The Internet Monk Archives

IM: The Oscars Open Mic Edition

Sad to say, I have not even seen one of the motion pictures that are up for Best Picture at tonight’s Academy Awards. Here is the list:

Honestly, “Life of Pi,” “Lincoln,” and “Amour” are the only ones I’ve been hankering to see. I wanted to read the book again before seeing “Pi,” and time constraints more than anything else have kept me out of the theater in recent days, so I’ve missed the others for that primary reason.

This means we need movie reviews — fast! — so that I can have some idea what I’m watching tonight.

I therefore invite you to chime in with your impressions and evaluations of the various films and performances that are being featured tonight (or perhaps, in your opinion, are being overlooked).

What movies and performances impressed you this year, and why?

Note: for a complete listing of this year’s nominees, go HERE.

iMonk: Post-Stupid?

“I am on a post-evangelical journey, discovering what it means to be vitally connected to Jesus.”

* * *

A classic Michael Spencer post from March 2008.

A truly prominent, not-post anything blogger has put forward the following theory:

Those who use the prefix “post” to describe themselves are claiming to be smarter than those who don’t.

Example: A “post-modernist” is saying “I used to be mired in the darkness of modernism, but now, through my superior intellect, I have arisen from the tomb of modernism and ascended to the higher plane of post-modernism.”

Or: A post-conservative is saying, “Once I lived in the dark swamps of conservatism, but now I’ve finally used my brains and looked at what Neanderthals inhabit conservatism. I’ve packed my bags and left for the sunshine and springtime of post-conservatism.”
And, of course: A post-evangelical — such as yours truly — is saying “Those stupid, sheep-like evangelicals can’t hold an intellectual candle to the brightness of my post-evangelical insights. How truly significant and wonderful it is that I have emerged, under the power of my stupendous brain, into post-evangelicalism.

You may send your best examples in to the Internet Monk research department.

I have three responses.

Continue reading “iMonk: Post-Stupid?”

Tidbits on the Tebow Tempest

OK, I’m breaking my Tim Tebow fast to give the iMonk community an opportunity to discuss the latest news.

I’ve assembled a few quotes from people who give various angles on the story of the NFL quarterback accepting, then declining an invitation to speak at First Baptist Church in Dallas. Read these perspectives and opinions and then you can weigh in.

My question is: Does this mean anything at all? Or is this all fluff and bluster, on the level of cheap celebrity gossip?

* * *

While I was looking forward to sharing a message of hope and Christ’s unconditional love with the faithful members of the historic First Baptist Church of Dallas in April, due to new information that has been brought to my attention, I have decided to cancel my upcoming appearance. I will continue to use the platform God has blessed me with to bring Faith, Hope and Love to all those needing a brighter day. Thank you for all of your love and support. God Bless!

– Tim Tebow

* * *

Fast food Christian CEO bullied. Pastor bullied out of praying publicly. Today,athlete bullied out of speaking AT A CHURCH!

– Rick Warren, @Rick Warren

* * *

So, while it was not surprising that First Baptist Dallas would want one of America’s most beloved and celebrated evangelicals to be part of their church opening, it was surprising that a petition began to circulate through Change.org urging Tebow to cancel — and it is positively a miracle that Tebow decided to cancel.

As recently as yesterday Jeffress seemed certain that Tebow would speak at his church and told conservative radio host Janet Mefford: “I believe as long as he listens to the Holy Spirit and to God’s voice and maybe not that of his handlers, you know, I think he will stand firm.”

But I believe that Tim Tebow was listening to the Holy Spirit when he made the decision to not associate himself with Jeffress and his worldview. Tim Tebow has joined the ranks of many Christians who are refusing to be associated with a particular strain of religious faith that is publicly connected with an anti-gay stance and flagrantly hostile to other faith traditions.

Like many evangelical young people, Tebow seems to care more about loving and being loved by Jesus than the politics that too many automatically associate with Him.

