people in his town and they decide to stop buying eggs. This didn't work because everyone needed eggs. Finally, the man suggested only buying what you need.
He ate 2 eggs a day. On the way home from work he would stop at the grocery and buy two eggs. Everyone in town started buying 2 or 3 eggs a day.

The grocery store owner began complaining that he had too many eggs in his cooler. He told the distributor that he didn't need any eggs. Maybe wouldn't need any all week.
The distributor had eggs piling up at his warehouse. He told the huge egg farms that he didn't have any room for eggs and would not need any for at least two weeks.

At the egg farm, the chickens just kept on laying eggs.

To relieve the pressure, the huge egg farm told the distributor that they could buy the eggs at a lower price. The distributor said, " I don't have the room for the eggs even if they were free".
The distributor told the grocery store owner that he would lower the price of the eggs if the store would start buying again. The grocery store owner said, "I don't have room for more eggs. The customers are only buy 2 or 3 eggs at a time". "Now if you were to drop the price of eggs back down to the original price, the customers would start buying by the dozen again".

The distributors sent that proposal to the huge egg farmers. They liked the price they were getting for their eggs, but them chickens just kept on laying.

Finally, the egg farmers lowered the price of their eggs. But only a few cents. The customers still bought 2 or 3 eggs at a time. They said, "when the price of eggs gets down to where it was before, we will start buying by the dozen."

Slowly the price of eggs started dropping. The distributors had to slash their prices to make room for the eggs coming from the egg farmers. The egg farmers cut their prices because the distributors wouldn't buy at a higher price than they were selling eggs for.

Anyway, they had full warehouses and wouldn't need eggs for quite a while.

And them chickens kept on laying.

Eventually, the egg farmers cut their prices because they were throwing away eggs they couldn't sell. The distributors started buying again because the eggs were priced to where the stores could afford to sell them at the lower price.

And the customers starting buying by the dozen again.

Now, transpose this analogy to the gasoline industry.

What if everyone only bought $10.00 worth of gas each time they pulled to the pump. The dealers tanks would stay semi full all the time. The dealers wouldn't have room for the gas coming from the huge tank farms. The tank farms wouldn't have room for the gas coming from the refining plants. And the refining plants wouldn't have room for the oil being off-loaded from the huge tankers coming from the Middle East.

Just $10.00 each time you buy gas. Don't fill it up. You may have to stop for gas twice a week but, the price should come down.

Think about it.

As an added note...When I buy $10.00 worth of gas, that leaves my tank a little under half full. The way prices are jumping around, you can buy gas for $2.65 a gallon and then the next morning it can be $2.15. If you have your tank full of $2.65 gas you don't have room for the $2.15 gas. You might not understand the economics of only buying two eggs at a time but, you can't buy cheaper gas if your tank is full of the high priced stuff.

Also, don't buy anything else at the gas station, don't give them any more of your hard earned money than what you spend on gas, until the prices come down..

(author unknown)

Saturday, April 22, 2006

I wasn't expecting this...

You scored as Old School Democrat. Old school Democrats emphasize economic justice and opportunity. The Democratic ideal is best summarized by the Four Freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

Old School Democrat

95%

Green

90%

Libertarian

70%

New Democrat

55%

Foreign Policy Hawk

50%

Pro Business Republican

35%

Socially Conservative Republican

10%

What's Your Political Philosophy?
created with QuizFarm.com

Friday, April 21, 2006

A New - but Old - Subject

Another Easter has come and gone, just like thousands of times before. I must confess that I see little change in myself or the world. The prejudice, hatred, and violence that has persisted before and after the Christ’s “resurrection” continues, much of it ironically in the very name of Christianity. I despair…until my thoughts turn to Rachel and Steve’s upcoming wedding.

I consider the most poignant moment of the Passover Seder to be when the celebrant asks the question, “What makes this night different from all others?” It seems a perfectly reasonable question to ask at a wedding, “What makes this moment different from all others?” As Mary and I will celebrate our thirty-fifth anniversary three days after Rachel and Steve exchange their vows, I find this subject to be among the few for which I can claim a practical expertise.

