Uncategorized

The Long Awaited Review of Beyond Evangelical with Apologies to Frank Viola for being so Late.

So I finished a really good book last night: Beyond Evangelical by Frank Viola.

As you know my lovelies, I agreed to write this review several weeks ago and was almost immediately deluged with life in all its glory and pain. Sadly this all pushed back my reading schedule.

But here we are, today is a new day and I am happy to report that I found Frank’s latest book well worth the read. In it he casts a vision for what the future of Christendom could look like if we were able to move beyond the religious right vs. the religious right squabbles to place beyond or outside of these two options.

In the book he lays out his vision for this third option if you will. He starts out by defining Evangelicalism and defining four different streams within it. He moves on to discuss the history of the movement, the hijacking of the term by the religious right and the push back from the religious left. The book culminates with a discussion of specific ways we can rise above the fray and become not ex-evangelical or even post evangelical but “Beyond Evangelical”.

He suggests we begin to do this by moving…

Beyond Legalism & Libertinism

In short, the libertine lives as if there is no God. The legalist lives as though she/he is God to everyone else…

The legalist doesn’t know that he/she is a legalist and tends to view all non-legalists as libertines.

The libertine doesn’t know that she/he is a libertine and tends to view all non-libertines as legalists.

Without the Holy Spirit’s illumination, this deception is difficult if not impossible to break.

The truth is, we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God. And we all need Jesus Christ to forgive, deliver, and keep us each day from both the defiling acts of the flesh and the self-righteousness of the flesh.

Beyond Deconstruction

Certainty? I’m a Christian: thus I’m absolutely “certain” of that which it is impossible to be “certain.” (2 Timothy 1:12)

It’s hip among some Christians today who have imbibed deconstructionism to believe that certainty is an unnecessary evil. Certainty is the cause of bloodshed, wars, persecution, etc. Yes. Certainty is the root of all evil (so they say).

As a Christian, I’m certain of that which none of us can be certain.

Beyond Self-righteousness

Now . . . shift gears and look at the sins that literally made Jesus angry and provoked Him to issue hot-boiling, scathing rebukes. It was the sins of self-righteousness. And it was aimed at those who sought to shame and humiliate others because of their wrong-doing.

The pure and spotless Lord Jesus Christ turned the pyramid upside down.

Beyond Sectarianism

The fact is, every devoted Christian will be tested on whether they really believe in the oneness of the Body of Christ or whether they deny it deep in their hearts . . . especially when there is pressure from others to embrace a sectarian spirit and exclude other members of the Body.

Religious pressure is a powerful thing. And it is most often contrary to Jesus Christ.

Beyond Calvinism & Arminianism

You can go through your Bible carefully and find biblical texts that better fit the Calvinist model, while others have to nearly be bent to fit it. The same with Arminianism. Some texts refuse to fit neatly into its mold.

Why is this? Because the Bible wasn’t written to Western minds shaped by Aristotelian logic. And so it’s difficult for us (Westerners) to embrace paradox.

Yet Scripture is full of paradox, and Jesus Himself is the Ultimate and Absolute Paradox. He is God. He is Man. He is Divine and Human.

In the end,  I believe Mr. Viola makes a good point. The cause of Christ to love all and serve all and reconcile all is better served not by bickering but rather by embracing the turning tide.

A tide of people who are increasingly Beyond Evangelical:

They are neither left nor right.

They are Christians who have a deep allegiance and devotion to Jesus Christ.

They believe that Jesus alone is this world’s true Lord and He stands above all systems and personalities, even religious.

They love, desire, and stand for the ekklesia, a local body of believers who are enthroning Christ as Head . . . and they believe that the church is Christ existing as a shared-life community, not two hours on Sunday and Wednesday. They don’t advocate any particular church form or structure. They simply want to follow the Lord with others.

This hearty band of Christians from every nation, tribe, kindred and tongue stand for the four notes of classic evangelicalism. But they have gone beyond them.

In addition, they are . . . intensely Christ-centered, Jesus is not only the supreme Lord. Not only the wonderful Savior. But He is All (Col. 3:11).