In his press release Tebow mentions that he was looking forward to sharing “Christ’s unconditional love” at First Baptist Dallas. Apparently Tebow, like so many of his evangelical brothers and sisters, now feels that the religious right is no longer a place where that can be done.

– Paul Brandeis Raushenbush,
“Tim Tebow Officially Puts Evangelical Right on the Sideline”

* * *

Evangelical Christians are now called upon to think strategically about what it means to speak truthfully and lovingly to a society that increasingly sees us as the moral outlaws. Clearly, we must watch our speech carefully, measuring every word for truth and tone and avoiding incendiary sound bites. We must also guard our hearts toward the persistent temptation towards self-righteousness. But, at the same time, even the most humble statement of biblical truth can now be turned into a sound bite described as hate speech and a refusal to affirm the normalization of homosexuality is turned into repulsive intolerance. We now face no shortage of arguments for capitulation, but abandoning the truth of God’s Word is not an option. We deny the gospel if we deny the sinfulness of sin. That sin. Every sin. Our sin.

Further, evangelicals should not miss this opportunity to rethink our focus on evangelical celebrities in popular culture, including sports heroes. For now, the controversy is over Tebow’s withdrawal from an invitation extended by an historic church. The pastor’s statements have been the center of the controversy. Inevitably, the controversy will shift to Tebow’s own statement, which he will eventually have to make. There will be no escape.

Before long, the ball will be thrown back to Tebow. I hope and pray he does not fumble it. I pray the same for myself and for every Christian in the midst of this tumultuous cultural landscape. Sooner than later, the ball will be thrown to each of us.

– R. Albert Mohler, Jr., “Tebow’s Big Fumble”

* * *

Oh, look, I would never say anything disparaging to Tim Tebow. He is a fine Christian who is trying to do what he thinks is right, and I do think Tim will learn in time that you can’t appease some of the severest critics of Christianity by compromising with them.

But we salute this great man of God. We wish him the very best.

– Pastor Robert Jeffress, quoted in The Daily Beast

Saturday Ramblings 2.23.13

Welcome to the holiest of all days, the last Saturday in February. Why is today so special? It is the annual Holland Hall Book Fair. What, you ask (if you could ask me), is the HHBF? It is a used book sale to support a private school in Tulsa. Is the school in trouble financially? I doubt it, not with tuition being more than some colleges. (Would you pay north of 15 grand a year to send Johnny or Sally to first grade? Will that kind of jack buy better crayons?) No, I’m not interested in helping spoiled kids feel better about themselves. (You ought to see the cars the high school kids drive. I mean, really.) I want great deals on used books. There will be thousands of books lining tables in the gym. The doors open at 8. My friend Mike and I get there at 6. I asked Mike this week if he was fasting and praying for a good book fair. “I’m praying I am faster at you to get the books I want.” As is our custom, as we are walking in the doors at 8, Mike will turn to me and say, “Once inside, I no longer know you.” So happy HHBF, iMonks. If you want to join us, feel free. Just don’t get in front of me in line. Now, let’s ramble.

Adam Palmer, our eagle-eyed rambling scout, told me about a Saturday Night Live skit from last week that he thought particularly insightful to how some Christians want to view Jesus. It is either insightful or highly, highly offensive. Not sure which side I fall on. You?

Don’t know if this is directly related, but NBC will finish this latest ratings period in fifth place. Even Univision, the Spanish-language network, beat the Peacock …

Here is a poster for a movie coming out next year that I’m sure I will find highly offensive. I only wish this were a spoof. Count me among those who would rather sit through a Saved By The Bell marathon than go see this. Again, you?

And speaking of offensive, Bill O’Reilly really has a thing about killing people, doesn’t he? Next up: Killing Jesus. Oh, how I wish I were joking …

Something good to say about a video? Ok then. How about this Gospel lesson from the just-concluded season three of Downton Abbey? Continue reading “Saturday Ramblings 2.23.13”

Time? or Timing?