Mary and I are in agreement that a marriage which has spanned so many years has its high moments as well as its low. The highs are ecstatically wonderful, but the lows are those that truly test the foundation of the relationship. While I would not change that moment at the altar of First United Methodist Church in Lincoln, Nebraska when I said “I do,” there are innumerable things that I would have done differently since. There is much truth to the notion that it is so easy to hurt the one you love.

As the apostle Paul so powerfully articulated in the thirteenth chapter of I Corinthians, love is the key; it is also the concept so abstract that it defies concrete definition. Nonetheless, love that becomes the living presence—the third person, if you will—that unites two hearts and two minds will bind the relationship through both the good times and the bad. Love ensures the ability to forgive the mistakes that are inevitably made. Love, as Paul says, endures all things.

Because love does seem to be such an elusive reality, I’m going to devote the next few entries to its further exploration from the perspective of one who’s “been there and done that.” This is not a foolhardy claim to have figured it all out, but rather a desire to share what little I have learned over the years combined with a confession that I have so much yet to learn. I failed to “incite” any comment during Lent, but I surely welcome any thoughts readers may have concerning this new direction.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Easter

And when the Sabbath day was over, Mary of Magdala and Mary the mother of James and Salome bought spices so they could go and embalm him. And very early on the first day of the week they got to the tomb just as the sun was coming up. And they had been asking themselves, “Who will help us roll the stone away from the opening of the tomb?” Then they look up and discover that the stone has been rolled away! (For in fact the stone was very large.)

And when they went into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right, wearing a white robe, and they grew apprehensive.

He says to them, “Don’t be alarmed! You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene who was crucified. He was raised, he is not here! Look at the spot where they put him! But go and tell his disciples, including ‘Rock,’ he is going ahead of you to Galilee! There you will see him, just as he told you.”

And once they got outside, they ran away from the tomb, because great fear and excitement got the better of them. And they didn’t breathe a word of it to anyone: talk about terrified….

(Mark 16:1-8 SV)

After the Sabbath day, at first light on the first day of the week, Mary of Magdala and the other Mary came to inspect the tomb. And just then there was a strong earthquake. You see, a messenger of the Lord had come down from the sky, arrived [at the tomb], rolled away the stone, and was sitting on it. The messenger gave off a dazzling light and wore clothes as white as snow. Now those who kept watch were paralyzed with fear and looked like corpses themselves.

In response the messenger said to the women, “Don’t be frightened! I know you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here! You see, he was raised, just as he said. Come, look at the spot where he was lying. And run, tell his disciples that he has been raised from the dead. Don’t forget, he is going ahead of you to Galilee. There you will see him. Now I have told you so.”

And they hurried away from the tomb, full of apprehension and an overpowering joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

And then Jesus met them saying, “Hello!”

They came up and took hold of his feet and paid him homage.

Then Jesus says to them, “Don’t be afraid. Go tell my companions so they can leave for Galilee, where they will see me.”

(Matthew 28:1-10 SV)

On the first day of the week, at daybreak they made their way to the tomb, bringing the spices they had prepared. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they went inside they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.

And so, while they were still uncertain about what to do, two figures in dazzling clothing suddenly appeared and stood beside them. Out of sheer fright they prostrated themselves on the ground; the men said to them, “Why are you looking for the living among the dead? [He is not here—he was raised.] Remember what he told you while he was still in Galilee: ‘The son of Adam is destined to be turned over to villains, to be crucified, and on the third day to rise.’” Then they recalled what he had said.

And returning from the tomb, they related everything to the eleven and to everybody else. The group included Mary of Magdala and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and the rest of the women companions. They related their story to the apostles; but their story seemed nonsense to them, so they refused to believe the women.

(Luke 24:1-11 SV)

On Sunday, by the half-light of the early morning, Mary of Magdala comes to the tomb—and sees that the stone has been moved away. So she runs and comes to Simon Peter and the other disciple—the one that Jesus loved most—and tells them, “They’ve taken the Master from the tomb, and we don’t know where they’ve put him.”