They are Resurrection life centered. They believe that Jesus, by his resurrection, is still alive and indwells every believer. But more, every believer can live by His indwelling life . . . and this is the meaning of the Christian life. They are also body centered. Christ in known in and through the shared life community called the church, which is His body.

And they are eternal purpose centered. God has a timeless purpose that goes beyond salvation, and He’s never let go of it.

They have gone beyond evangelical. 

Lists, Ambition and One Last Thing

Much has been made in the last week while I was away about a list of the Top 200 Church Bloggers posted by Kent Shaffer. There is also a cover story done by Christianity Today about 50 Women to Watch coming to news stands near you.

And while I do care that Mr Shaffer’s list was 93% white males, I do not care that word of a woman was no where to be found. I honestly don’t care about ever making his list. I also don’t care if Christianity today decides I belong on their list of women to watch even if I do love me some Rachel Held Evans. I appreciate them attempting to celebrate female followers of Jesus who they feel are making an impact, but I personally don’t care if I ever meet the criteria to make their list. For me having a women’s list that is separate from the men’s list is just more of the “our church lets women lead” mentality that Kathy Escobar wrote about recently. This may lead you to ask what I would do if I were ever to make a list such as this one. One way to react is the way Rachel Held Evans did this week in her post Is Ambition a Sin? She explained:

I weighed in a few times myself, thinking that, as one of just three women who made it to the Top 100, no one could accuse me of sour grapes. I even offered some tips regarding search engine optimization, design, posting schedule, and so on, hoping they might help some women whose content is great, but whose blogs might be blipping just under the radar. If we don’t like the list, I reasoned, let’s work to change it!

I agree on the one hand, working to change it is all well and good but in the end there is no doubt this is Mr. Shaffer’s list and he is free to choose whomever he wishes to be on it and it is no skin off my nose if he only decided to include baptists or pastors or  Chevy owners. I also understand, as he does, that his selection “approach is subjective and consequently flawed.”

So the question remains my lovelies, why don’t I care about making a “top Christian _______” list? The reason I don’t care has nothing to do with lack of ambition or feeling that it is unladylike to self-promote. On the contrary, I want to be an influential blogger period: Christian or not. I want to be the Mumford and Sons of blogging. I want my blog to be recognized because it is making the world a better and more beautiful place. I want it to be widely read because it connects on a deep level and maybe just maybe it reflects a spark of the divine and makes people long for more of that which calls us all to be better. This has never been about being influential with church people for me. This is about being influential with people. I believe with all my heart that God has given me words to speak that are worth hearing or I wouldn’t be here. This blog is and has always been about love; loving God and loving my neighbor; speaking out for freedom for the oppressed, and asking how we can see God’s kingdom come here and now in every corner of life. I want that message to go out to as many as humanly possible. And so…I write, because I have to, because I must, because I believe He wants me to or He wouldn’t have given me this heart, these words or this fracking awesome technology that allows us all to be more connected than ever.

Rachel Held Evans asked her readership how they felt about ambition yesterday and I am glad she asked. In Philippians 2 it says that we should “do nothing out of rivalry (some versions say selfish ambition) or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.” It does not say, “Do nothing out of ambition,” but rather selfish ambition. That phrase implies that there is also unselfish ambition. Google defines ambition as:

am·bi·tion/amˈbiSHən/

Noun:
  1. A strong desire to do or to achieve something, typically requiring determination and hard work.
  2. Desire and determination to achieve success.

I don’t know about you my lovelies, but that sounds like a good thing to me. As far as I can tell, I am supposed to love and reconcile as many as I can; I am attempting to achieve that through my writing (among many other avenues); Therefore, I continue to be determined and work hard to do what it takes to succeed, including promotion and branding to ensure that my blog is seen by as many people as possible. Make no mistake, no list can determine the value of what I do here on the blogosphere any more than being named employee of the month or father of the year makes it so. The value of Word of a Woman can only be determined by whether it stirs in you, my lovelies the desire to love God, to love your neighbor, to use your life, your talent and all you are to see the world made a better place.