One common area of cultural misunderstanding involves the perception of time.

Once, when we were in India, our host planned a day of sightseeing before the mission team was to present an evening program. In typical fashion, everything took much longer than anticipated and we arrived at the church over an hour and a half late — at least from our point of view. To the team’s surprise, the congregation was seated quietly, patiently awaiting our arrival. They watched as we rushed about and set up our equipment. All of us were flustered and embarrassed, but those who had come to see our program on a weeknight didn’t appear to be bothered at all. They were gracious and polite and seemed to appreciate the service even though it lasted late into the evening.

I remember imagining the tongue-lashing we would have received from anyone who might have scheduled us in the U.S. had we been so insensitive to people’s schedules. I guarantee we would have arrived to a dark and locked church building too. No one would have waited around. Our ministry would have lost respect. As far as I know, however, there were no negative repercussions from our tardiness.

Yet most people who have lived abroad will tell you that time is one of the ways cultures are most different. In the West, time is a hot commodity. Most of us consider it a limited resource. Sure, there are twenty-four hours in a day. We struggle to fit all of our responsibilities — work, family, hobbies, leisure — into our busy schedules. We prove that other people are truly important to us when we “find time” or, better yet, “make time” for them. Because time is both limited and important, we talk about it as if it were a commodity that can be saved, traded or spent like money. Indeed, we are convinced that “time is money.” We are sensitive to the fact that other people value their time, so we try not to “monopolize” their time or, perhaps worse, waste our own. We even develop strategies for “time management,” which help us get maximum productivity out of this most limited of resources.

…While we fret and wring our hands about the demise of time, many non-Westerners don’t. My Indonesian fishermen friends seem to have all the time in the world. I have deadlines. The end of the month is looming. I’m running out of time. I can hear my fishermen friends laughing. How can you “run out of” time? In their world, “there is always tomorrow until one day there’s not [i.e. you die], and then it won’t matter.” For them, procrastination is a virtue. Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow? When tomorrow comes, you might find you didn’t need to do it at all. This gives many Westerners hives, because the sand is running out of the hourglass! The clock is ticking!

What we value determines how we talk about time. Therefore we in the West have precise terms for time and our language itself distinguishes verb tenses quite specifically in terms of when an action takes place. On the other hand, the authors note some languages that have no verb tenses at all! Time is distinguished by using words like “today” or “tomorrow” that give whatever specificity might be needed.

In the West, correct time is connected to the measurements of a timepiece. However, many non-Western cultures proceed by what some have called an “event” orientation, which stresses the quality of the event rather than identifying it by the chronological period it is designed to fill. Relationships are more important than schedules and the sense of time is much more elastic and seen through the lens of organic development.

How do different perspectives on time affect the way we read the Bible?

Continue reading “Time? or Timing?”

On Fire … Or Burned Out?

The email asked what the sender, I’m sure, meant as a good question for good Christians: “Are you on fire for Jesus?” It was an invitation to a conference, or to watch some service online. I forget which. But, as the email went on to say, if we are to see our world changed, we all need to be on fire for Jesus. And it’s up to us to change our world, you know. Certainly not the responsibility of the one who created it. He needs us to do the changing, and we have to be on fire to accomplish our mission.

So just what does it mean to be “on fire for Jesus”? Is that a good thing?

I’ve looked in the Bible, but I can’t find many who were “on fire.” Not even Jesus was on fire for Jesus. “In this world you will have many troubles.” Not exactly the motto for an on-fire savior, is it? Now Elijah … Elijah called down fire from heaven and was caught up to heaven in a fiery chariot, but in between he discovered that God does not speak in fire, but in a whisper. That put the damper on Elijah being a man of fire.

So is being on fire a good thing?

On Tuesday, two boys—ages 17 and 18—set themselves on fire in Tibet to protest Chinese rule in that country. That brings the total to 104 Tibetans who have chosen self-immolation since 2009 as their way to speak out against what they consider injustice. They very literally were on fire for their country. But what good has it done? Two more families mourning the loss of those they loved, and today China still rules Tibet.