So Peter and the other disciple went out, and they make their way to the tomb. The two of them were running along together, but the other disciple ran faster than Peter and was the first to reach the tomb. Stooping down, he could see the strips of burial cloth lying there; but he didn’t go in. Then Simon Peter comes along behind him and went in. He too sees the strips of burial cloth there, and also the cloth they had used to cover his head, lying not with the strips of burial cloth but rolled up by itself. Then the other disciple, who had been the first to reach the tomb, came in. He saw all this, and he believed. But since neither of them yet understood the prophecy that he was destined to rise from the dead, these disciples went back home.

Mary, however, stood crying outside, and in her tears she stooped to look into the tomb, and she sees two heavenly messengers in white seated where Jesus’ body had lain, one at the head and the other at the feet.

“Woman, why are you crying?” they ask her.

“They’ve taken my Master away,” she tells them, “and I don’t know where they’ve put him.”

No sooner had she said this than she turned around and sees Jesus standing there—but she didn’t know that it was Jesus.

“Woman,” Jesus says to her, “why are you crying? Who is it you’re looking for?”

She could only suppose that it was the gardener, and so she says to him, “Please, mister, if you’ve moved him, tell me where you’ve put him so I can take him away.”

“Mary,” says Jesus.

She turns around and exclaims in Hebrew, “Rabbi!” (which means “Teacher”).

“Don’t touch me,” Jesus tells her, “because I have not yet gone back to the Father. But go to my brothers and tell them this: ‘I’m going back to my Father and your Father—to my God and your God.’”

Mary of Magdala goes and reports to the disciples, “I have seen the Master,” and relates everything he had told her.

(John 20:1-18 SV)

He comes to us as one unknown, without a name, as of old, by the lakeside [see John 21:1-25], he came to those men who knew him not. He speaks to us the same word “Follow thou me!” and sets us to the tasks which he has to fulfill for our time. He commands. And to those who obey him, whether they be wise or simple, he will reveal himself in the toils, the conflicts, the sufferings which they shall pass through in his fellowship, and as an ineffable mystery, they shall experience in their lives who he is.

(Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus)

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Day Forty

What a strange day this is. Symbolically it represents the last day of the Hebrews’ forty years of wandering in the wilderness. I wonder if they knew that tomorrow they would enter the Promised Land? This is why the gospel texts carried that symbolism forward to Jesus’ forty days in the wilderness prior to the commencement of his itinerant ministry. I wonder if this was the day that he argued with Satan; if he knew that tomorrow would be the day that he would return “in the power of the spirit to Galilee” to begin teaching in the synagogues? (see Luke 4:14-15) And in the Western Christian tradition of Lent this is the day between Jesus’ crucifixion and the Resurrection of the Christ.

This is also the Sabbath, per the Genesis creation stories. Perhaps this explains why—in conjunction with the Hebrew Scriptures’ formulations regarding the Son of Man—it was so important (particularly to the synoptic evangelists) to have the Resurrection occur on the third day rather than during or immediately following the crucifixion. The early Christian creeds took advantage of this “day off” for Jesus to descend into the depths of hell (the history of the creeds and their development offers fascinating reading for those interested in learning more about the subject). Finally, there is a rather weak justification offered for why the tomb of Jesus was left unattended until Sunday morning, even though Shabbat ended at sundown Saturday.

For the contemporary Christian armed with the foreknowledge that tomorrow is Easter, today is the day to run all the last minute errands in preparation for tomorrow’s sunrise services and traditional ham dinners (which were originally intended to keep the Jews away from the table; bet you didn’t know that, did you?) How utterly different it must have been for those first disciples. Today for them must have been a time of intense grieving, disappointment and despair. Their world had literally come apart before their very eyes and the texts imply that any memory of something Jesus’ might have told them about death’s inability to sever their relationship with God was far from their minds. Of course it can’t, but it’s too bad that such a frame of mind could not set the tone for how we ourselves might choose to spend this day.

