Alms, not Tithes

The Widows Mite, Ravenna mosaic
The Widows Mite, Ravenna mosaic

I have never heard an evangelical sermon on almsgiving.

Despite countless texts in the Hebrew Bible about generosity toward the poor, the example of the first Christians, and a long tradition of the practice, especially during Lent, I have rarely heard the word mentioned in my adult life as a Christian. “Tithes and offerings,” yes of course, and many are the sermons I have heard about the generic subject of “stewardship” or “giving,” but rarely has anyone explained to me what “almsgiving” means and how it relates to other kinds of giving practices.

The other day as I sat in the sanctuary it hit me that the “Bible-believing” churches, pastors, and teachers I’ve sat under and those like me who’ve come forth trained under their direction have gotten the subject of Christian generosity and serving others with our resources all jumbled up. We don’t grasp some important distinctions when it comes to “biblical giving.”

Take the tithe, for example. I still hear people talk about it all the time. I still hear churches urge tithing as a fundamental Christian duty. Even in churches that don’t use the term or think of it as a NT concept, it seems to me that most churches have functionally taught the basic principle of the tithe.

This may surprise you, but that basic principle of tithing is not the concept of giving 10%. 10% is the amount a tithe represents, but it doesn’t describe why the Old Testament required tithing.

The fundamental point of the tithe in Israel was to maintain the theocracy. The various tithes required in the law went primarily to support the Temple, the priesthood, the government and civic institutions of the nation. There were charitable uses for tithes as well and special tithes specifically for that purpose, but always in the context of national and civic responsibility. The tithe was the taxation engine of the nation of Israel to support their life in the Promised Land.

In other words, paying your tithes in ancient Israel = paying your taxes.

The basic principle of the tithe is that it was mandated to keep the God-ordained institutions running. Of course, even the tithe was to be given out of recognition that God owned everything, that he was the true King, and that he had redeemed them and provided the Land for them. It was not simply a civic obligation. As citizens in a theocracy, giving tithes was an expression of their faith, gratitude, and love for their neighbors. I am not denying the spiritual import of the tithe. But it is important to see that the tithe was primarily the financial means of supporting Israel’s infrastructure as they lived as a nation in the Land under the Law.

That is why you will find precious little about the tithe in the New Testament for the Church of Jesus Christ. It is not because for Christians “stewardship” and “giving” changed from being something “required” to something “voluntary,” a statement which I have heard (and taught) a thousand times. Rather, it’s because there was no longer a Temple, a priesthood, or a nation to underwrite — they were all fulfilled in Christ. There is no more localized, institutionalized theocracy to maintain!

However, churches have taken this basic principle of the tithe — mandated institutional support — and transferred it to the Church (as an institution). Whether they call it “tithing” or not, whether they uphold a 10% standard or not, churches that teach that Christians are responsible to do their primary giving to “support the Church” are advocating the principle of the tithe. When ministers teach that Christians’ first giving responsibility is to “support the Church” and her ministries, they are revealing a “tithe” mentality.

And I think they are completely missing the boat when it comes to what scripture is urging us to practice.

Now, I am okay with giving to my church to support its vocational ministers (as encouraged by Paul) and to help provide a place and programs to advance the cause of Christ. I happen to think it’s a worthy cause. But I see it as more of a practical necessity than a requirement. There is no “biblical” command that Christians must underwrite buildings, organizations, various kinds of staff, or programs and projects to “build the church” or maintain it.

Indeed, I would dare to say that most of this kind of “giving” is not the kind Jesus and the apostles, or even the law and prophets are talking about at all when advocating generosity and charitable giving. “Supporting the Church” is not the NT meaning of “giving.”

widows-mite-lInstead, I would argue that exhortations and examples of Christian giving, as presented in the NT, are based on the concepts associated with almsgiving.

This is a different kind of giving. Almsgiving is not grounded in the need to support theocratic institutions, but on the specific call to “remember the poor” (Galatians 2:10).

When speaking of the responsibility of God’s people to practice charity and generosity to others, particularly the poor, the Talmudic Rabbis used a Hebrew word which indicates compassion for others that arises from a love of justice (צְדָקָה, ẓedakah). Greek-speaking Jews used the word ἐλεημοσύνη (mercifulness). The Jewish Encyclopedia summarizes the concept they were trying to communicate as: “charity in the spirit of uprightness or justice.” This is exactly the way Jesus talked about it too; he called it “practicing righteousness” (Matthew 6:1). When the “haves” share their abundance to help the “have nots” have peace and security, this promotes the process of turning the world rightside-up.