You say that is not what being on fire for Jesus means? Ok then, what does it mean?

Enthusiasm, you say. It means being excited about Jesus. In what way? Just how am I supposed to show excitement for Jesus? Does it require me to wear a t-shirt with some cheesy Christian slogan on it?

I have been on fire for Jesus. I have been to the conferences and listened to the CDs and sung the songs and, yes, bought the t-shirt. I’ve been really really really excited for Jesus. I’ve had my early morning devotions and read more than one chapter in my Bible at a time. I’ve gone to church both Sunday morning and Sunday night. I’ve even gone to men’s very early morning prayer. I’ve given up R-rated movies and cussing and eating devil’s food cupcakes. And yet China still rules Tibet.

Or, in this case, many of those closest to me still have not found the Gospel to be good news. My parents still think being good people is enough to get into heaven. My neighbors still find their greatest satisfaction in the things they can buy. My coworkers still insist they can build a great life on their own without any help from God, if there even is a God.

So consider me burned out. Do you know when I realized I was no longer on fire for Jesus? When one of my employees, ironically enough nicknamed Smokey, who is an agnostic, came and encouraged me recently when I was having a really bad day. I had let my Christian mask slip and actually said I was having a crappy day. (Christians who are on fire for Jesus never have bad days. And they don’t say “crappy” either.) Somehow the fact that I was just me, not the super-Christian-blazing-on-Holy-Ghost-fire me, was enough to allow Smokey to be herself in sharing how she, too, was having a crappy day. And in that sharing we both found that we could get up and keep going. It felt really good to be real. It was a great freedom to not have to wear a mask. I could breath much more easily without it.

Count me among the holy extinguished. I am no longer on fire for Jesus. I’m just me, take me or leave me. I love Jesus very imperfectly. I have good days and crappy days and a lot of days that are a swirl of the two. When God whispers I sometimes hear him and sometimes don’t. If being on fire would help me to see and hear and know God better, I would dump a can of Holy Ghost gasoline on my head and strike the match. I have found that doesn’t work. From now on you will have to deal with me as I am, the non-burning man. I hope that is not too great a disappointment.

What Should We Do? David Fitch Suggests: “Maybe Nothing.”

Christians are doers. We think churches are supposed to be “doing” places. Pastors and church staff are the chief doers but everyone else knows they are supposed to be doers too. We expect churches to have an active approach to mission, to have programs that will enable people of all ages and different life settings to be involved. We worship together, have classes and studies, take care of young children and have activities for older children and teens, put on special concerts, plays, and programs, do service projects in our communities and take mission trips to other places, have fellowship dinners and events, and put together leadership and ministry teams to oversee it all. Of course, it all has to be staffed with volunteer workers.

Before you know it, you have a church full of doers.

We like to think we are doing good things and doing them for people, to serve them, benefit them, bring them to Christ, disciple them, transform them into servants — so they too can be doers who keep the chain going.

That means our default position, the question we instinctively ask, the outlook we bring to every situation is: What can we do? What should we do? What does God want us to do?

All of this is pretty standard operating procedure in the common program-style church. David Fitch, who is trying to help church adopt a more missional approach that goes beyond things that happen in buildings and gets God’s people out into their neighborhoods and world, says the “doing” approach can be a trap even for a missional community. If that sounds like a contradiction to you, I recommend you read Fitch’s wise post, “The Grace to Do Nothing,” in which he suggests that doing nothing may indeed be the best way to go about doing the work of the church.

His words don’t just apply to the specific “missional community” setting in which he lives. I wish pastors and church leaders everywhere would take heed to his counsel.

What does Fitch say?