Friday, April 14, 2006

Day Thirty-nine

Our Lenten journey brings us to the foot of the Cross, and it seems like a very final destination indeed. Just when I was beginning to think that I understood a little bit, to think that I was making some sort of progress, I end up here and I’m not so certain anymore. I can’t find that Jesus ever actually said that I am supposed to join him there—to myself be crucified, that is—so what can its purpose be? I have been told that the early Christian community used the sign of the fish to identify themselves, and that it wasn’t until later that the Cross became the universal symbol of the faith. What am I to make of this instrument of violence, death and destruction now that I stand in its shadow?

I am beginning to understand that the Cross at its nexus of intersecting planes perfectly signifies the meaning and purpose of the Christ, that being the full and complete connection of the self with the Other, the conscious realization that there is no separation. The miracle of birth marks the beginning of this consciousness, but it is difficult to look at death as equally miraculous precisely because in its mysteriousness it appears to be the end of such cognizance. With all due respect to the traditional interpretation that Jesus’ death upon the Cross somehow magically saved humankind, I find it profoundly more meaningful to understand the event as the man’s ultimate demonstration of the Truth that even death cannot destroy the connection!

Actually, scripture and tradition support such a conclusion arrived at through the employment of experience and reason. When I began this series it probably seemed that I came down rather hard on the apostle Paul, but I really meant to be critical of the way his thoughts, too, have been misinterpreted down through the millennia. One test of Truth is its timelessness, and this eternal quality is found in Paul’s words to the early community of believers in Rome: No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:37-39 NRSV)

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Day Thirty-eight

Come; let us share this meal together. We’ve covered a lot of ground—literally and figuratively—these past three years and there are some things we need to talk about. The fate that awaits me is the same as for all mortals, but the circumstances are going to be quite different. You’ve seen that my relationship with Abba is extraordinarily close, and now the time has come for me to show the world that nothing, nothing is powerful enough to destroy it—even death. You need to witness this so that you can believe the same is true for you. I know you want to believe, but your lack of faith in your connection with the Other leaves you fearful of that which is ultimately so natural.

What is different about me from you is my comprehension of the Whole and my realization that I am part of it, not separate from it. You, on the other hand, see yourselves as distinct entities isolated from one another. I have done my best to explain to you that the Other and I are one, just as you and the Other are one. I am in you as you are in me because the Other is in us all and we are all a part of the Other. In our oneness we are equals, no one of us any more deserving of the relationship with Abba than the other. This is why I consider you my friends, not my servants or my slaves. It is why I have been able to treat everyone I meet as my brother or my sister, even the despised and lowly.

I want you to let me do something that is going to make you uncomfortable at first, but with time you will understand why it needed to be done. I am going to wash the dust from your feet to demonstrate that the relationship is about serving, not being served. Perhaps it seems that I am too special, too powerful, too above you to do such a thing, but to think that is to not understand the truth. We sit at the same table. We share from the same loaf and we drink from the same cup. We share the same end just as we share the same beginning. Now come with me to the garden to renew and strengthen our relationship with the Other through prayer. The reign of God is at hand!

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Day Thirty-seven

The chief concern of the Christ is connection. It may be argued that it should be salvation, but the case has been made in this series for the complete and full relationship with the Other to be the most effective means of salvation. The example of Jesus as the Christ is one of unbroken relationship with his Abba, of perfect communion with God. What some find inspiring while others find it disturbing is Jesus’ invitation to join with him in the relationship, apparently without condition or qualification. This is a direct affront to organized religion—whether it was then or now—because control over who gets to be saved and who doesn’t is the kind of power that institutions strenuously covet. Jesus upset the status quo by preaching that anyone can achieve the connection without the requirement of mediation.

If, then, I choose to follow the way of the Christ my chief concern also becomes connection. But not just for myself. With emphasis upon the interconnectedness of the Whole it becomes important that my neighbor also be connected. Like the old fashioned strings of Christmas lights which required all the bulbs to be burning because one being out would cause the whole string to go out, so it is with human connectedness. I may experience some degree of partial relationship with God, but the completeness of the connection is lessened if you, too, are not experiencing the relationship. The more people who consciously experience the relationship the stronger the connection; and this in turn is amplified by the reciprocity of God more fully experiencing the Whole.