Thus, almsgiving takes us in a different direction than mandated institutional support. It takes us outside the realm of “paying taxes” and “supporting the enterprise” into the realm of caring for others through generosity.

And so in the NT we read of the needy man outside the Temple to whom people gave alms as they entered (Acts 3:2). We have a Gentile exemplar of almsgiving in Cornelius: “He was a devout man who feared God with all his household; he gave alms generously to the people and prayed constantly to God” (Acts 10:2). When Jesus pointed out the widow who was giving her “mite,” she was putting coins in an alms-box outside the Temple, not paying her tithes. Though poor herself, she sought to help others even less well off. One of the Apostle Paul’s greatest projects was to raise alms from his Gentile churches that he might present to their poorer brethren in Palestine, not only as an act of compassionate care, but also as a sign of unity in Christ. Some of the strongest passages in the NT on the subject of generous giving grew out of this charitable effort (1Corinthians 16:1-4; 2Corinthians 8-9), and the underlying principle is that of almsgiving — caring for others through generosity.

I used to think that the primary difference between “giving” under the Old Covenant and “giving” under the New Covenant involved a law vs. grace issue. Under Moses, charitable giving was required and specified through the 10% rule. However, in Jesus I was taught that we practice “grace giving” — we give freely to others because Christ gave himself freely for us. Turns out it’s not that simple. It is not just law vs. grace, required vs. voluntary, 10% tithe vs. sacrificial giving. There is as much or more about grace and gratitude and compassion, justice, generosity and sacrificial giving in the OT as in the NT. The NT instructions about such giving, indeed, grow directly out of the OT soil of almsgiving.

Unfortunately, over the years churches and ministers and teachers have gotten it all jumbled up so that people don’t really understand the basic principles and purposes of charitable giving. As a result, the focus has been on “supporting the Church” and not on “caring for the poor.” It has been about following a principle which underlies the theocratic notion of tithing rather than on giving focused attention to caring for the needy.

Christians are not the nation of Israel any longer, and we do not have the Temple and the priesthood, theocratic institutions to maintain or civic responsibilities in the Promised Land to uphold. Therefore, we don’t tithe anymore. We are citizens in all lands, and if you pay your taxes and support good civic causes, you are already doing the equivalent of “tithing” in Israel.

And once again, I must also reiterate: if you want to support your church or Christian organization in that way, you are free to do so and it may indeed be a wise investment in the work of the Kingdom. But don’t let any preacher lay on you the responsibility to “tithe” or suggest that giving to “support the church” is a “biblical” description of what God requires. It’s not about maintaining the infrastructure and keeping the institutions of theocracy going. At the core it’s about doing what Jesus did — practicing generosity so that others might have life and have it more abundantly.

I don’t have space in this post to explore various dimensions of what it means to give alms, to practice “charity in the spirit of uprightness or justice.” Suffice it for now to say that the focus is on caring for others in genuinely compassionate and just ways and doing so with grace and generosity. This can be done through individual acts and gifts of charity or in more organized and extended ways through trustworthy organizations that exist for such a purpose.

Perhaps we’ll explore that further in another post. Lent is an ideal time to think about these things.

Bottom line? Jesus-shaped giving, almsgiving, is all about loving our neighbors from the heart — in practical, generous ways — because of the love and grace God has shown us, so that his righteousness and peace may fill the earth.

Randy Thompson: Religious Virtuosity — The Spiritual Life on Automatic Pilot 

Mickey Mouse - Take a bow!  by melmike-threadless
Mickey Mouse – Take a bow! by melmike-threadless (link below)

Growing up is, among other possibilities, a process of learning how to do things. We learn to walk and talk, to tie our shoes, and to tell the difference between the men’s room and the ladies’ room. Much of what happens later in life builds on such foundational skills. For example, we learn to drive and fly airplanes because we first learned to walk and tie our shoelaces.  Learning to ask questions is rooted in learning to talk, and so on.

Among the things we learn to do is religion, which is arguably something innate in human beings, although in a rather confused and vague form.  Like learning to talk or write, we learn to “do” religion by learning to do religious things, such as pray, sing, and think (and talk) about what we believe.  These religious activities all become learned behaviors which become part of our life and which most of us don’t think much about.  These behaviors are important, but they can have a dark side.