I will let him set the stage:

We were in the middle of a discussion at one of our missional communities. We were talking about the challenges of being a missional community in the neighborhood and the subject turned to finding “what we are supposed to do next.” How do we locate places of need, situations of distress, places where the “least of these” are where we can devote some of our time and energy for the Kingdom? How about the domestic violence shelter down the street, can we help there? How about a project to help the community rally around improving the park? How do we locate where the needy are so that we can put our resources to work?

As the conversation proceeded, Fitch felt led to say, “Maybe the best thing we can do is nothing.” What was he thinking? Here is the reasoning behind his suggestion:

Focusing on projects turns people into objects.
This takes lots of effort and resources.
It ends up making us feel better about ourselves, but it also reinforces and perpetuates less than desirable structures .
Thus we end up colonizing people and serving them from positions of power.
Nothing really changes.

So, opposed to looking for projects, I offered that maybe what we are supposed to do is the opposite: Do (emphasis on:”do”) nothing. Instead, our main task is to be “with” people in and around our lives long enough, years maybe, to listen and become friends, partners in life, sufficient to offer who we are and what we have become in Christ in exchange for their friendship and their support and who they are. These relationships should be characterized by

1. Long term presence within everyday life. Being with people at same place same time each week, hanging out in same places, working alongside them, raising children in the park, sharing resources over long periods of time.

2. Listening, helping and receiving help just as you would any other friend. Developing a mutual vulnerability.

4. Developing trust.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Whether one is discussing how a missional community can be “with” their neighbors or how people in a more traditional style congregation can more effectively live out their vocations in daily life and serve together as partners in congregational mission work, can we please remember that Jesus-shaped living and serving is about building genuine relationships with people, sharing life with them in real settings, and receiving as well as giving, as we learn to be friends and neighbors.

As we do that, we may just find that the things we do together achieve more lasting good.

It is about doing less and being together more, talking less and listening more, initiating less and letting others set the agenda more, organizing less and letting things happen more.

I know this goes against the grain of our anal compulsion to do, to serve, to fix. It also puts a great deal of “ministry” outside the realm of our planning and control, and I realize that is no selling point for most of us who like to be in charge.

Nevertheless I can’t help but think that David Fitch is on to something. Maybe this “church” thing is about life and love and learning, and not just about doing.

Ethiopian Lutherans Sever Ties with ELCA

On Feb. 7, the ELCA News Service reported that “the Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus (EECMY) is severing its relationship with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), the Church of Sweden and ‘those churches who have openly accepted same-sex marriage.’”

The EECMY has been associated with the Swedish church for over 150 years and with the ELCA for more than 5o years.

As a result of the split, EECMY churches will no longer serve communion to pastors and leaders of these church bodies, nor will they receive communion from them. Representatives from these groups will not be invited to preach or participate in any spiritual ministries in EECMY churches.

Representatives from the denomination expressed sorrow and dismay over this schism. The article notes that the ELCA consistently kept its Lutheran companion churches informed about the process that led to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly decisions, which included the adoption of a social statement on human sexuality. When the decision was made, they wrote to the EECMY to express the commitment that they would not impose their actions but would respect the policy and practice of the Ethiopian church.

The Rev. Mark S. Hanson, ELCA presiding bishop said, “Our own statement on human sexuality acknowledges that the position held by the Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus is also held by members of the ELCA. We are not of one mind, but we are one in Christ, in faith and in baptism.”

Hanson also indicated that he hopes for reconciliation, stating, “Reconciliation is not an option. It is given in Christ, and we stand ready to engage with the Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus on what this gift of reconciliation might mean for us now.”

* * *

As I have said on this blog before, I respect the way the ELCA has gone about this matter, taking a different approach from other mainline groups that is not always appreciated. Recognizing the deep divisions that exist between brothers and sisters in the same faith community about these issues, the denomination sought to produce decisions that would intentionally include people from conflicting sides within a broader context of Christian truth, morality, and love.

Of course, sometimes when you try to walk a middle ground like that, you make everyone unhappy.