What seems to be so incredibly difficult for the human mind to grasp is the utterly volitional nature of choosing to be consciously connected to the Other. From the dawn of time those with some degree of power over others have believed that the connection can somehow be forced or coerced, or that it can be exclusively withheld altogether. For centuries the Church capitalized (and may still) on fear as a means of motivating conformity and obedience, these certainly not to be confused with connectedness. How ironic that such a tactic has been used in the name of the one who repeatedly told his hearers to “fear not!” I cannot force my neighbor to make the connection; I can only by example make it attractive. How powerfully this was understood by the one who said, “Follow me!”

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Day Thirty-six

There seem to be any number of things that can distract my focus and consequently detract from my relationship with the Other. Keeping mindful of the relationship on an ongoing basis is a challenge even when I try to be intentional about it. Harder still is staying cognizant of the Other’s omnipresence in the Whole, most especially when that includes other people who seem so different from me. If I was to prioritize I’m pretty sure that this inability to see and to accept that God is in others just as surely as God is in me ranks as my cardinal sin. This manifests itself as being judgmental, and I am both embarrassed and ashamed at the discovery of the degree to which this condition hampers my relationship with the Creator.

Just as I am not always aware of my relationship with God, so aren’t the others of whom I find myself sitting in judgment. If sin actually is broken relationship with the Infinite then it is a widespread human condition. As I judge others, so they judge me, and a vicious cycle develops that often shuts God out altogether. It is important to remember that God is not absent from these situations, but does end up being “ignored” through a lack of comprehension that is caused by focusing on the wrong thing. Instead of looking at someone who is different from me with an appreciation of God’s diversity (and vice versa) I am much more apt to view her/him from a vantage of superiority because I believe God is less present in them than in me.

Among the traditional passages of scripture to reflect and meditate upon during this Holy Week are the last words of the Christ from the Cross. Again, these are not contained in any one Gospel but have been passed down by the tradition as a composite. Most relevant to my sin of being judgmental is the incomprehensible moment when Jesus looks upon his persecutors and prays, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.” (Luke 23:34 NRSV) That these words are not deemed authentically those of Jesus does not deprive them of the powerful way they speak to the character of the man. If such is the spirit of the Christ, then surely I must begin to look at others with compassion and forgiveness rather than judgment and disdain. If successful, my reward will be a renewed and strengthened connection with God!

Monday, April 10, 2006

Day Thirty-five

Just exactly what happened yesterday? Was it some sort of pep rally to send Jesus off to the cross? What exactly am I supposed to be doing this week to prepare for Easter? Buying a new suit? Making reservations for a champagne brunch? Mapping out where I’ll hide the eggs? I’ve been trying to figure out what to do with the whole Lent thing to begin with, but now I’m getting the impression that I’m somehow supposed to be “changing gears” during this final week. There’s no doubt that we’re headed for the big day—for the Super Bowl of Christianity—but it is a seeming paradox to have entered into a process that’s now supposed to culminate in an event.

Experience and reason are going to be hard pressed to hold their own against tradition and scripture in the coming week. As irreverent as it is, I still have to chuckle at the joke about the child who told his Sunday school teacher that Easter is the day that Jesus comes out of his cave and if he sees his shadow it means there will be six more weeks of winter. Whatever progress has been made in the preceding days toward a possibly new and more meaningful understanding of what Easter is about seems very vulnerable to backsliding into childish (not to be mistaken with childlike) interpretations that must be accepted with blind faith because they are so irrational as to defy an enlightened worldview.

Just as Jesus apparently “connected” with the Other during his wilderness experience in such a way that he was able to move past the temptations that are common to us all, I must hope that I’ve come closer to making a connection of my own that is going to help me not lose sight of where I’ve been and where I’m going. As ironic as it sounds, religion has an inherently powerful ability to interfere with—or to break altogether—the relationship we are intended to have with our Creator. Jesus’ prescription for a strict and absolute way of restoring and enhancing this relationship is intriguingly absent from the gospel texts. One needs look no further, however, than the tradition established by the Church to find such dogma. It’s sad to say, but a church may not be the best place for me to spend the next seven days.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Day Thirty-four

This thirty-fourth day of Lent brings us to the threshold of Holy Week, the time during which we must squarely face our own mortality and see what we can make of it. Early in this series we considered death as the enemy from which we want to be saved, and I’m sure that there are many whose minds remain unchanged in that regard. But for some of us the development of the notion that death could figuratively be referring to the sin of separation rather than the literal cessation of physical function sheds an intriguing light on the path to the Cross. Even the most conservative orthodoxy will not argue that Jesus was crucified to death and then buried, but it requires an open-minded and progressive theology to consider that the subsequent Resurrection is something radically different than resuscitated reanimation.