Recently I’ve been thinking about how easy it is for Christian people to mistake such learned behaviors for communion with God. I’ve been struck by how easy it is for us to practice these behaviors in such a way that we end up as performers, playing a religious role for God’s benefit. And it doesn’t end there, either. We can easily slip over into playing a role for the respect and admiration of others. Worse, we end up so impressed with how skilled we are in these learned behaviors that we confuse our behavior with knowing God. Instead of talking with God, we end up talking at God.  Our praying becomes a recitation, rather like a grade school student reciting Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to her teacher to fulfill a class assignment.  We start out trying to do good for God’s sake and end up doing good in order to look good or feel good.  Usually without knowing it, we find ourselves using our learned behaviors to play a role, where we end up performing for a human audience and even for ourselves, thereby maintaining a public persona for the admiration of others and a self-image that we can live with, and even admire.

Unfortunately, in doing so, we can lose sight of God’s love for us and we lose our capacity to receive that love.  God, along with his creatures, becomes an audience for which we perform. When we think we hear the audience applauding us, we’re happy. When we don’t, we feel worthless and inadequate.  In worst case scenarios, our identity, who we really are, decays into the learned behaviors which earn us the applause we seek.

Jesus speaks to this state of affairs when he talks about the “hypocrites” who put on a good show when they pray, “standing in the synagogue or on a street corners” to be seen by others (Matthew 6:5, NIV).  These are folks who learned how to do something religious but forgot who they’re talking to, and settled for an audience.

Learned behaviors can look very impressive, at least at a glance, but the more you look at the persona these behaviors create, the more you sense that there’s something missing, and what’s missing is the person playing  the role. When the person is missing, so is the capacity for authentic relationships, particularly with God.  One ends up performing a role in a play of one’s own devising, sometimes with a hope that someday the role will give birth to a real person, like the wooden puppet  Pinocchio becoming a real boy.  Unfortunately, this fairy tale typically does not happen in real life.  As much as we would like to become the person we pretend to be, we remain a wooden puppet pretending to be a real boy.

Recently, all  this was brought home to me in a prayer group. This group is a genuine and supportive one, a place where it is safe to share life’s difficulties and anxieties. Occasionally, we have visitors who can’t participate regularly due to their work schedules. A few months ago, one of these visitors joined us one morning for prayer, and when he prayed, something struck me as odd. I’ve learned, over the years, to pay attention to things that strike me as odd, so I did here.

When this fellow started to pray, it was as though he turned on some sort of mental switch and became a different person. A normal guy in conversation, he became much less normal while talking to God, or I should say, talking at God. While praying, he spoke in an energetic singsong, staccato voice, with words flying out of his mouth as though it was a machinegun aimed at the heavens.  He seemed to disappear as a person and become something else, as though God would not listen to him unless he could muster up a suitable amount of psychic energy to get His attention. As a performance piece, it was Pentecostal virtuosity. But, it felt to me like it was a learned behavior rather than a heart-to-heart conversation between persons.

I must quickly acknowledge that I do not know this gentleman’s heart, nor am I making judgments about it or his relationship with God. Heaven knows, most anyone could find any number of oddities and hypocrisies in me. I know full well that God listens to all of us way more attentively than we deserve. It is a mark of God’s grace that He can put up with a lot of craziness in His children. Indeed, it is a mark of God’s grace that we can converse with Him at all. At the least, prayer is where God listens to us when we don’t know what we’re talking about, with the aim of helping us make sense. (I, for one, am a work in progress in this regard.)

That said, I think it is important to know the difference between talking with God in a meeting of persons and talking at God in a learned behavior. In other words, it is important to know the difference between being in a love relationship with God and playing a role in some sort of performance for God’s benefit and that of others. Since we are who we are in God’s sight, and not what we pretend to be, the mumbled, inarticulate prayer of confession or intercession is more authentic than a display of religious virtuosity.

Picture22This propensity to flip a mental switch and become someone else is not just something you find in prayer meetings, though. It is a malady very commonly found among clergy. Many years ago, we had a friend who was a Baptist minister. He was a perfectly normal person and someone we enjoyed spending time with.  However, the first time we attended his church we were in for quite a surprise, for our friend the normal person didn’t show up at the service. Instead of our friend, his persona, Rev. Clergy Pastor, showed up.  The change was jarring.  The friendly, normal guy we knew became  a religious professional, speaking in a pious, feel-good,  sing-song with all the right inflections, suggesting empathy without actually offering it. (Think of Rev. Clergy Pastor  as being a less depressed version of Homer Simpson’s pastor, Rev. Lovejoy.)