Nevertheless, I think it is worth the effort. After all, if we have to choose, which is the greater theological value: taking a stand against certain forms of sexual practice, or making a commitment to maintaining unity in Christ and persevering in trying to work out our differences? I want to side with Bishop Hanson here. I’d like to think we could be one in Christ, faith, and baptism without necessarily being of one mind about every issue. To withhold communion or refuse to take communion over such a matter seems over the line to me. We are either Christians or we are not.

However, the EECMY made their choice.

Contradictions among the Baptists

Michael Spencer did not subscribe to Biblical inerrancy.

Inerrancy looks, smells and feels remarkably like a philosophical imposition on the Bible, going beyond what the Bible CAN say about itself, and forcing those of us who believe in the authority and truthfulness of the Bible to take a “loyalty oath” that goes beyond what should be said. Typical of evangelical attempts to show they are really really really really really right. Catholics do it with the Pope. Pentecostals with experience. Evangelicals with inerrancy.

“Bingo!” with a capital “B,” I say. Let’s hear more, Michael…

I want to say more, but I am weary from saying this much. I love and respect my inerrantist friends. When they tell me I am rejecting the resurrection by rejecting “inerrancy,” I am hurt and puzzled. But so I will remain, because the quests to insure that modernistic assertions about the Bible precede and protect the Gospel are not about to end. Denominations will split. Friendships will end. Seminarians and pastors will be shown the door. Christians will reject their brothers and sisters. It is needless, and a ridiculous waste of unity.

I wonder what Michael would say about the latest kerfuffle in the Southern Baptist world over inerrancy. It seems that Houston Baptist University (which has a “ministry relationship” with the SBC in Texas) brought apologist (and suspected non-inerrantist) Mike Licona onto its faculty last fall. In November, he confirmed the suspicions of the inerrancy defenders by saying in an interview that some of the facts in the Gospels might contradict possibly each other.

Here’s a summary of the interview from Baptist Press:

In an interview with Lenny Esposito of Come Reason Ministries at the Evangelical Theological Society’s annual meeting, Licona, a former apologetics coordinator at the North American Mission Board, said it had not necessarily ever bothered him that some facts reported in the Gospels appeared to be contradictions.

“I believe in biblical inerrancy, but I also realize that biblical inerrancy is not one of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. The resurrection is,” Licona told Esposito. “So if Jesus rose from the dead, Christianity is still true even if it turned out that some things in the Bible weren’t. So it didn’t really bother me a whole lot even if some contradictions existed. But it did bother a lot of Christians.”

Licona recalled a student in a class he was teaching at Southern Evangelical Seminary who, with tears forming in her eyes, wanted to know whether there were indeed contradictions. A majority of the class, he said, raised their hands to indicate they were troubled by apparent contradictions. Then he realized it was something he should address.

As he studied the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Licona began keeping a document of the differences he noticed. The document grew to 50 pages. He then read ancient biographies written around the time of Jesus because New Testament scholars often regard the Gospels as ancient biographies, he said.

Licona focused on Plutarch’s biographies. The assassination of Julius Caesar, he noted, is told in five different biographies by Plutarch.

“So you have the same biographer telling the same story five different times. By noticing how Plutarch tells the story of Caesar’s assassination differently, we can notice the kinds of biographical liberties that Plutarch took, and he’s writing around the same time that some of the Gospels are being written and in the same language — Greek — to boot,” Licona told Esposito.

“As I started to note some of these liberties that he took, I immediately started recognizing these are the same liberties that I noticed that the evangelists take — Matthew, Mark, Luke and John,” Licona said.

“… If this is the case, then these most commonly cited differences in the Gospels … aren’t contradictions after all. They’re just the standard biographical liberties that ancient biographers of that day took.”

Continue reading “Contradictions among the Baptists”

Internet Monk: The State of the Blog

It is time to give a “State of the Blog” message. Here is the gist of what I want to say today:

Internet Monk has always been a personal blog that has reflected the personal journeys of its authors. As our lives change, the blog changes. There are particular themes we try to maintain and regular access to the Archives helps keep us on track, however, as in any long-term relationship the seasons and circumstances we go through will lead us to emphasize certain aspects of “Jesus-shaped spirituality” at various times and in a variety of ways.