I am still asked whether or not I have seen Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. I have not, and I will tell you why. For as incredibly cruel and inhumane as Jesus’ crucifixion was, it is not for me the focus of the significance of his life and his teachings—at least not in the way that much of Christianity (and from what I understand, the movie) has come to interpret it. I do not believe that Jesus had to die upon a cross as the exclusive, preordained method for human salvation. Quite to the contrary, Jesus fully and completely revealed “the plan” for salvation in the course of his brief ministry, and his crucifixion served to prove his conviction in the Truth of his teaching to an unbelieving world that was gravely threatened by his message. As the resurrected Christ has perpetuated that Truth down through the ages we have seen the cycle viciously repeated.

Holy Week—which encompasses the Passion of the Christ—is a story of severe disappointment. It is the story of once exuberant crowds who adulated a man who quickly disappointed them by not meeting their selfish expectations of what a Messiah should be. It is the story of disciples disappointed by their own inability to understand their Master’s words and actions, a confusion that ultimately led to betrayal and denial. It is the story of a man who shares with his Abba his disappointment with the way things are coming to a close, wondering out loud if perhaps it couldn’t have ended differently. And it is the story of the most faithful experiencing the utter disappointment of watching their teacher and their friend suffer the death of a common criminal, wondering whether or not there was ever any truth to the things he had led them to believe.

Friday, April 07, 2006

Good News Update

This is just too good not to bring to everyone's attention. It will be interesting to see what the fundamentalists do with this:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/04/07/MNGH6I59QF1.DTL

Day Thirty-three

Let’s see if I’m getting this right. God is always available to the relationship whenever I (or anyone) choose to enter into it. My choice, however, is significantly influenced by my even knowing that it is available to me. My ignorance of its availability does not excuse the resulting brokenness or separation, thus making ignorance of the availability of the relationship a sinful condition. Salvation from this sinful condition comes from being made aware, from being enlightened. A savior from sin, then, becomes one who provides this enlightenment in ways that are truly meaningful to the human consciousness. From such a vantage, Scripture takes on—at least for me—a completely new significance:

Genuine light—the kind that provides light for everyone
—was coming into the world.
Although it was in the world,
and the world came about through its agency,
the world did not recognize it.
It came to its own place,
but its own people were not receptive to it.
But to all who did embrace it,
to those who believed in it.
it gave the right to become children of God.
They were not born from sexual union,
not from physical desire,
and not from male willfulness:
they were born of God.
The divine word and wisdom became human
and made itself at home among us.
We have seen its majesty,
majesty appropriate
to a Father’s only son,
brimming with generosity and truth.
(John 1:9-14 SV)

It was from this same worldview that the ongoing and abiding presence of the Paraclete was revealed, a continuing source of enlightenment that will serve as an everlasting safeguard against the sin of separation. I have personally never understood why it became necessary to look forward to the second coming of Jesus if there was any truth at all to the Resurrection. How can something come back that has never left? It may be regarded as heresy by some, but I’m beginning to think that Easter is significant for some very different reasons than those derived from tradition alone.

Thursday, April 06, 2006

Day Thirty-two

If God is omnipresent (which I believe is true) then God is always available to the relationship. If, then, there are times when the relationship is lacking—or missing altogether—it cannot be because God has absented Itself. In other words, I am the one in control of the degree to which the relationship is comprehended. The model of electricity has helped me to better grasp this concept. Electricity is always available, but anyone wanting to use it must develop a receptive means of “connecting” to it. When the connection is broken or short-circuited is when sin—at least according to the working definition that is being developed in this series—occurs in the spiritual sense.