Of course, Baptists and Pentecostals don’t have a monopoly on religious virtuosity. I’ve bumped into mainline clergy who have learned to play an ecclesiastical role that is both unctuous and clammy, channeling “Mother Church” with a glazed-eyed compassionate smile  and a whiff of other-worldliness.

It is relatively easy to see the spiritual or ecclesiastical roles others’ play and fail to notice that we too can slip into similar roles, going for long stretches in our relationship with God where we dutifully do what we think will make God happy and keep Him off our backs at the same time. We can pray, worship, preach sermons, chair committees and read our Bibles (including the study notes) while on spiritual automatic pilot. The religious activities go on with the self not showing up to participate.

We have every reason to believe that God is present always, but we also should humbly acknowledge that we ourselves often are not.  And when we are not present to God as persons, we aren’t present to God at all. We’re merely doing religious things that look good.  We all have spiritual seasons like this, of course.  The danger is getting used to such seasons so that we become numbly self-satisfied with our performance, especially when others compliment us or encourage us in such behavior

Mistaking learned behaviors for knowing God can become a sort of soul suicide, where we become a series of behaviors without anything linking them all together . Recently we met someone and shared several meals with him. He was a pastor. Speaking with him, or should I say listening to him, was exhausting. After several meals together, we were left with no sense at all of who he was. His conversation was a monologue,  consisting entirely of ministry anecdotes rattled off in an almost stream of consciousness style.   He had his ministry role and he played it. He knew what to do, and did it. And yet, there was no sense at all of the actor playing the role, and no sense of the one doing all the doing.

An extreme case, perhaps.  But how many believers have you met who seem to be little more than a recorded message of what they’ve done and what they’ve accomplished?  How many  folks have you met who’ve mastered a vocabulary and say all the right things, but seem not to be in touch with what they’re saying?

And finally, dear reader, what about you and me?  We all at times recognize the spiritual truth about ourselves of which the King in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” describes:

My words fly up, my thoughts remain below:
Words without thoughts never to heaven go.

I for one certainly know what it is like to be a collection of learned behaviors and to acquire a vocabulary of words without thoughts.

Many years ago, having just completed an elaborate negotiation to bring a prominent scholar to speak for the organization of which I was the head, I sat back in my chair, pleased with myself at having pulled off this negotiation.  But then, unbidden,  came an insight I wasn’t prepared for, and which I was too naive and dumb to understand.  I suddenly realized that I was a series of activities and there was nothing holding any of them together.  An odd insight, I thought at the time, and then I went off to do something else.  A year later, I started to fall apart. My life had become the sad and even grim cliché about the lights being on and there being no one at home.  All my successful behaviors turned into uncontrolled stress and raging anxiety.

By God’s grace, friends provided a week at a retreat center out in the country. For a week, I did nothing but sleep, walk, read the Bible, and pray. Slowly, I started becoming a person again. ly, God cultivated in my wreckage a person with whom He could carry on a relationship, someone who could recognize His love and respond to it.  There would be other lessons later, some of them painful, and I would have still more to learn about how deep-seated the urge to perform is,  but this one was the prerequisite for the many lessons that were to follow.

Jesus warned us not to stand on street corners and pray loudly for the applause of passers-by, and he warned us not to “heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do” (Matthew 6:5-8, ESV).  Yet, we have tended to apply his words to folks we don’t approve of. It rarely occurs to us that these words are intended for us–me!–and  that we ourselves are always in danger of becoming Jesus’ hypocrites and Gentiles.  Are my prayers intended to be overheard by those around me? Is my brain engaged when I’m talking with God, or am I heaping up pious phrases that are the spiritual equivalents of helium balloons?

If we’re a performer, “the show must go on!” But, if we’re human beings and disciples of Christ, then the “show” must stop. No amount of performing or acting gains us the applause of heaven. “Well done, good and faithful servant” is reserved for persons, not performers.

• • •

Header Art: melmike-threadless on DeviantArt

Music Monday: There are years, and there are Years (part 1: 2014)

Roseanne Cash and John Leventhal
Roseanne Cash and John Leventhal

When it comes to music, there are years, and there are years. 2014 was a year. 2015 looks like it may be a year. Since I didn’t do an end-of-the-year review of music in December, I’ll write about the first today and we’ll focus on the second next Monday.

It would be hard to overestimate how much music means to me and how the songs and albums I listen to each year accompany and shape my life. Apart from my wife and family, these songs are my best friends and we share almost every day together. I am thrilled to have this forum to talk about them with you.