Now, let’s talk…

I received this email recently from a regular reader:

Chaplain Mike-

Can I express a few concerns off the record about Internet Monk. And I’m saying this as a friend. I’m really concerned that the blog has drifted from its original purpose. I know you’re not Michael Spencer and it would be wrong of me to expect that but I look at the posts we had a couple of years ago and the posts that exist today and its almost two different blogs. Remember posts like these?

https://internetmonk.com/archive/the-disney-ization-of-faith

https://internetmonk.com/archive/im-speechless-how-do-you-respond

It was the Internet Monk blog where we discussed Ken Ham, the SBC, John MacArthur, etc… from time to time. I don’t see those posts any more and I’m concerned because when I look in the archives I see a lot of posts that explored those problems in theology. Maybe I missed it but Rachel Held Evans released a significant book called A Year of Biblical Womanhood and I really thought we’d tackle it, but unless I missed it, the blog didn’t touch it.

I’ve been spending some time thinking about all this and I wonder if maybe the ELCA has prevented you from writing posts like the ones above due to how it would reflect on the ELCA. I am not sure and I am not trying to put words in your mouth either. If you feel this email is being difficult then please call me on it. I’m willing to listen and hear. But as I check the blog on a regular basis it seems like the blog has drifted into becoming a Lutheran blog. And I’m happy that some people found a way out of the problems by embracing Lutheranism, etc… But each person has to find their own way, and what works for one person may not work for another. …And I just want to raise this concern.

I appreciate it when readers raise concerns. I’m not always able to answer every comment or email, but I asked permission from this author to answer these concerns publicly and was given the OK to do so. The email brings up several issues that are voiced by IM readers and it gives me the opportunity to answer them at one time. So, here goes…

First, an easy one — as to the specific question of reviewing Rachel’s fine book on “Biblical Womanhood,” I still plan to do that. Actually, I planned to write a review as part of our First Testament emphasis in January, but ran out of time. Look for it soon.

Second, the question: “Has Mike’s affiliation with the ELCA prevented him from writing certain posts?” Answer: absolutely not. However, I will confess that I am in a different stage of my own journey. What does that mean, and how does it affect my writing?

I would ask all of our readers to realize that the most significant issue regarding my writing has nothing to do with theological perspective or affiliation but with the simple, mundane matter of time. Since the fall I have been involved in an ordination process with my denomination and this has required a much greater time commitment, including travel, taking a seminary class, doing independent study that involves reading and writing, participating in churches and doing preparation work necessary to that, and getting more involved in my own congregation as I get ready to take over additional pastoral responsibilities this summer. Along with a full time job that includes extra on time call every other week and trying to find leisure to be with my wife, children, and grandchildren, the demands have been almost overwhelming at times, especially when day turns into evening and I realize it’s time to start writing the next day’s blog posts.

So far, with lots of help I’ve been able to keep my head above water, and at times that has meant combining material from my studies and activities (hence, perhaps a bit heavier “Lutheran” emphasis). I have not had quite as much freedom to do any extra research necessary to seriously explore certain issues in writing. I realize no one likes to hear, “I’m busy,” but sometimes “facts is facts.”

I would also say that I have had some changes in perspective that have shown up on the blog. Internet Monk is not and never will be a “Lutheran” blog, but I am a Christian practicing my faith in the Lutheran tradition now, so that’s going to come through once in a while, especially when I share my own journey. Remember, we have a whole team of writers here: evangelicals (Jeff, Lisa Dye, Dan Jepsen), Roman Catholics (Martha, Damaris), Presbyterian (Craig), and we make it a point to bring in guest writers from various denominational and non-denominational backgrounds. That will not change.

Continue reading “Internet Monk: The State of the Blog”