A number of obvious situations and circumstances that can lead to this sinful condition have already been cited. Paramount among them, however, is when concern for the self overrides consciousness of the Other. When the Other is not acknowledged as an integral component of the self, a skewed perception of reality results. Yes, it is still all about me, but I am nothing without the Other. I may actually grasp this part of the equation, but I am quickly dumbfounded by the realization that what holds true for me applies to the rest of sentient creation. Although I would like to think otherwise, I have no more special access to God than anyone else. Therefore, when I let myself think that I do I once again end up in the sinful condition.

One explanation for why Jesus is remembered two-thousand years after his ministry is that he realized his relationship to the Other more perfectly than anyone before or since. He comprehended that the Other is also the Whole and is thus to be found in everyone and everything. When such a realization is authentic a new level of identification—of empathy—with others as common with the self leads to a remarkable degree of compassion that is remembered to this day as one of Jesus’ preeminent characteristics. Jesus was the flesh and blood embodiment of the Shema, loving God with all his heart, soul and mind, and his neighbor as himself. In this sense, he may well have been without sin which lends profound credence to his salvific gospel that his disciples are capable of following in his footsteps!

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Day Thirty-one

I am truly blessed among all children! My parents inspired and encouraged within me an inquisitiveness about the nature of things that has made life’s journey both worthwhile and meaningful. Dad introduced me (along with thousands of others) to a remarkably progressive theology that I didn’t fully appreciate until I was exposed to more traditional, conservative settings. And while he was occupied with his ministry Mom (the most widely and well read person I know) nurtured the practical aspects of my spiritual development, things like praying, reading the Bible, and going to church and school. Their combined efforts provided me with a worldview that has served me well for over a half-century.

I was extraordinarily fortunate to have been brought up in an environment in which spirituality was regarded as more than just rote catechism. As a result I early on came to understand that something like prayer is more than just reading from a book, more than just memorization, more than just mechanical formulas. Certainly not in so many words, I learned from my parents that prayer is a dynamic process through which one enters into communion with God in an incredibly intimate and personal way. Rather than regard God as some sort of divine Santa Claus that one goes to with a wish list, I was guided toward a much more realistic understanding of prayer as a process of aligning (one of Dad’s favorite terms) oneself with the awesome “I Am”.

I have often wondered if Jesus felt the same way about his parents. Such information is not what the gospel texts intended to communicate. With an emphasis upon the divinity of the babe and later the man, there was little interest in the development of the boy and teenager in between. The tradition has made some attempts to fill in the gaps with childhood stories, but they too are aimed at promoting the miraculous and supernatural rather than the normal and natural character of Jesus. But he had to learn from somewhere that it is not only possible but alright to enter into communion with the Other on such an intimate basis that he called It “Abba” (Daddy)! This may have been Jesus’ first insight (and ours) into the nature of the Paraclete.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Day Thirty

If I use Wesley’s quadrilateral as the formula for improving my dynamic relationship with God, can I find a “common denominator” residing in Scripture, Tradition, Experience, and Reason? As a matter of fact, I can. From all four sources I learn that the “mechanism” which serves to improve an already existing “connection” or to reestablish a lost connection is: prayer. I find overwhelming support of this conclusion from both the Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament (as well as the scriptures of almost every world faith), from the Church’s dogma, doctrine, creed, and ritual, from my own personal experience, and from an objective and empirical analysis of the subject (just do a search of “prayer” to discover how much of the scientific community—particularly medicine—is researching this subject).

This being said, though, the common denominator is subject to diverse and varied interpretations of what constitutes genuine prayer. The Church has its point of view as does Scripture. Experience sometimes does and other times does not coincide with reason. Predictably much of the disparity is generated by different understandings of what the function and purpose of prayer is. I have referred to it as a process of making or improving the connection with the Other, but it would not be hard to find those of the opinion that the purpose of prayer is to petition God to action of some sort or another. Even within the four facets of the quadrilateral this diversity is to be found. Scripture does not present a singular definition for prayer, just as tradition, experience and reason do not either.