One last thing…

Mr. Shaffer did publish a response to the female bloggers who objected about not being included called, Open Letter to Christian Women Blogs in which he attempted to explain the list at least in regards to the exclusion of more women’s blogs. Unfortunately, in my opinion he missed the point in his response post. I could go into all the details but that would be missing the point of my own post. 😉 I will just let you read it for yourselves and make your own decisions. I will however make one point. In her response post on the Her.meneutics site, Laura Ortberg Turner relays this discussion:

In an e-mail exchange with Shaffer, a Christianity Today editor inquired as to why Her.meneutics was not on the list. He responded in a way that is indicative of a false dichotomy between “church” and “ministry” within our larger church culture:

“It hasn’t been included because we’ve subjectively decided it doesn’t focus on ministry topics frequently enough. The value in our list (although flawed) is its relatively narrow scope of topical focus. You write good posts, but they tend to be focused more on sex, relationships, adoption, politics, etc. than they are on topics rooted in ministry.”

Mr. Shaffer, this is where you completely lose me. You said that Her.meneutics was not included because their posts “tend to be focused more on sex, relationships, adoption, politics, etc. rather “than they are on topics rooted in ministry.” Really? How are these not topics rooted in ministry? I know no human, male or female, who is not personally invested in relationships, sex, adoption and/or politics. I personally reject the notion that there are ministry and non ministry topics; that posts (or anything else) can be pigeonholed into exclusively secular or uniquely sacred. I would even go so far as to say that you cannot have a blog as a follower of Christ that isn’t about a ministry topic.

In the end however you view the lists, they are subject to the list makers and the criteria they set. So why worry about whether or not I am deemed worthy by Mr. Shaffer or Christianity Today or any other person or group of making their list? Seeing my blog on a list is not my ambition. Love and Liberty and Reconciliation…now those, those are my ambitions. If I happen to end up on some “top whatever list” some day, I will most likely file it away with my Miss Congeniality award from high school, my ADDY award and all my other atta’ girls. They’re nice and all, but in the end, they don’t mean much. What survives in the end isn’t the lists or the accolades but the love and I want to be known for as much of that as possible.

Render unto God that Which is Caesar’s?

So there is this story Jesus tells in the Gospels…

The scribes and the chief priests sought to lay hands on him at that very hour, for they perceived that he had told this parable against them, but they feared the people. So they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor. So they asked him, “Teacher, we know that you speak and teach rightly, and show no partiality, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, “Show me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?” They said, “Caesar’s.” He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they were not able in the presence of the people to catch him in what he said, but marveling at his answer they became silent.        (Luke 20:19-26 ESV)

I have been thinking a lot about this story since a couple weeks ago when I read God and Our Political Platforms by Rachel Held Evans. In it she said,

When Jesus was asked about taxes, he didn’t hold up a coin, point to it dramatically, and shout to the crowd, “WHY ISN’T MY NAME ON THIS?! I NEED YOU GUYS TO GET MY NAME AND PICTURE ON THIS THING—STAT!” (…or whatever the Aramaic equivalent of “STAT” would have been).

No, Jesus, when pressed to use his authority to make a political point said simply,  “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”

I had never thought about this passage in that way before. It was a revelation. Jesus didn’t care that his name wasn’t on the money.

HE DIDN’T CARE.

I think all too often, American Christians spend too much time and effort on rendering to God that which is Caesars and to Caesar that which is God’s. It is a funny thing, I think Jesus understood the seperation of Church and State better than many Christians do. Case in point, this week Governor Rick Perry of our great state of Texas had a conference call in which he attributed the concept of separation of Church and State to Satan. His exact words were,

This separation of church and state, which has been driven by the secularists to remove those people of faith from the public arena, there is nothing farther from the truth…Satan runs across the world with his doubt and with his untruths and what have you and one of the untruths out there is driven — is that people of faith should not be involved in the public arena.