2014 was a relatively sleepy year for me in music. Few spectacular albums were released, nor did many concerts of note come to town. Gail and I and some friends did enjoy seeing John Gorka here in Indy last spring and his album, Bright Side of Down, proved to be a satisfying listen for folk fans like me. Gorka is one of the brightest, cleverest lyricists you’ll hear, and his talents are aging along with him like fine wine.

Here’s a performance of a song from the record that’s appropriate for the season we’re in here in the Midwest, called “Thirstier Wind.”

That concert also introduced me to an artist I had not known before. Appearing with John was a German-born folksinger who came to the U.S. and grew up in Delaware, named Antje Duvekot. Her deeply personal and melodic songs were a perfect accompaniment to Gorka. Antje’s most recent album was released in 2012 and is called New Siberia. I was especially impressed by two songs that she sang that evening. The first was a tribute to her grandmother called Anna (available at Antje’s website), and it brought tears to my eyes as she described the fading light of a loved one in old age. The second was her song Long Way, about a memorable road trip throughout the U.S.

Here, she sings it in performance:

In addition I enjoyed Jackson Browne’s Standing In The Breach and welcomed the return of Natalie Merchant through her self-titled record. Gail and I also took one of our regular pilgrimages to hear James Taylor in concert on a lovely summer evening by Lake Winnipesaukee in NH. Besides that, the year was pretty quiet. It gave me a chance to explore some other artists I had somehow missed over the years, including Bill Mallonee and Josh Rouse, and to catch up on some good music from 2013 that I had put on hold, such as Jason Isbell’s Southeastern.

• • •

And now, the very best of 2014 . . .

The album of the year for me was Roseanne Cash’s The River & The Thread. More than four years after her remarkable record, The List, which I wrote about in 2013, Cash again teamed up with her husband John Leventhal to produce a great collection of classic American music. It won 3 Grammys, was voted Rolling Stone’s Country Album of the Year, and was deemed the number one album of the year by the Americana Music Association. Unfortunately, we couldn’t catch her show here in Indianapolis last September.

The River and the Thread involves an evocative journey through the American South, Cash’s family ties and other influences, and her own heart. Below is a video in which Cash gives us a tour through the process of making this record. As it says on her website, in this film “we see her creative process, witness her emotional connections and feel the power of her stories.” If you get one album from 2014, this is the one I recommend.

Sundays with Michael Spencer: March 15, 2015

baylor+heart+transplant

Note from CM: We are only about a month away from the fifth anniversary of Michael Spencer’s death. Each Sunday this year we are re-posting some of his encouraging, challenging words. Today we present a longer piece that was first published in March 2006, called “Dying We Live: Pat’s Story.”

• • •

I never knew Pat when he was healthy. I first heard his name in the aftermath of a massive heart attack that visited him one night and left him a weakened and depleted man compared to what he had been before.

Over the years, I caught a glimpse of the old Pat. He was a man’s man. Loud and opinionated, he didn’t mind dominating a conversation. He could be a bit arrogant and argumentative, but he also had a tender side that laughed, teared up and loved to hug. Pat had not always been a Christian. He’d been a drinker in his past life, but he became a converted man who loved to talk about how Jesus had taken away his addiction to alcohol.

Pat’s brother was one of my deacons, and they had both been hunters long before they were business partners. They’d made, and lost and made money, and it didn’t seem to mean all that much to them. They loved to travel to the best hunting places, but they also loved their families (both divorced and remarried) and children (almost grown.) They also loved the church, their pastor and Jesus. Their love for God was positive and contagious.

The heart attack had cut Pat down and brought him to the door of death, but he didn’t go through. I lost count of how many times Pat told me about a vision of the cross that came to him in the hospital as he was on his way to the grave. He had a supernatural vision of Jesus that never left him. Whatever faith had been there before his heart attack was watered by the heart attack and became a beautiful, strong, living testimony.

As Pat recovered from the heart attack, he was told that his heart was not going to survive, and that he would die in a short time without a heart transplant.

I had heard about heart transplants for years, but I had never heard of one happening remotely close to the my circle of influence. Now Pat was put on the waiting list.

Pat was ambiguous about the transplant. He wanted to live. His girls and wife wanted him to live. But Pat did not want someone else to die. We never talked without Pat agonizing over the fact that God was going to take someone’s life in order for him to live. He never failed to relate this awful reality to the cross, and to the strange, undeserved grace of God for sinners like himself.

He was at peace throughout the wait, and when the day came, he went to the hospital ready to pass on, or to come back. Whatever God had for him was alright with Pat.