I really am going to need help with this one, and the Paraclete would seem just the person to provide it. But how do I get in touch with this rather vague and enigmatic presence? And how can I possibly know that anything I do perceive as the Holy Spirit is not just a figment of my imagination. Both experience and reason inform me that the human mind is powerfully capable of fabricating answers to unanswerable questions. The psychological phenomenon of closure is a proven example of how our minds fill in the gaps when there are uncomfortable “holes” disturbing our comprehension. Nonetheless, the prospect of connecting—of communing—with God, and in the process of diminishing or eliminating sinful separation seems worth an earnest quest for authenticity. I need to learn more about prayer.

Monday, April 03, 2006

Day Twenty-nine

I feel as though I’ve made some progress inasmuch the journey thus far has provided me with a different understanding of where I’m headed, what my spiritual goal may be. I no longer think that my physical death is the ultimate sin to be saved from. In fact I’m beginning to understand that sin may be better understood as a kind of living death that occurs whenever I somehow manage to diminish or sever the dynamic relationship with my Creator, with God. I’ve even succeeded in identifying some of the situations and circumstances which can cause a break in this relationship. All this, however, has left me wondering where I go from here.

I have on occasion sensed the availability of the Paraclete, of the Christ-promised comforter and advisor that serves to make the original experience real and relevant to me today. But this is at best a fleeting experience. Much more constant is the state of separation brought on by either ignorance or distraction (oftentimes both), hopefully less often by intent. Is it possible to reverse this condition so that there is more time spent with the Spirit and less time sinfully separated? And if it is possible, how is it accomplished? Who or what do I turn to for competent advice and counsel? The profound theological insight of John Wesley (1703-1791) revealed in his quadrilateral of Scripture, Tradition, Experience, and Reason provides an answer.

The genius of Wesley’s approach is the combining of these elements into a whole that is held together by what I have come to think of as a dynamic tension. No single element in isolation is sufficient unto itself, even though there has been a faction of United Methodism (the American church that grew out of Wesley’s movement) that continues to bring ever-increasing pressure to bear on the primacy of Scripture. Now free of such infighting I am in a position to look more closely into the Truth of which Wesley speaks, and in the process to perhaps enter into a more constant and salvific relationship with my Creator through the Christ.

Saturday, April 01, 2006

Day Twenty-eight

I really hate never having the wherewithal to get all the things I need. Again, this is just a hair’s breadth away from hating (although ‘resenting’ is probably the more accurate word) those who seem to be able to get whatever they want whenever they want it. I’m constantly bombarded with new things I really must have in order to be happy and fulfilled and my means are simply limited. To maintain my station in life just isn’t enough. My ethic is admirably one of self-improvement and the most obvious sign of success is affluent prosperity. Everything is relative, and it is unfortunate that there are so many in the world living in true poverty. But my ability to send a few dollars their way is contingent upon my having a surplus for myself, and that’s why I hate never having enough.

But wait! Am I not sinning here? Is my insatiable desire for more serving to interfere with—or to break altogether—my relationship with God? Or is it the other way around? The currently popular theology of success purports that it is sinfulness that manifests itself as impoverishment (Third World countries in particular need to take note of this) while material wealth is the reward for having obtained God’s favor and blessing. Therefore good people have plenty and bad people are punished by having to do without. But for as simple as this seems it still does not help me understand how or why the guy in the million-dollar house with a fleet of Mercedes is so much better in the eyes of God than I am. Why, I don’t think he reads the Bible as much as I do!

Speaking of reading the Bible, it’s hard to find an accurate and objective interpretation that supports a theology of success. Indeed, there is much—especially in the gospel texts—that argues just to the contrary. From the Hebrew Scripture’s prohibition of covetousness (remember that this would have been the “bible” that Jesus worked from) to the numerous admonitions of Jesus himself found in the New Testament against letting money and materialism hamper one’s relationship with God, the scriptural message would seem to at the very least caution against equating wealth with righteousness and poverty with sinfulness. Indeed there seems to be an entirely different definition for wealth other than the materialistic one, but I’m so busy chasing the contemporary understanding of success that my exploration of something more will just have to wait. God have mercy on me, a sinner!