Rick is convinced that the separation of Church and State is a grand conspiracy to keep people of faith out of the public arena. I would suggest (to use his words) that “there is nothing farther from the truth”.  As , The Friendly Atheist said, “people of faith have always been welcome to participate in the public arena. What they can’t do is legislate their religious beliefs; when the Constitution and the Bible are in conflict, the Constitution must win. If you can’t handle that, then you belong in a church and not public office.” I agree. Gov. Perry wants to render to God that which is Caesar’s and to Caesar that which is God’s.  He in effect wants the United States to be a theocracy. He would like to effectively take away the religious freedom our founders fought for from people whose beliefs differ from his. The problem with people of faith making laws based on what they believe to be sinful or permissible is three fold: First you must decide whose religious tenets you are going to make law (i.e. Will we allow drinking? What about dancing? Will all women have to wear skirts and long hair?); Second, you must go against God’s design by denying people the liberty and freedom of will to choose how best to follow God. God gives humans free will, forcing people by law not to “sin” as you define it does not change hearts. Paul actually discusses this in Colossians.

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.
If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.        (Colossians 2:16-23 ESV)

Lastly, when you enact laws based on preferences or even deeply held religious beliefs rather than on “liberty and justice for all” (even when the majority of the people happen to agree with you) you run the risk of someday having laws enacted based on someone else’s religious beliefs. They are fine with someone else’s beliefs being trampled but don’t realize their own could be next. Jesus expects more of us than that. He says, “Love your neighbor as yourself” with no qualifier. That includes your Muslim neighbor, your gay neighbor, your Democrat neighbor, your Jewish neighbor and your Palestinian neighbor. You MUST love them as yourself in order to follow Jesus.

People in Jesus’ time looked for him to be a political or military savior. He was neither. When asked point blank he said give to Caesar that which is his and God that which is his. Jesus was not concerned that his name be on the money or that the Jewish people were being required to pay taxes to Caesar (who the Roman’s regarded as divine). Once again, HE DIDN’T CARE. I think we often spend our time as American Christians fighting battles Jesus would be unconcerned about such as prayer in school, gay marriage and having his name on the money when we should be loving our neighbors, caring for the “least of these” and reconciling people to the lover of their souls. Everything already belongs to God (“The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein” Psalm 24:1). Giving tribute to Caesar or taxes to the US government that they in turn spend on things you may or may not agree with cannot change that.

God will not be erased from existence because we don’t have specific time set aside for praying in the school day, his purpose will not be thwarted nor his cause advanced depending on whether his name is on our currency. His love cannot be stopped because of who we elect as President of the United States or even whether or not the government recognizes same sex marriages. God is not American nor is he partisan. God belongs to all nations and peoples and is at work everywhere in every culture. He is much MUCH bigger than our politics or even our religious beliefs (none of us has everything right, just ask a Pharisee).
Jesus, It seems, is much more concerned with whether his name is written on our heart than on our money.

Related articles

Her mouth said no, but she got pregnant anyway.

So as you may have heard this week Rep. Todd Akin had some truly mortifying things to say about rape.

” First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

Mr. Akin speaks of punishing the rapist and not attacking the child, but what sir of the WOMAN? Shall we punish her as well? I find it telling that Mr.Akin chooses to focus on both the rapist and the baby but completely ignores the woman stuck in the middle. In fact, Mr. Akin’s entire statement here reduces the very real victims of rape to “the female body”. Perhaps he needs to read the article I read today by  on the Huffington Post about how an actual rape victims felt upon reading his statement.

“Rape is so isolating — it ruined my world for a long time,” Law, now 43, said in an interview with The Huffington Post. “If I had had to carry that rapist’s baby to term, quite honestly, I might have taken my life.”

Law said she couldn’t believe her eyes on Sunday when she read that Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin of Missouri declare in an interview that pregnancy from “legitimate rape” is “really rare” because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

“First of all, what is legitimate rape?” she asked. “Whether it’s date rape, whether the woman was beaten to a pulp, whether it’s a 14 or 15-year old kid carrying her father’s child, it doesn’t matter. Having to deliver the baby of a rapist — that’s torture.”

Another rape survivor in Missouri was so incensed by Akin’s comment that she called into St. Louis television station KTVI to share her feelings. “It was like I had been slapped,” she told the anchor. “I heard that comment and I just began to shake. I was fit to be tied.”

The second question that comes to mind is, how exactly does Mr. Akin think that the woman’s body differentiates between rapist sperm and consensual sperm?  Seriously?!?  I certainly hope he wouldn’t suggest that most of the 35k+ women who are impregnated every year as a result of rape must have actually wanted it or they wouldn’t be pregnant. My guess is he would say that is preposterous; however, it is the logical conclusion of his statement.

I find it fascinating that a man who will never have to worry about carrying a child who is the product of rape is presuming to tell women who have been how they should feel and what they should do. Don’t get me wrong, men can be and are raped. “About 3% of American men — or 1 in 33 — have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime,” according to the National Institute of Justice & Centers for Disease Control & Prevention’s Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women Survey, 1998.  The number for women increases to about 1 in 6. The crime is just as violent and shame inducing for a man as it is for a woman however; the man will never be faced with having to carry to term and deliver the child of their attacker. There are 435 voting members of the House of Representatives and 100 members of the Senate. If the statistics were the same for them as it were for the female population 79 of them would be victims of completed rape, 15 of them would be the victims of attempted rape and 4 of them would be pregnant by their attackers. If this were the case I seriously doubt we would be having the same discussion.

This whole thing brings to mind another post I wrote a few months ago called “Raped Too Much”. In which I discussed Liz Trotta’s comments about how women in the military should stop complaining about being “raped too much”.  Statements such as the ones made by Ms. Trotta and Mr. Akin continue to add to what is referred to as “rape culture”. In her book Shakesville, Melissa McEwan defined rape culture this way:

Rape culture is 1 in 6 women being sexually assaulted in their lifetimes. Rape culture is not even talking about the reality that many women are sexually assaulted multiple times in their lives. Rape culture is the way in which the constant threat of sexual assault affects women’s daily movements. Rape culture is telling girls and women to be careful about what you wear, how you wear it, how you carry yourself, where you walk, when you walk there, with whom you walk, whom you trust, what you do, where you do it, with whom you do it, what you drink, how much you drink, whether you make eye contact, if you’re alone, if you’re with a stranger, if you’re in a group, if you’re in a group of strangers, if it’s dark, if the area is unfamiliar, if you’re carrying something, how you carry it, what kind of shoes you’re wearing in case you have to run, what kind of purse you carry, what jewelry you wear, what time it is, what street it is, what environment it is, how many people you sleep with, what kind of people you sleep with, who your friends are, to whom you give your number, who’s around when the delivery guy comes, to get an apartment where you can see who’s at the door before they can see you, to check before you open the door to the delivery guy, to own a dog or a dog-sound-making machine, to get a roommate, to take self-defense, to always be alert always pay attention always watch your back always be aware of your surroundings and never let your guard down for a moment lest you be sexually assaulted and if you are and didn’t follow all the rules it’s your fault.

Apparently now we must also worry about whether our body will betray us by not discerning the rape sperm from the consensual ones and allowing us to become pregnant. Or God forbid proving that a woman actually wanted to have sex with her attacker. The whole thing kind of gives new meaning to “her mouth said no but her [fill in the body part] said yes.”

Just for the record. I do believe in the sanctity of life. I am against late term and partial birth abortion except to save the life of the mother. I believe abortion should happen as rarely as possible. I do not believe people like Mr. Akin have any business criminalizing a woman who chooses not to carry and deliver the child of her rapist. How can that be justice?

Related articles

When Did I Become Such A Dangerous Woman?

Was it when I said, I don’t believe you can Pray Away the Gay?

Maybe it was when I suggested that I am capable of independent thought and that Kent is not responsible nor does he agree with everything I say.

Perhaps it was one of the days I decided to stop being divided in my heart and become an ex-good-Christian woman.

Or maybe it was the day that I decided it wasn’t my job to keep “the peace” when keeping the peace requires the silencing or muting of half of the church.

Most definitely it was the multiple days I encouraged others to take a closer look at what they have always been taught about what God says about homosexuality and consider that maybe there is more to the story.

Certainly it was the day I encouraged other women and men in patriarchal situations to become what God always intended for them to be.

The Scriptures say, as much as it depends on me that I should live at peace with everyone. And I do. But sometimes it does not depend on me. Sometimes the peace comes undone because people do not want to live at peace with me when what I see when I read the scriptures does not match up to what they see. They say I will have to answer to Jesus for every word I have written and spoken. I am ready. I am prepared to stand before the lover of my soul and say that I have tried everything in my power to move people to love God and love each other with no unless. I have not been perfect. I guarantee you I am wrong about some things (as are we all). But I KNOW that what Jesus did is enough to fill the gaps and erase my sin and cover my errors. It is enough for yours too. It is enough for all of ours. As my good friend Sarah said yesterday,

I stand outside, in the wilds, banging my pots and pans, singing loud and strong, into the wind and the cold and the heavens, there is more room! There is more room! There is room for all of us! And then I’ll slide right up next to you, I’ll hook my arm through yours, I’ll lean in, I’ll whisper right into your ear, quiet, loud, it will sound like I’m singing or like I’m preaching, and I’ll say, there is room for you.

Make no mistake about it. Somewhere along the line I fell in with a dangerous crowd. I posted this status last month on fb and i think maybe it fits here.

“You say I run with a dangerous crowd, we ain’t to pretty we ain’t too proud. We might be laughing a bit too loud, but that never hurt no one.”

I have good news this morning. Jesus came for the poor and the sick not for the rich and the well. What many “good” church going people fail to realize is we are all poor and sick because of all that is wrong here and now both in our hearts and in this world. But old things are passing away, and he is making all things new. You bring his kingdom on earth as you love the people around you. God hates no one. His love is for everyone. He can and is making all things new. Our rules we place on ourselves and others seem like they will work (see Col 2) but they have no effect on the heart. Love? now that changes things.

“So c’mon Virginia, give me a sign. Show me a signal. I’ll throw you a line. That stained glass curtain you’re hidin’ behind, never lets in the sun.”

Only the “good” die young.

Here ends Theology 101 with Prof. Billy Joel.

Being dangerous isn’t always a bad thing.

Oh yes, please read this spec-freaking-tacular post by my friend Matt.

 

Related articles

I and My Husband are One, but It Doesn’t Mean We Agree on Everything.

Ruth Graham was once asked if she and Billy agreed on everything. Her response? When two people agree on everything, one of them is unnecessary.

No two people agree on everything. This was true of Billy and Ruth and it is true of Kent and I. Kent and I are fond of saying that we are one, and we are. We are one in heart, one in purpose and one in love. What we are not is one in thought.

When I began this blog, I made an assumption that people would know that it contains my musings, my thoughts, my feelings and my beliefs. Some of these beliefs are ones that my husband and I share, some beliefs are mine alone and some beliefs are still up in the air for one or the other of us.

It has recently come to my attention through loving friends that people who know both of us assume that since I am making my statements in a public forum Kent must have approved them first or that every point I make here is a point he would make himself. For that I have asked his forgiveness. It is not fair to him for my thoughts and statements to be laid at his feet. Hopefully this post helps any misunderstandings to be avoided in the future.

We try to build our relationship on mutual respect and mutual submission. We, by God’s design, sharpen each other through discussion and sometimes hearty debate. We believe that we are each the other’s keeper and we live our lives to love each other. This does not mean that he is responsible for what I say or that he agrees with it. As always (as all of you who know Kent already know), if you want to know what he thinks on a topic, all you have to do is ask him. He has never been known to be shy. For now, just know that whatever I say here is me talking. Some of it is stuff he would say, some of it is not, some is undecided and some is a mixed bag.

Residue

Bitch
Slut
Whore
Fag
Retard
Fat
Stupid
Fairy
Ghetto
Ho
Be careful what you say
Words can’t be unheard
Labels are hard to remove from soul tissue
And leave residue for years
That must be painfully scraped off
And still the scar remains

Women’s History Synchroblog

I will be participating in this Synchroblog in celebration of Women’s History Month.

What topic would you all like to see me cover? Please post suggestions in the comment section.

I will choose the topic for that day from your suggestions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Girls can’t/shouldn’t/wouldn’t want to do that. -or- Rick Santorum & the DISD are out of touch.

Today Rick Santorum is in serious spin mode. Yesterday he said, “I want to create every opportunity for women to be able to serve this country, and they do so in an amazing and wonderful way and they’re a great addition — and they have been for a long time — to the armed services of our country.”  BUT?  “But I do have concerns about women in front-line combat, I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission, because of other types of emotions that are involved,” Santorum continued. “It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat, and I think that’s probably not in the best interest of men, women or the mission.”

This morning on the Today show he qualified his statement this way. “I think that when you have men and women in combat, I think men have emotions when you see a women in harm’s way I think that’s something that’s natural that’s very much in our culture to be protective. That was my concern, I think that’s a concern with all the military.”

I personally am with of the Washington Post on this one. In her article she says, “At first, he questions the prospect of women in the military serving in roles closer to the front lines because of “other types of emotions that are involved.” Then he clarifies it to say he meant men’s emotions, their cultural tendency to “be protective” that would surely skew their decisions in combat. So he insults the professionalism, sacrifice and military discipline of both male and female soldiers. I don’t think that solves his problem.”

Somewhere in the second theater of the war…

Last night after finishing a fantastic family night of takeout Chinese and American Idol the news popped on, here we heard this story:

DALLAS – The Dallas school district took students on a $57,000 field trip Thursday to see a movie.

The district bused about 5,000 fifth grade boys to the Mesquite 30 Theater to see the movie “Red Tails” because it coincides with lessons about World War II and Black History Month.

The movie is about the Tuskegee Airmen, the African American pilots who distinguished themselves by their bravery during the war.

The fifth grade girls had to stay behind and watch the movie “Akeelah and the Bee” in the classroom. That’s because teachers decided the trip would appeal more to boys than girls. But later this month the girls will get their turn on a field trip to visit with a group of female mentors.

Still, some parents think the Tuskegee Airmen field trip would have been good for boys and girls.

“That doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. I think they all would have enjoyed it. It’s part of history. They should have been able to go see it,” said Amanda Copeland, a parent.

The districts admits it did have to pay up $32,000 to rent the movie theater and $25,000 for bus transportation, but said it will get reimbursed with federal grant money.

I have a NUMBER of issues with this.

#1. “Teachers decided the trip would appeal more to boys than girls” The boys saw Red Tails about the Tuskegee Airmen and the girls will be going to hear a group of 100 women mentors. Really?

#2. In another article Dallas ISD spokesman Jon Dahlander said, “There is only so much available space at the movie theater, so the decision was made for boys to attend the movie” Really?

#3. Separating the kids by gender for field trips has been going on for a couple years

#4. We are going to spend 57k taking 5000 boys to this movie when we have a 25 million dollar budget shortfall in the DISD, we laid off at least 200 teachers last year, and we closed 11 schools last year? Really?

#5. Its okay, we are (probably) going to be reimbursed by the Federal Government. Really?

Now to address them

#1. Did they ask the kids what appealed to them more or are they assuming because it is about war and the Tuskegee Airmen (who were all men) that the girls wouldn’t be interested? That is akin to only sending the African American children because the Tuskegee Airmen were all African American. Ridiculous. Also, since when is what appeals more to the kids the issue? Are we not making the decision based on educational points. The District is now trying to claim that is was an educational decision. The District said this was a supplement to the unit on WWII that the kids are learning about in the classroom. So what, pray tell, does Akeelah and the Bee have to do with WWII? Why did the boys receive the supplement to the unit and the girls did not? Retired Air Force Capt. Barbara A. Wilson, who manages a website about women in the military, called Dallas ISD’s decision to exclude girls ridiculous. “It sounds like something from the dark ages,” she said. “What century is this?” I would recommend they read about the women of the Israel Defense Forces. One recent graduate of their Ground Forces officer training course, Orian Levy who is 19 years old, enlisted in 2009, to be a combat soldier at the MLRS battalion in the Artillery Corps. Even though she serves in a unit specializing in operating heavy weaponry, she says that “female combat soldiers are treated just the same as male ones.” It was very important to her to go to officer’s course, from which she graduated with honors, in order to instill values in her soldiers. Her motto is: “I’ve always been there for my friends, and I will be there for my future soldiers.”

I have the same concern with why the boys won’t be going to hear the 100 women mentors later this month. This just says to the boys, women mentors are only for girls; they have nothing to offer to boys. Perhaps if we begin affording boys more exposure to powerful and successful women we will change the thought that men and boys have nothing to learn from them. I really hoped we were getting past these types of things in society if not in the church.

#2. Shelley Correll, an associate sociology professor at Stanford University who writes about gender equity in education, said Dallas ISD should have provided equal opportunities for all students. “Not having space for everyone does not justify using gender to decide who gets to participate in an educational outing,” she said. “This sort of blatant gender discrimination is actually quite shocking in 2012.” THAT.

#3. According to the DISD rep this is not out of the ordinary. How is this supposed to make me feel better? It just makes me think why did it take us this long to hear about it? Was it the money? If so that is sad. Just sad.

#4. I have seen people saying that the 11 or so dollars per kid isn’t that expensive for a field trip. However as my brilliant husband said in a Facebook comment thread on this subject, “$60k may or may not be cheap, but that isn’t the point. In this terrible economy, one can buy a Hatteras Yacht really, really cheap. But if a person cannot afford to pay their rent on their apartment, it probably isn’t a good idea to go spend money on a yacht. This is just another example of unwise government spending.” I do love that man.

#5. This is supposed to make me feel better? As my amazing husband also said so eloquently in the same thread, “Reimbursed by federal grant money? So, let me see if I get this right. WE pay OUR taxes to D.C, they scrub off a bunch to pay a boat load of bureaucrats to sit around and decide that the money should be earmarked for special events (like movies?), DISD pays a boat load of bureaucrats to decide to use the grant money to take kids to the movies, and I am now supposed to be happy with DISD’s explanation that none of “our” money was used? Huh? Do people really believe there is some magical source of money flowing from D.C.? News flash for DISD leaders: It is our money!” Um yeah, we are the federal government and, by the way, this is part of the reason why the Federal Government is swimming in the red.

Some days I am encouraged by the way things are going and the progress that is being made. Some days, I decidedly am not.

Still Following the Treasure Map

When you were a child did you ever dream of finding a treasure map? Did you imagine following the steps and paces; turning north at the large rock and digging beneath the branches of the big tree? Did you envision wiping away the dirt from the top of the trunk, prying open the lid and marveling at the treasure inside?

I am discovering recently that my life has been a treasure map of sorts; except that ,well, there is no actual map. It is a map – if you will – that  is in my heart. It hasn’t always been easy to read and the treasure isn’t just something I believe I will find at the end of a rainbow or under the big black X, but something rather that I am accumulating along the journey of becoming. It is the treasure accumulated by climbing the large hills, facing adversity and the elements to find an oft obscured dotted line on a map I cannot see that brings me unexpected and unforetold treasure.  I am finding that sometimes the turns come when I think they shouldn’t and take me to places you never thought you would go. I am also discovering that the treasure I am collecting comes in many forms: The surprising discovery of a new talent that brings me joy and daily challenge to be better, the unending gift of friends who have your back when the world comes crashing in and also are appropriately giddy when you have good news, a community where love and Jesus compel us forward and the astounding challenge and ridiculous privilege of being a parent. Best of all, a loyal  travel companion who is ame every dot of the way undergirding me with his love.

If there is one thing I have learned on my quest it is that as I walk the path of my life, even when it is hard to discover, the little dotted line that stretches out behind me all the way to 1969 keeps revealing itself with surprising little dots of wonder and heartache and confetti laced celebration. I can’t wait to see the places my invisible map still has to take me. I do know this; I need a bigger treasure chest.