I’ll always recall visiting the hospital through that transplant procedure. It is an emotional roller coaster with crisis after crisis. After the surgery itself, there were many possible complications, with the most serious being rejection.

Pat’s heart took, and he began the long road back to a life with someone else’s heart.

Pat came home, and the recovery was slow. On one of his first Sunday’s back at church, he blacked out and passed out in the foyer. His head hit the floor so hard I thought someone dropped a bowling ball. He went back to the hospital, and it started to become clear that Pat’s heart was not doing well.

After coming through the transplant, it was discouraging to everyone to know that the heart was not working as it should. Once again, Pat was on the road to death. Pat, however, was never depressed. He was thankful, joyful and worshipful. His “Pentecostal” side wasn’t praying for a healing, but praying instead that he would have the opportunity to tell others about Jesus.

No one would have believed that Pat would become a candidate for a second heart transplant, but that is exactly what happened. The wait began again….and once again Pat was put through the process of contemplating the meaning of life purchased by death. He considered the meaning of life given freely by Christ to a dying man, and waited.

Continue reading “Sundays with Michael Spencer: March 15, 2015”

Saturday Ramblings, March 14, 2015

Nazi cows, coming out poly, and Mexican mummy heads. Welcome to the weekend, imonks. Ready to ramble?

1955 was a good year
1955 was a good year

Strange Headline of the week: Jury awards $150K to employee who feared scanner as “Mark of the Beast.” The long-time employee was forced to retire after he refused to submit to biometric hand scanning because he feared the scanner would imprint him with the Mark of the Beast. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Consol Energy, claiming Consol had violated the employee’s religious beliefs, and he was awarded $150,000 in damages by a federal jury.

Okay, this one may be stranger: Farmer turns killer Nazi cows into ‘tasty’ sausage. Yes, it seems there is a strain of cattle engineered by Nazis, and a British farmer decided to import a few.  Unfortunately they were hyper-aggressive and “kept trying to attack any humans who came close.” Well, who could have seen that coming? The farmer finally had enough and had the cows made into “very very tasty” sausage.

We will get our revenge!
We will get our revenge!

On a related note, did you know the Nazi’s also tried to develop a cat breed?hitler-cat (1)

Continue reading “Saturday Ramblings, March 14, 2015”

Damaris Zehner: Ponderings on Permaculture

sabines-place-permaculture-127

It’s almost spring, and I’m reading about gardening.  It’s my yearly ritual to keep hope alive over the winter.  This winter I’ve focused on permaculture.   I like permaculture because it deals with growing things in a sustainable and sane way, but it has also led me to three related thoughts.

Permaculture, I’ve learned, is not a method but a philosophy, one that emphasizes the relationships between all the elements of the environment rather than its individual parts in isolation.  The opposite is big-farm monoculture.  In monoculture, corn or soybeans are removed finally and completely from the environment where they were raised, leaving behind a barren field.  In order to grow the corn or soybeans next year, external inputs of seeds, fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, irrigation, and petroleum-powered machines are necessary.  So things are brought from outside; they spend a short time where they are put and (seemingly, at least) interact with only one environmental element (the corn); then the result they bring about (the harvest) is removed leaving (seemingly) nothing behind.

The goal in permaculture, however, is to have an almost perfectly closed system that reaches a natural maturity and sustains itself there.  Once properly established, a permaculture system fertilizes its own soil through nurturing a mix of deep-rooted plants that bring up nutrients and aerate the soil, nitrogen-fixing plants, plants that drop leaves as mulch, and animals that plow, fertilize, and control the plant populations.  This system receives water from outside, of course, but it stores huge amounts of that water in its soil and loses very little to run-off.  Because more of the plants are perennial, as opposed to monoculture’s annuals, plant populations remain in place and in balance – an ever-shifting balance, but a sustainable one – for decades.

Continue reading “Damaris Zehner: Ponderings on Permaculture”

Mud season and me

lot-cleanup-2009

These are the ugly days.

Before the new season springs forth in delicate color and texture, the world looks like a frat house the day after.

The grass is patchy, brown and nubby, and with every step comes the possibility your sneaker treads will lose the battle with God’s good mud.

Whatever snow remains crouches in the shadows in gray-black crystallized fear of extinction.

The leaves that didn’t get raked up in the fall lie soaked and limp in piles like a bowl of day-old corn flakes abandoned in the kitchen sink.

The curbs try their best to corral the litter that skitters across the street. Plastic grocery bags shriveled up like withered balloons, cigarette butts and assorted bits of paper, plastic, and metal, smashed styrofoam cups and fast food wrappers along with receipts and torn paper bags shiver and tumble in the freshening breeze.

The yard is strewn with sticks, pine cones, sweet gum balls, unraked leaves and fugitive mulch, a few tools and toys that didn’t get picked up before the snow fell, and whatever litter jumped the curb and made a break for it.

It is good that the rain comes in spring. The world needs to be washed clean.

12842008The other day I drove through MacDonald’s in the rain and fog and as the woman handed me my coffee, she said, “Have a great day. I know the weather’s kind of ugly but it’s better than snow, right?”

I laughed and said, “Sorry, I’m one of those guys who likes the snow better.”

“Not me!” she said with mock dismay before she wished me a good day again.

After the last snow, the world was gray but lovely. Clean. Frigid, but as harmonious as a well-made bed. God’s good earth was blanketed smooth, white, still, exquisite, pleasing.

I like those winter landscapes because they are so unlike my life, my mind, the inner me. My bed is all askew, covers and pillows tossed every which way, a downy debris pile of blankets and sheets. I am an unmade bed.

And I am the world in mud season, after the snow and before the blooms.

Litter blows in and through my life and mud cakes the treads of my sneakers.

I don’t see many signs of life yet, only a freshening wind that blows warmer, hopeful air.

Fundamentalist Toxicity

20080902_angry_protester_33

Fundamentalism is a problem, no matter what kind it is.

Aurora Dagny (a pseudonym) has written an article for The McGill Daily called, “Everything is problematic,” in which she tells her story about her involvement in radical leftist political groups and how she eventually escaped their unhealthy influence. “There is something dark and vaguely cultish about this particular brand of politics,” she writes.

Although Dagny maintains her support for leftist causes and what she calls “anti-oppressive politics,” she hones in on a particular problem she found among radical adherents — their fundamentalist zeal created a culture that became toxic to their own members.

She identifies four troublesome characteristics of the radical leftism that she knew and in which she participated:

  • Dogmatism
  • Groupthink
  • A crusader mentality
  • Anti-intellectualism

Dogmatism. For fundamentalists, beliefs become “sacred beliefs,” and any person or group who denies them is not just disagreeing, but morally culpable. Any deviation, even in tone, from the party line is a sign of a serious character defect.

Groupthink. The world is divided into believers and unbelievers, insiders and outsiders, us and them. Boundaries are maintained through policies that require strict conformity. As Dagny says, “When I was part of groups like this, everyone was on exactly the same page about a suspiciously large range of issues. Internal disagreement was rare. The insular community served as an incubator of extreme, irrational views.”

Crusader Mentality. She defines this as “an extreme self-righteousness based on the conviction that they are doing the secular equivalent of God’s work.” The world becomes a battleground of good vs. evil. It’s all black and white, and one must choose which side to be on.

Anti-intellectualism. Dagny describes groups that stress activism and verbally disdain the theoretical but fail to see that they are beholden to ideas themselves, ideas by which they harshly judge others. They are loathe to consider anything other than the party line and so they stop thinking and growing. Driven by zeal, they resort to “a lot of rhetoric and bluster, a lot of passionate railing against the world or some aspect of it, without a clear, detailed, concrete alternative.”

This is as good a concise summary of the fundamentalist ethos as I’ve seen. And I’m especially happy that an insider from the left end of the political spectrum has had the courage to admit this about groups in her world. We all need more humility and good judgment as we think about the things we believe and the causes we embrace.

Aurora Dagny retained enough self-awareness to keep thinking and discerning. Wisely, she moved on, staying committed to the causes she considered good, but cutting herself off from the bondage of mindless conformity.

Consuming zealotry and the group dynamics it creates is part of our common human sin problem. Fundamentalist toxicity can enter in to all sorts of groups — even the most religious of organizations. It divides and damages people wherever it appears.

If you are worried about a group of which you are a member and these characteristics sound eerily familiar, run — don’t walk — out of there as fast as you can.

Control is not love.

Absolute conformity is not a proper test of loyalty.

The people who come across as so charismatic and insightful are only telling you a small part of the story.

And I think I’m safe in saying that God (or Mother Earth) probably hasn’t called your little band of true believers to change the world.

You need to de-mythologize this group and see it for what it really is.

I am not saying there isn’t truth or value or meaning in anything this group believes. At some point, they may have helped you along in your journey. But I would urge to you step back for a moment, take a breath, ask someone on the “outside” for a more objective point of view, and start thinking and acting for yourself.

If you find yourself stuck and you want to get out, get help.

Forget “engaging the culture”

111913-chicago-michigan-ave-south-day-timelapse-crop-proreshq-HD_xlarge

Yesterday I read an article called, 3 Ways Christians Will Address Cultural Issues in the Coming Yearsby Ed Stetzer. Stetzer is one of those people who sits above the vault of the earth and keeps his eyes on the big picture, on trends. He’s a culture-watcher, a pundit. And few voices are stronger in our world than that of the pundit.

Ed Stetzer, in best sermonic form, identifies three ways that he thinks Christians will “engage the culture” in days to come: there will be culture engagers, culture defenders, and culture creators.

  • The first group makes an effort to understand the culture around us and “engage” it by developing better ways of interacting with the people in that culture.
  • The second group contains the people who will focus on “tak[ing] a stand in both the political and social arenas on issues that have to do with human flourishing.”
  • Group three will speak to the culture through projects that will help others imagine a different and better world, one with the truth and values Christianity contributes.

Stetzer writes:

When we assess our current situation, I believe that we find the need for all three types of respondents: culture engagers, defenders, and creators.

We need more culture defenders and churches that will stand winsomely for the truth.

Many Christians will go about this in different ways—and it won’t fit in three nice little categories. Regardless, it does matter that we think well about culture: how we engage it, defend things within it, and create it. And, we need to do so “christianly.”

The byline of Ed Stetzer’s article in CT says, “The way we engage culture as Christ followers matters. It matters a lot.”

Does it?

I am starting to think all this talk about “engaging culture” presents yet one more bypath that actually leads most of us away from what it means to be a Christ follower.

The concept of “engaging the culture” has grown out of a “culture war” approach to Christianity in the U.S. Its emphasis is on:

  • Taking public stands on the public issues of the day in American society.
  • Developing strategies and using public means (politics, media, the institution of the church, the arts) to bring about change (or block change) with regard to those public issues.

The key word is “public” and the approach may be deemed “strategic.” However, here’s my problem with this: First, what is “public” in today’s world is media-driven and frankly, irrelevant to most people in their actual lives. Second, that which comes across as “strategic” smells of manipulation in the service of a goal of “winning” a contest.

The issue of same-sex marriage, for example, today’s hot-button issue among conservatives, rarely intersects with my daily life, my daily relationships in my family and among my neighbors, my daily work, and my interactions around my community. If it does, it doesn’t do so as a “public” issue on which I must take a “stand” and utilize “strategies.” If I do have contact with people in same-sex relationships (and I do), they are my neighbors or friends or co-workers or family members. Relating to them rarely if ever requires expressing my opinion about the political issue of same-sex marriage in Indiana, the theological underpinnings of the institution of marriage, or my “view” of homosexual relationships. If I ever find myself in such conversations, it is usually among insiders who share a particular point of view and whose interaction merely serves to reinforce their opinions.

What is happening in the media is mostly not my life nor the life of my neighbors. When I relate to people face to face, on street level, it’s not about “strategy.” It’s about love. It’s about taking interest in each other’s lives and being together in such a way that we help each other along the path of life.

This is one of my main problems with Christianity and the way it’s presented today.

  • Faith has been redefined as having strong opinions about issues we hear about in the media.
  • Love has been redefined as “strategy.”

I have no doubt there are some people called to “engage the culture” by participating in public service and institution building. Not the vast majority. For most of us this stuff is propaganda and shoptalk. Makes the insiders feel good. Doesn’t do a thing for others.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go to work and ask Jesus to help me love my neighbor. Today.

Music Monday: Top Songs for Lent

Stations of the Cross, Gethsemani Abbey
Stations of the Cross, Gethsemani Abbey

One of the best resources on the web for pastors, church musicians, and worship leaders is the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship. In their Resource Library, I found a page on which four church leaders listed their top ten songs for the Lenten season. You can go to the site and read more about each leader, their congregations, and their thoughts about Lenten worship.

This leads me to list my choices for top ten songs to use personally and in groups for Lent. I hope this will prompt some discussion about your favorite music for this time in the Christian Year.

If you are a pastor or church musician, I would especially love to hear from you.

• • •

I will limit my choices to more contemporary songs today (songs written in my lifetime), and perhaps in a future post we can discuss more traditional Lenten hymns. Each link takes you to a performance so that you can listen to each song if you like.

I have arranged these songs in an order that makes a nice playlist for Lenten devotion.

Ten Songs for Lent

I also recommend, for congregational prayer in Lent: